Recent Theodore Gordon book

[Woodlakejag]

Yes there's bibliography, McDonald and Miller are primary, with the usual suspects as secondary.

The author is pretty clear about the parts he fictionalizes. I would disagree that it does nothing to advance an important historical figure. Many, many of the books and movies people enjoy today about history are partially fictionalized (mostly, because they have to be) and as long as they are honest about which parts are fiction, many people enjoy them and gain a better understanding of history by watching/reading them. Thinking about Gordon's life, and wondering about his thoughts and experiences, does a lot to advance an important historical figure.
I can think of many good examples, but here's just one: the movie Lincoln. Much of the dialog and some of the events are fictional, but it was still a good movie and supports historical facts and does a lot to advance the history of who he was as a person and president.

[jeffkn1]

George

Enjoyment and entertainment sell, and I can enjoy a book with a bit of creative writing, but I won't read this book if he's not presenting new facts. I listened to a bit of the radio interview with Gubbins and artistic license plays too big a part in it to suit me. If he did the same thing with Lincoln how might the NYT book review read?
I have struggled a bit with Charles Wheeler for over ten years and the effort has been stalled by lack of facts to support a theory about him that I have come up with. I have run this theory past people I hold in high esteem and I have yet to to get a thumbs-up from anyone, save the late AJ Campbell who liked it and believed it probably went that way. AJ's novels wove history into his fiction and that kept it interesting. When I finished reading his books could say I liked them but I couldn't say he broke any new ground. His tackle book broke some new ground by establishing relationships between known historical facts, and he presented a theory or two for the readers' consideration. I will likely include my Wheeler theory in the finished manuscript but only with sufficient words to clarify that known facts would fit this theory, yet it remains only a theory.
I can make a story out of facts, but I can't make facts out of a story. No facts = no history.

[Woodlakejag]

Jeff,
I look forward to your Wheeler book, put me on the list if you have a list.
You are correct that there are no new facts in the Gubbins book, but there are certainly facts. Most of the people, places, and some of the events are facts. The conversation is fiction and some of the events are fiction, but they are enjoyable because they are grounded in fact and believable. The author is clear about what parts are fiction.
Some people won't enjoy it, but I thought he did a good job and I enjoyed the book. And I typically only enjoy nonfiction books that only present facts.

George

[ted patlen]

Greatly enjoy historical fiction and was wondering about how much it detailed. The movie that often comes to mind is the Audie Murphy story, "To Hell and Back" staring Audie Murphy.

[RymanType]

So what is the best book to read to get a better understanding of TG?

[bearbutt]

So what is the best book to read to get a better understanding of TG?

Probably McDonald? Paired with the Sports Illustrated issue with detailed photos of Gordon's Fly Box (October 18, 1954) and an issue of the AMFF magazine devoted to Gordon (Spring 2001). And Sparse's essay too, in Fishless Days. The flybox photos speak volumes.

Gubbin's book was very satisfying for me. I like especially how he took to getting inside how Gordon tied. Of course, the book spins a tale about the mysterious angling companion, but it's part of the genre.

bb

[jeffkn1]

Jeff,
I look forward to your Wheeler book, put me on the list if you have a list.
You are correct that there are no new facts in the Gubbins book, but there are certainly facts. Most of the people, places, and some of the events are facts. The conversation is fiction and some of the events are fiction, but they are enjoyable because they are grounded in fact and believable. The author is clear about what parts are fiction.
Some people won't enjoy it, but I thought he did a good job and I enjoyed the book. And I typically only enjoy nonfiction books that only present facts.

George

Now that you have some actual Gordon under your belt, has your opinion of the book changed?

[splintered]

Just finished this book and enjoyed it. It seems to be generally agreed that Gordan was an innovative fly-tier of his day, an accomplished trout fisherman, and frail, lonely man at least in his later years. The author portrays him well. What the book does particularly well, in my opinion, is place Gordan in time and place. Sparsely populated rural Catskill towns, with cold winters, unfriendly spring weather, drafty homes, humble residents, well-to-do summer visitors, and the ever present health concern of the time tuberculosis. This book goes well with East Branch by Mitch Keller.

[thegreek]

I just read the book and enjoyed it. Sparse's book "Fishless Days, Angling Nights" contains a chapter about Gordon's life and helps with some of the historical aspects of this book. I think the words weave historical facts and possibilities together quite well and makes for an interesting read even if you know very little about Gordon. Yes, it's quite possible to enjoy a frog without dissecting it.