Nota: 0 de 5 estrelas
0 notas
Carregando
MW![]()
author
Mat Wilson
"Preserving Their Legacy" is the product of 32 years of groundbreaking research. History has confirmed the undertstanding that John F. Kennedy conveyed when he said, "The great enemy of the truth i...ver mais"Preserving Their Legacy" is the product of 32 years of groundbreaking research. History has confirmed the undertstanding that John F. Kennedy conveyed when he said, "The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
The legacies of icons like Marilyn Monroe, John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., John Lennon and Ernest Hemingway have been distorted by mythology and "Preserving Their Legacy" will therefore surprise because it will challenge your assumptions with compelling evidence.
Cause is inferred from a series of events and sequences. Systematic misrepresentation temporarily misdirects but the concealed past is ultimately excavated through time-consuming, historical research. In the meantime, the validity of groundbreaking research is temporarily marginalized by the common phenomenon that Plato defined when he said, "strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught falsehoods in school. And the person that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool."
The confusion is understandable. Historical events like the Kennedy assassination have long been exploited by amateurs but history contains unfounded speculation through well researched books like "Preserving Their Legacy". Initially titled "Preserving The Legacy", it is evidently responsible for spawning fictitious novels like "The Memoirs of John F. Kennedy."
At its best, biography is not something you say about somebody you have never met. Meaningful biography is history digested; what we believe is frequently mere fiction and it is evidently human nature to blur the distinction.
***Astute readers provide opportunity to explain flaws: Posting on the Amazon news groups, Michael Robinson wrote:
"The one thing which is 'surprisingly missing' from this book, as I see in the preview, is: footnotes. You make statement upon statement in this book, yet you cite no corroborating sources other than your own authority. This, after a little time, can be a bit wearisome ... but it also denies the curious reader the easy ability to pursue on his own a tantalizing point that you have just raised. Any piece of formal writing needs footnotes to support what is being said.
It also occurs to me that your Foreword does not really do its part in setting the stage for the book: describing what premises you intend to raise, and how you intend to raise them. ("Go ahead," wink wink, "sit on the edge of the bed at least for a little bit, and tell me how good it's going to be.") The table of contents can serve as a strong indicator of how the book as a whole will fall, but right now it's a list of dead people.
You certainly have done an excellent job with the cover. Talk the book up in blogs frequented by people who are interested in this sort of thing, and hand free review-copies to the people who run those blogs.
It's possible that you're a bit too-close to this. For example, consider the following sentence from the first chapter: "... and that should be clear to you because you have read J. Edgar Hoover's memorandum dated November 29, 1963." Huh? How could I have done that? You need to include that public document right here in your book. However, instead, with that passing sentence, you rush on to your next conclusion.
Reviewers and editors can probably help you reorganize some of this material to present it more effectively, and inserting (hundreds of ...) footnotes would greatly improve its impression as a scholarly work.
Certainly, this book should sell."
Michael Robinson is absolutely correct. I just thought that all my footnotes were not vitally important in electronic format (an unnecessary distraction)? because I have tried to note the authors of quotations and references in the body of the text and the bibliography identifies all the sources.
Key historical documents are references like the oral histories of people like Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy, Historical Materials (documents, oral histories, presidential presidential papers...) in the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library and that is all made clear in the bibliography as well.
More importantly, Mr. Robinson notes that I speak of J. Edgar Hoover's memorandum dated November 29, 1963 as if everybody had read it and that is because in a previous version of my book, I had actually posted the memorandum in my foreward along with an article written by Dorothy Kilgallen dated that very same day. Unfortunately, when I revised the foreward, I neglected to revise the first chapter to reflect these changes.
For those who are equally perplexed by my reference to Hoover's "smoking gun memorandum" I post it here for your review.
http://mdatoz.com/document
The above noted memorandum is a key historical document and my personal inadequacy is rather insignificant compared to the need to prove that my conclusions rely upon the historical record.ver menos