babyhippoface's Reviews > Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever
Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever
by Bill O'Reilly, Martin Dugard
by Bill O'Reilly, Martin Dugard
babyhippoface's review
bookshelves: historical, grown-up-stuff, mystery-thriller
Jan 15, 12
bookshelves: historical, grown-up-stuff, mystery-thriller
Read from January 03 to 15, 2012
When I walked into the theater to see the movie "Secretariat", I already knew Secretariat had won the Triple Crown. Still, my anxiety (and my pulse) increased during every race scene, and I cheered every victory. I chalk that up to terrific storytelling and a great director. And that's the same way I felt about this book.
Obviously, I knew what was going to happen before I read page one, but I found myself hoping someone would stop arrogant and narcissistic John Wilkes Booth before he could carry out his plan. Ooh, that guy really made me mad. And that stupid, lazy, and irresponsible guard who left his post at Ford's Theater on April 14, I wanted to smack him. I gained new respect for players in the story I hadn't known much about before, lost some for others, and am still wondering what to think about others (Stanton, I've got my eye on you).
Barring some amazing historical discovery of hidden documents, we will probably never know much more about Lincoln's assassination than we do right now. O'Reilly and Dugard researched thoroughly (resources are referenced, though not in distracting footnotes) and included different theories of the events in their storytelling. Words and thoughts attributed to people in the book come from diaries and personal narratives written by those people or others involved. The authors have done a terrific job of turning history into a thriller. Battle scenes were dynamic and described as though they were being witnessed first-hand. (Of course, that's because those details came from diaries written at the time.) I guarantee, I retained more of the facts surrounding this event than I would have if I'd read a typical historical book on the subject.
I'd recommend this to anyone who is a Civil War buff, a Lincoln fan, or likes thrillers in general. This isn't a typical read for me, but I have the highest respect for Abraham Lincoln and all he stood for in the face of hatred and injustice, so I was interested in this book. I really, really liked it. When I started reading it, I went to the library and checked out a couple of big, coffee table-type books on Lincoln so I could find photos of people and places this book talked about. I read about the same events, the same theories. My guess is that many people who criticized this book harshly did so more because they have a personal problem with Bill O'Reilly than anything else. (Some reviewers here on goodreads complain about "many historical inaccuracies" but fail to mention any specifically, which lends credence to that theory, I think.)
The book is well-written, exciting, and kept me interested until the very end. The only problem was that this time, Secretariat was shot before he could reach the finish line.
Obviously, I knew what was going to happen before I read page one, but I found myself hoping someone would stop arrogant and narcissistic John Wilkes Booth before he could carry out his plan. Ooh, that guy really made me mad. And that stupid, lazy, and irresponsible guard who left his post at Ford's Theater on April 14, I wanted to smack him. I gained new respect for players in the story I hadn't known much about before, lost some for others, and am still wondering what to think about others (Stanton, I've got my eye on you).
Barring some amazing historical discovery of hidden documents, we will probably never know much more about Lincoln's assassination than we do right now. O'Reilly and Dugard researched thoroughly (resources are referenced, though not in distracting footnotes) and included different theories of the events in their storytelling. Words and thoughts attributed to people in the book come from diaries and personal narratives written by those people or others involved. The authors have done a terrific job of turning history into a thriller. Battle scenes were dynamic and described as though they were being witnessed first-hand. (Of course, that's because those details came from diaries written at the time.) I guarantee, I retained more of the facts surrounding this event than I would have if I'd read a typical historical book on the subject.
I'd recommend this to anyone who is a Civil War buff, a Lincoln fan, or likes thrillers in general. This isn't a typical read for me, but I have the highest respect for Abraham Lincoln and all he stood for in the face of hatred and injustice, so I was interested in this book. I really, really liked it. When I started reading it, I went to the library and checked out a couple of big, coffee table-type books on Lincoln so I could find photos of people and places this book talked about. I read about the same events, the same theories. My guess is that many people who criticized this book harshly did so more because they have a personal problem with Bill O'Reilly than anything else. (Some reviewers here on goodreads complain about "many historical inaccuracies" but fail to mention any specifically, which lends credence to that theory, I think.)
The book is well-written, exciting, and kept me interested until the very end. The only problem was that this time, Secretariat was shot before he could reach the finish line.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Killing Lincoln.
sign in »
Comments (showing 1-3 of 3) (3 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Terri
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jan 16, 2012 01:41pm
Love the review, especially the line about Secretariat at the end. I need to read this to see if the " inaccuracies" some have mentioned are there or merely sour grapes due to the author's politics. If you liked this one, check out Candice Millard's Destiny of the Republic from the library.
reply
|
flag
*
Well, I think some are there, and some aren't. Some criticisms I've seen are that they included a theory that Secretary Edwin Stanton was involved, even though "most scholars haven't mentioned that in years". Well, I had never heard it, and I found it intriguing, so I was glad they at least mentioned it. Some have criticized them for saying Booth drilled the peephole in the door, when that hasn't been proven. True, but I read the same information in another book, and also that a gimlet was found in Booth's hotel room later. I think it's a common assumption, and a fair one. There are some that are apparently very off related to Mary Surratt. I get that. But to discount the whole book because of it? Bah.Next I'm think I'm going to read Glenn Beck's Being George Washington.
I also read some who complained that they "didn't learn anything new" (especially some who called themselves "Lincoln scholars"). Well, that wasn't the point of the book. They weren't trying to introduce anything new, they were writing the story as a thriller. So I thought those criticisms were unfair (and irrelevant).
