Rumors, Myth, Legend and LIES

[mbhenty]

,,

[augusta]

Great post, mb! I've seen this book online and did not want to buy it. The title turned me off.

Thanks for sharing the radio interview with us. Yeah, I'd say he picked up a copy of Lincoln or Spearing and called it good.

[Tina-Kate]

This reminds me of the problems I've had in selling my own Lizzie book.

One publisher said they would consider seeing it only if I would agree to classify it as "non-fiction". They said my chances of publishing it with anyone would increase greatly if I claimed the whole book was factual.

I insist it's "literary non-fiction" (which is the correct term) because I filled in the known gaps using fiction. In fact, if one even uses dialogue that's not a direct quote, you are moving into fiction.

However...it seems anything can be classified as non-fiction these days. Eg the recent controversies over supposed "memoirs" people have published that have been discovered to have been largely fabricated.

So, basically publishers WANT non-fiction over fiction...even if the non-fiction isn't true.

[Ad]

[quote="mbhenty @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:57 am"] Right from the inception of the Borden murdrers rumors and falsehoods have manifested into truth.

As time went on such exaggerations were made popular by writers who embellished their work, some repeating the deceptions to a shameful level. Even making up some of their own as they honed their betrayal of the truth more and more.

Their is no excuse for these writers. Some may say they just got it wrong, but the truth is some insist on embellishing and polish their ignorance to the point of shame.

To find the truth you must go to the source. Who said it? Why? Is there any evidence to support the allegation?


I too feel very strongly about mis-leading the next generation of people interested in this unsolved double homicide. The true facts are already enough to make a person crazy without the help of those who really could care less about what really happed that day and the days that followed

The reason that I sought out this forum and the reason I keep coming back is the quality of the people onboard and the obvious care and interest and attention taken when dissecting the events of Aug 4th 1892 and after.

The focus should always be to keep in the forefront the fact that these people lived, loved and died. They were real; they are not just a Hollywood who-done-it. Any author or arm chair detective that treats these people and events with less than honesty and respect should be (in my humble opinion) beaten with their own chair or book!

It is the people like Leonard Rebello whom I respect. It cannot have been easy spending all the time he did researching every person, lead, photo, newspaper article, etc, etc….. and still he took the high road; and I for one am very grateful that he did. His work will cast long shadows on every hack writer out there.

It is people like Kat that keeps our enthusiasm alive, but makes absolutely certain that that enthusiasm comes with quotes in “”, our words in ** and references as to where our viewpoints came from. It is easy to run with a thought or a scenario, but Kat keeps us honest. Not a job that she is always thanked for (I’m sure) but a job that is necessary; for without it, it would be very easy for this site to become just another half baked Borden site. I like the fact that Kat is always encouraging us to think 3 dimensional, to include all of the characters/suspects testimonies regarding our theory in order to ascertain whose words sound hallow.

It is maddening to think that there are people, who will profit from un-researched, unloved, un-true facts regarding the people and events that the rest of us embrace.
Take heart that there are some of us out there that strive for the truth, no matter how much hair we must pull out!!

[Harry]

Yes, Michael, it is painful to listen to and as much as I hate to give this book any publicity those with strong stomachs can listen to the radio show at: http://tinyurl.com/5b45px

He has the nerve to say that the research he did was not a challenge. Well, he's got that right.

[Nadzieja]

This is one of the reasons that I've only read a few of the books by other authors. Everything else has been The Hatchet issues and source documents. I'm still in the prelim hearing. I'm taking my time and just reading so much of it at one time. Every page that I have a question about I put a little sticky paper with the question written on it. It's at the point it looks like it needs a haircut. Once I feel pretty sure of things, then I'll venture to the other books. I take breaks & read other books in between. ( I don't know why I own a tv sometimes) That hasn't stopped me from collecting them, because I know I'll be getting to them eventually.

[1bigsteve]

This is the very reason why I suggest that people new to the case check into the facts here in the archives before reading some book that claims to have the legend, the truth and the final chapter type of thing. All authors should check their facts before publishing. I call it "ethics in journalism."

-1bigsteve (o:

[Kat]

Wow! I'm gone editing on the new issue of The Hatchet- and writing my brains out as well- and here there are accolades! Thank you so much- especially for noting the difference in the " " and the * * !!


It's funny, because I was going to post the end of Judge Dewey's charge to the jury this week, but was busy.

I think I will put it here now- it's a good place for it. I feel as if we are the jury and should show respect- for the victims especially. It's definitely not a game we play.

I thought of reminding ourselves here- and because it was the third post of my new LB Forum career, over at darkrose, in 2001. Ah, memories!
Two members were arguing and I interrupted with this transcription- to show we were all there for the same reason.
That was more than 39,999 posts ago!

Trial of Lizzie Andrew Borden, pages 1926-7:
And now, gentlemen, the case is committed into your hands. The tragedy which has given rise to this investigation deeply excited public attention and feeling.

The press has administered to this excitement by publishing without moderation rumors and reports of all kinds. This makes it difficult to secure a trial free from prejudice.

You have doubtless read, previous to the trial, more or less of the accounts and discussions in the newspapers. Some of you, when you were selected as jurors, said that you had formed impressions about the case, but thought that they would not prevent you from giving a candid judgment upon a full hearing of the testimony.

Doubtless you were sincere in that declaration; but in this matter you will need great care and watchfulness, for we are often influenced in forming our judgments by what we have heard or read at some previous time, more than we are conscious of. You must guard so far as possible against all impressions derived from having read in the newspapers accounts relating to the question you have to decide. You cannot consistently with your duty go into any discussion of those accounts or in any way use or refer to them. Your attention should be given to the evidence only, for the discovery of the facts; and any other course would be contrary to your duty.

And, entering on your deliberations with no pride of opinion, with impartial and thoughtful minds, seeking only for the truth, you will lift the case above the range of passion and prejudice and excited feeling, into the clear atmosphere of reason and law. If you shall be able to do this, we can hope that, in some high sense, this trial may be adopted into the order of Providence, and may express in its results somewhat of that justice with which God governs the world.


We are not sworn, and so we can have passion, but that should be based on a solid foundation of fact.