First, I want to think about the citations or quotations from LitB.
When you first come to them, they give you an impression of 'reality', a sense that this is the reporting of true events. But I didn't just start reading yesterday, so I know they might not be real. Other authors; particularly, I think, early authors; have used various devices to make the text seem 'true'. So these might be real or might be fictional. I'm not an academic, so I'm not going to check all the citations. I wouldn't know some were real and some were not if I hadn't read the questions for study groups or whatever it's called. I assume a certain degree, if one can speak that way, of truth. I assume Saunders is interested in Lincoln and has read a few books about this, that he knows the basic story, so even if he makes up all the quotations, there is still a basic truth to history in them. I imagine that the historical sources really do sometimes contradict each other and that that amuses Saunders and that he plays with it.
Did you actually read all the citations? I probably read the first four and then maybe one from time to time, and I noticed the shorter ones. How do they affect my reading of the story? Not much really. I suppose they make one feel that the story is connected to the 'real' Abe Lincoln.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index