I am still reading "Fortune's Fool" and learning quite alot.

As I read it, I keep thinking that Booth possibly suffered from a borderline personality disorder--a very inflated sense of self, volatile and destructive personal relationships, rapid mood swings and a tendency towards despair. This is certainly not new ground for I am sure that his mental state has already been brought up and discussed. Morever, anyone who shoots an American president has to be, almost by defintion, crazy.

At the very least, he was an adrenalin junkie. Hard to believe how many times he was stabbed, cut, shot, etc. His reckless sword play on stage suggests someone barely in control of himself. Did he have to drive himself that hard just to feel anything?

It's a wonder that he did not (apparently) drink as much as his father did. Someone living at such speed would llikely look for a liquid or chemical way to come down at the end of the day.

As an aside, I think that JWB looks physically much like Lee H. Oswald in the photo in which Booth is photographed with his two brothers wearing Roman togas.

(05-14-2015, 02:28 PM)Juan Marrero Wrote: I am still reading "Fortune's Fool" and learning quite alot.

As I read it, I keep thinking that Booth possibly suffered from a borderline personality disorder--a very inflated sense of self, volatile and destructive personal relationships, rapid mood swings and a tendency towards despair. This is certainly not new ground for I am sure that his mental state has already been brought up and discussed. Morever, anyone who shoots an American president has to be, almost by defintion, crazy.

I can agree pretty much with you on this. I have not read "Fortunes Fool" yet.
I would recommend to you "My Thoughts Be Bloody" by Nora Titone, if you don't already have it. I read it abut three years ago. It's good. We have discussed it some on the forum, but it doesn't have it's own thread.
Amazon has it very reasonably priced.
http://www.amazon.com/My-Thoughts-Be-Blo...1416586067

Thank you, Gene C. I agree wholeheartedly. That is is one of the best books on the assassination if not the best. I will have to go back to it to re-read about JWB's mental issues

Been very interested in Booth's mental health for a long while. Many people don't want to hear about it because they probably would feel as though a mental illness involved in the equation would be a way of letting Booth "off the hook" in a way for his actions. That is not the case - it doesn't let him off the hook at all, but simply might explain how his mind was working when the assassination occurred and perhaps why it occurred. After all, he had to ask what *year* it was on April 14th. I think that incident says something pretty big about where Booth's mind was that day.

Just my two cents. I could write quite a bit on the subject.

Thanks for starting a thread devoted to the topic!

Take a look at Gordon Samples' "Lust for Fame" and the chapter about Booth's supposed trip to Paris. A woman he spent some time with was afraid of him and said he would awake in the night to converse with spirits and displayed some very strange behavior.

My vote goes for Bipolar Disorder on Axis I and Narcisstic Personality Disorder on Axis II.

Quote:A woman he spent some time with was afraid of him and said he would awake in the night to converse with spirits and displayed some very strange behavior.

That sounds very much like his father, Junius Brutus Booth. He had similar "episodes" where he acted extremely strange and it was all put down to drink. I wonder how much so, if at all. Could such behavior have been a factor into something else (psychotic?) And if so, could it have been hereditary?

I've been very interested in Booth's mental health for a long while. Many people don't want to hear about it because they probably would feel as though a mental illness involved in the equation would be a way of letting Booth "off the hook" in a way for his actions.

Jenny, you raise the all important question of whether one can judge someone fairly without taking into account all the factors prompting a particular action. A Spanish philosopher of the last century said, "I am I and my circumstances." Booth committed the foulest murder in U.S. history but by his own lights he was acting heroically and selflessly. That seems absurd, but, on the other hand, I have a soft spot for John Brown.

Perhaps John Brown and Booth suffered from similar mental ailments, but one fought for abolition and the other acted for slavery. Neither I believe could change their intrinsically fanatical nature, but both were intelligent enough to change their direction if so persuaded. (I like to think of St. Francis as one who could not change his nature, but radically changed his direction.)

Whatever his mental problems, I think that Booth's greatest "sin" (aside from the murder itself) was not to exercise enough moral imagination to see slavery as the evil it was. He became fixated on the south and the injustices done to Copperheads without giving, apparently, much thought to the enormous evil of slavery.

For Booth- it was an issue of his Core Beliefs about slavery. He did not believe it was evil. In fact, he thought it good. He thought it God-ordained.

(05-15-2015, 09:37 AM)LincolnMan Wrote: For Booth- it was an issue of his Core Beliefs about slavery. He did not believe it was evil. In fact, he thought it good. He thought it God-ordained.

Yes, but he lacked the moral imagination (empathy) that made Lincoln (among other things) great. "Fortune's Fool" notes that Booth was very close-minded. He wanted to learn from other people who were well informed, but only to reinforce his own opinions. What was said about the Bourbon monarchs of France might well apply to JWB: "they remembered everything but learned nothing."

I agree with every one of the points made above - especially the narcissistic personality disorder. And I wonder if some of that was not a learned behavior rather than a genetic one. Every source tells you that he was his mother's favorite child; he was idolized by his sisters (especially Asia). Despite learning difficulties in school, he became somewhat of a leader. Women fell over each other to attract his attention, and men considered him a good friend in most cases. With so much attention being thrown at him, I would think that he was at the very ripe age when the Civil War began to think that he could literally walk on water.

Couple that with the flamboyant and overly artistic talents of his father and the constant devotion to the republican ideals of his father and grandfather, and you have created a very unique individual, imo. As far as his thoughts on slavery, I think he focused more on the issue of whether or not a government had the right to take slavery away from the owners. His political thoughts and actions outweighed his support of slavery. That's why he was somewhat in awe of John Brown. They both had a fanatical view on their "causes." He could admire someone who was as fanatical as he - even if in the opposite direction.

Put those character traits inside a person who may already have inherited a tendency towards mental illness, and you get a ticking time bomb.

It is so wonderful to find that John Wilkes Booth was some kind of a nut. It is even more refreshing to see that his has been psychoanalyzed by pseudo-professional mind readers. The problem is that Americans seem to prefer that all of their presidential assassins be insane--it allows us to avoid difficult questions about real motive for pop psychology. I refer you all to the article by James W. Clarke, "Conspiracies, Myths, and the Will to Believe: The importance of Content," In Gabor S. Boritt and Norman O. Furness, Historian's Lincoln: Pseudohistory, Psychohistory, and History (Urbana: U Ills. Press, 1988), 365-73.

Mrs. Verge: one book (I think it was the one about his troubled relationship with Edwin) goes the full Freud/Oedipus route and suggests that he identified the South with his suffering mother Mary Ann and President Lincoln with his father. He saw mother/South as refined and AL/North as uncouth and aggressive.

According to this theory, he stepped in stop further "abuse" in the only way he could. If this carries any weight, it could explain his reluctance to use the name "Booth" in his initial theatrical forays as being beyond simple humility and/or deference to his father's reputation as a Shakespearian genius..

(05-15-2015, 09:08 AM)Juan Marrero Wrote: ...both were intelligent enough to change their direction if so persuaded. (I like to think of St. Francis as one who could not change his nature, but radically changed his direction.)

Agree 100% with this.

(05-15-2015, 11:05 AM)Wild Bill Wrote: It is so wonderful to find that John Wilkes Booth was some kind of a nut. It is even more refreshing to see that his has been psychoanalyzed by pseudo-professional mind readers. The problem is that Americans seem to prefer that all of their presidential assassins be insane--it allows us to avoid difficult questions about real motive for pop psychology. I refer you all to the article by James W. Clarke, "Conspiracies, Myths, and the Will to Believe: The importance of Content," In Gabor S. Boritt and Norman O. Furness, Historian's Lincoln: Pseudohistory, Psychohistory, and History (Urbana: U Ills. Press, 1988), 365-73.

Don't know if he was nuts, but he sure didn't think this through very well, from the impact the assassination had on the Confederate Army and government, political impact on the south after the war, and his escape from the Yankees, John Wilkes Booth just didn't have both oars in the water. Maybe that's why he let Davey row.