Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

LincolnMan · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:39 AM by RJNorton.)

After Betty told me about a book that should not be taken seriously, I decided to ask the learned members of this Forum as to what are the books pertaining to the Lincoln era that probably should be avoided or taken seriously. This is not meant to be critical of an author's work. We're not intentionally being mean. Perhaps the reasons for the selection as "book to avoid" should be stated. This could be very helpful to us all as we build our libraries and seek to learn the truth (as best we can). I mentioned that I own "Why Was Lincoln Murdered?" but have never read it. I have heard that it has "problems" to say the least. I suppose that the selections would also be chosen because of "standings" within the community of accepted Lincoln scholarship. Am I on track here?

BettyO · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 07:13 AM by BettyO.)

One book (and MOVIE) to FOREMOST avoid is Balsinger's Lincoln Murder Conspiracy and the movie fiasco of the same name, circa 1977-1978. JWB escapes, goes to India and Stanton is behind the entire thing. Dialogue used in the book entails usage of 20th Century verbiage and euphemisms, and those infamous Potter papers again! Davey Herold - "Wait! WHO is that in the barn with me?! Is it.....it's....No! It's NOT John Wilkes Booth - it's John Boyd!"

Everything about this movie was bad - costumes, dialogues, sets, etc. They have Alexander Gardner using a FLASH camera (which wasn't invented for another 20 years or more) to take photos of the conspirators.... and the prison outfits that the "Boys" have to wear look like something out of Oh, Brother Where Art Thou -standard prison garb.....pretty scary movie AND book! AVOID at all costs!

LincolnMan · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:40 AM by RJNorton.)

Betty. Thank you for the first entry into this thread. Personally, I'm going to great a list for myself-just to keep track of them. I don't own that book and have never seen the movie-but now I know about them.

Rob Wick · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:41 AM by RJNorton.)

People who know me know that I have a hearty dislike for James Swanson's Manhunt. For a lot of people I know I'm in the minority, but that's my feeling. Of course, Eisenschiml, Shelton and I have to add H. Donald Winkler's book, which is a rehash of Eisenschiml (and not a very good one, at that).

I'm at work, so I can't go into detail why I dislike Swanson's book, but those who know me know why.

Best
Rob

LincolnMan · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:41 AM by RJNorton.)

I would be interested-when you have time-to give some of your concerns with Manhunt. Also what is the name of the Winkler book you referenced?

J. Beckert · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:42 AM by RJNorton.)

Although I've seen him interviewed and he seems like a wonderful man, Ted Nottingham's "The Curse of Cain" was very bad. No facts, conjured dialogue, etc. There wasn't a smidgen of fact in the book to re-enforce his beliefs.

Rob Wick · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:42 AM by RJNorton.)

Bill,

It's Lincoln and Booth: More Light on the Conspiracy.

If you go to my old blog which is here, and look for the posting called "One book on Lincoln's Assassination you should avoid" it will tell you my problems with Manhunt.

Best
Rob

RJNorton · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 06:55 AM by RJNorton.)

One book I disagree with is Robert Lockwood Mills' "It Didn't Happen the Way You Think." The author implies that Stanton thought Booth was only going to kidnap Lincoln and decided "to let it happen" for political reasons. He figured Booth's kidnap plan would fail, but Booth was, in effect, cleared for the assassination because Stanton thought it was only going to be a kidnapping attempt. Mills makes a series of arguments that did not convince me. I continue to believe that Stanton had absolutely nothing to do with the conspiracy.

BettyO · (This post was last modified: 07-27-2012 07:28 AM by BettyO.)

(07-27-2012 06:54 AM)RJNorton Wrote: One book I disagree with is Robert Lockwood Mills' "It Didn't Happen the Way You Think." The author implies that Stanton thought Booth was only going to kidnap Lincoln and decided "to let it happen" for political reasons. He figured Booth's kidnap plan would fail, but Booth was, in effect, cleared for the assassination because Stanton thought it was only going to be a kidnapping attempt. Mills makes a series of arguments that did not convince me. I continue to believe that Stanton had absolutely nothing to do with the conspiracy.

Agreed! There is simply NOTHING to support any involvement regarding the US government....Now, and I'll possibly take flack for this from some Southern groups (don't forget that I'm a Southerner as well), but I do believe that the Confederate government was involved regarding the kidnap venture....

Laurie Verge · 07-27-2012, 11:38 AM

There are times when I disagree with only certain aspects of a book - including the author's conclusion. Such is the case of American Brutus.

Now that everyone has sharpened their daggers and headed for Clinton to eliminate me, let me say that the book is a wonderful resource, filled to the brim with verifiable information, an excellent example of detailed research, and generally a good read (except for much skipping back and forth, which tended to make it sometimes confusing for me).

So what do I disagree with? I still cannot accept the conclusion that Booth was essentially a one-man show, the great puppet master who could manipulate people, set traps for them to fall into to incriminate themselves, etc. - especially in the short period of time between first appearing on the scene in the late-fall of 1864 and the assassination in mid-April of 1865. Even if he was the leader of the others, I do not see him as craftily manipulating them.