Primary source versus recycled information

[Christine]

I'm hoping you all will help me with this one. I've started reading a book (not going to name it) and I'm only in it about 15 pages, but I'm starting to get annoyed and am wondering if I'm just a 'research snob' or if this is a legitimate complaint.

It appears the author only quotes other authors. Only books, no primary source material. Not even the date the original quote is attributed to Lincoln or someone else. For instance, on one page he said something to the effect that "during the dark days of the Civil War Lincoln said. . . " Well, excuse me, but most of the days of the Civil War were dark. I want to know which dark day he said that, what was the circumstance behind the quote, who did he say it to, why. Is that asking too much? I want to know where I can look up the original version of the story so I can see if the quoted author added his own opinion to the original quote.

I did a fair bit of original research into Aiken, and it really isn't that hard to find some primary source material; after all, if I had just quoted other authors exclusively, I'd have simply added alot of misinformation and passed if off as true.

Does this bug anybody but me?