data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/29611/29611fc068a6c5c116b71d035b78a630d5b53ec7" alt=""
All of this leads to my real reason for posting. I have
noticed in the past few months quite a few "book reviewers," especially
on Amazon, disliking various books because they are so detail-oriented. I've
seen this with my own books, and with fellow authors, like Eric Wittenburg. What
gives? I dislike books because they are
not rich in details. If I am reading a battle history, or a regimental or
brigade history, I want those details. Have we descended to a mediocrity in
intelligence where the educated reader simply wants to get by with just the big
facts? Would you, the reader, prefer me to write "that there was hand-to-hand
fighting around the farm house," or, would you prefer to hear it from a
survivor of the battle? For example, during a portion of the battle of Hanover
Court House, a member of the 25th New York chronicled that Sgt.
Harry Clark, a New York City Fireman, “was wounded, and the rebels thought to
take him a prisoner; he resisted, as it is supposed, for he was found lifeless
over the dead body of a rebel, having put his bowie knife through the rebel's
throat.” ?
What I like
about Hartwig, Harsh, Carman, and many others, is the level of details that put
the reader there. I guess that not everyone is up to that level of history.
2 comments:
Details, ALWAYS , PLEASE?
Michael,
We're both thinking about the same thing this weekend. I've been noticing the trend for a long time and the newest 1-star "review" of Dave Powell's Chickamauga book pushed me toward the edge. Maybe I still will write about it.
Post a Comment