Posted on 11/12/2011 9:19:45 PM PST by Steelfish
Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Lincoln’ Book Banned From Ford’s Theatre Because Of ‘Mistakes’
By Steven Levingston November 12
Of all the places you’d expect to find Bill O’Reilly’s new history “Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination That Changed America Forever,” Ford’s Theatre — the site of the dreadful act — should rank right at the top. But you’d do better to search for the bestseller on Amazon because it has been banned from the theater’s store.
The crime? O’Reilly and his co-author Martin Dugard have displayed a serial disregard for historical fact.
For a purported history of the assassination — an “unsanitized and uncompromising ... no spin American story,” as the authors put it, “Killing Lincoln” is sloppy with the facts and slim on documentation, according to a study conducted by Rae Emerson, the deputy superintendent of Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site, which is a unit of the National Park Service.
Other Lincoln experts also have sounded off. In a review published in the November issue of “North & South — The Official Magazine of the Civil War Society,” historian Edward Steers Jr. cites many instances where the book strays from documented history, then asks, “If the authors made mistakes in names, places, and events, what else did they get wrong? How can the reader rely on anything that appears in ‘Killing Lincoln’”?
By taking on Lincoln, O’Reilly and Dugard have set themselves up for avid scrutiny. Few presidents, indeed few subjects, are as voluminously researched and fought over as Lincoln, and have as many amateur and professional specialists eager to display their startling command of minutiae. Steers notes that more than 16,000 books and articles have been written about Lincoln, with more than 125 volumes on the assassination.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Unprofessional, Newbie?
I notice that the detractors, classic bureaucrats all, are long on generalities and short on specifics.
I wonder if their own books have sold as well.
Who are these historical giants?
One final thought. I read about 75 books a year, equally divided between fiction and non-fiction.
Damn, I have just made a research error. Can't divide 75 books equally in half. But I don't care.
I have yet to read a single book that did not have an error of fact, grammar, spelling or typo. I have never written a book or won a Pulitzer Prize, but I manage to find the "faulty research." I also manage to enjoy most books.
“How unprofessional. Wonder if BOR plays fast and loose with his ‘facts’ as he puts together his dog and pony show on FOX as well.”
OReilly cherry picks a word or sentence, changes the context and then makes his point.
My wife bought me one of his books several years ago. It was terrible. Many of the “points” were infantile.
thanks for making me laugh!
No! John Wilkes Booth was the handsomest stage matinee of his day and a very good actor. He came from an acting family so it’s not surprising he went into the business. Now a complete political idiot, yes, but neither a bad actor or a nepotist.
His name is mudd now...
What’s wrong with that sentence?
Sorry. Didn’t read the next post.
I didn’t realize the editors of the magazine “North and South...” are communists.
Off topic
Putting together some books for a 14 year old boy for Christmas. Bishop’s “The Day Lincoln Was Shot” is on that list. I read it at about that age (more than 50 years ago) and am wondering if it is still considered “non-fiction” today, or should I drop it from my list?
Thanks in advance
Now that is funny.
“The history is well-documented.”
But is it true?
The older the book, the less politically correct it is likely to be.
Yes, I read the article. While no specifics were given, the fact that Ford's Theatre banned it is pretty strong anecdotal evidence that BOR did a lousy job.
From the WP article: ‘Other Lincoln experts also have sounded off. In a review published in the November issue of “North & South — The Official Magazine of the Civil War Society,” historian Edward Steers Jr. cites many instances where the book strays from documented history, then asks, “If the authors made mistakes in names, places, and events, what else did they get wrong? How can the reader rely on anything that appears in ‘Killing Lincoln’”?’
You say the article had no support - how about Edward Steers Jr.? Didn't you read the article???
Yep, unprofessional. Someone of BOR’s age and experience should have seen to it that the book was written correctly. Hard to believe that ‘North and South’ magazine would be so critical if there wasn't something to it. Are you insinuating the criticism is politically motivated?
As far as being a ‘newbie’, I've been around long enough to know that BOR is a pompous blowhard who does not do FOX or conservatives any favors.
I guess he wants to do it live...
That was my thought also, just wasn’t sure.
Thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.