B-17's and Strategic Bombing (Was:Was D VII a good plane)

Apparently, he didn't do this because he was a knucklehead, but because he had
discovered that the largest audience for mass-market paperbacks about WW2
aviation were junior high school and early high school boys, so he adjusted his
writing to make it as appealing as possible to this target audience.

Even that may make it sound more deliberate than it was. Do the math:
he wrote 150 books in what? thirty? years? Forty at most. That's a
book every three months.

Ask Ed Rasimus what it takes to write a book.

(And he didn't have to do any research


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org

From: ost (Chris Mark)


One example of how Caiden "sweetened" a story has been pointed out to me (by
two people, as a matter of fact):
In Fork-Tailed Devil, Caiden relates the death of William Sells. In the
Caiden
account he says that "perhaps" only one scorched carbon sheet remains to tell
what happened to Sells, a paper Caiden found while working in Japan.
However,
Sells career and death are fully documented in the usual routine way.
Caiden says the carbon he found is damaged so that the date of the episode
and
Sells' unit are not known, although he suggests a possible fighter group. In
fact, Sells squadron, the individual plane he was flying, and the date of the
episode are fully documented.
The story Caiden then tells is fantasy. He says Sells took off alone on an
engine check only to discover dozens upon dozens of approaching Japanese
bombers and fighters bearing down on the field, none of which had been
detected
by radar (how this could be is not explained). Sells gallantly attacks them
single-handedly and shoots down six (the shootdowns witnessed by those on the
ground) before running out of ammo. His plane riddled with bullets, an
engine
on fire, himself bleeding profusing, he dives away and heads for a landing.
In fact, the Japanese did launch a very large raid that day. It was detected
by radar and several flights of fighters were sent up to intercept, including
one led by Sells. One of his four planes aborted, but three continued and
Sells
led his wingmen (whose names are known) into an attack on a formation of Vals
escorted by Zeros. He ordered one of his wingmen to attack the Vals while he
and his wingman attacked the Zeros. Sells' wingman lost him in the attack on
the fighters and diverted to attack the Vals, damaging two before being
chased
off by Zeros. The wingman who had been orderd to attack the Vals is bounced
by
Zeros and has to break off his attack before inflicting any damage. He sees
Sells alone engaging 12 Zeros, goes to his assistance, attacks the Zeros and
shoots down one confirmed before having to dive out of the fight. No one
sees
Sells shoot down any planes and he is not officially credited with having
shot
any down.
In Caiden's account, Sells heads for the nearest field but P-40s are
scrambling
from it and Sells is ordered to go around and his plane crashes while he is
attempting to do so.
Unit records say Sells was making an emergency landing on one engine at RAAF
Gurney when he was cut off on short final (gear down, full flaps) by a
landing
P-40. In avoiding a collision Sells' plane ran out of flying speed and
crashed, killing him.
The real story of Sells' death is fully interesting enough. But apparently
Caiden felt the need to "massage" it.
Apparently, he didn't do this because he was a knucklehead, but because he
had
discovered that the largest audience for mass-market paperbacks about WW2
aviation were junior high school and early high school boys, so he adjusted
his
writing to make it as appealing as possible to this target audience.


That would be me.

That sounds like good information. Thanks.

Walt

You just can't
use Caidin as a reliable source; but modern standards, he is not.

I know of two instances where very good historians have used Caidin as a
source. Both Robert Caro and Geoffrey Perret cite Caidin's account of how
Lyndon Johnson got his Silver Star, an account that is utterly bogus.
I attended a talk given by Caro during his book tour promoting his latest
volume of LBJ biography and during the Q&A brought this up. Unfortunately,
Caro reacted as if his own research was being faulted and defended Caidin. I
asked if he could recommend any Caidin books by name. He could not. So I don't
think he is familiar with Caidin at all. I suspect the Caidin piece on LBJ was
dug up by a research assistant and Caro took it at face value.
This is not to blast Caro, who seems to be a very diligent researcher and an
engaging writer--his Johnson volumes are wonderful. But it is a reminder of
why people should be cautious when a writer relies on secondary sources for
information--the author is at the mercy of these other authors' accuracy and
integrity.
Perret cites Caidin's LBJ account in his biography of Douglas MacArthur.
Now that these two respected historians have cited Caidin, others will, too,
not even bothering to go to the original Caidin source, but picking the story
up from Caro and Perrot, helping make it respectable (in a sense making _them_
the authors of the account, not Caidin, who fades into the background).
And so the fictional account assumes the form of fact.


Chris Mark

Subject: B-17's and Strategic Bombing (Was:Was D VII a good plane)
From: ost (Chris Mark)
Date: 4/18/04 11:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

You just can't
use Caidin as a reliable source; but modern standards, he is not.

I know of two instances where very good historians have used Caidin as a
source. Both Robert Caro and Geoffrey Perret cite Caidin's account of how
Lyndon Johnson got his Silver Star, an account that is utterly bogus.
I attended a talk given by Caro during his book tour promoting his latest
volume of LBJ biography and during the Q&A brought this up. Unfortunately,
Caro reacted as if his own research was being faulted and defended Caidin. I
asked if he could recommend any Caidin books by name. He could not. So I
don't
think he is familiar with Caidin at all. I suspect the Caidin piece on LBJ
was
dug up by a research assistant and Caro took it at face value.
This is not to blast Caro, who seems to be a very diligent researcher and an
engaging writer--his Johnson volumes are wonderful. But it is a reminder of
why people should be cautious when a writer relies on secondary sources for
information--the author is at the mercy of these other authors' accuracy and
integrity.
Perret cites Caidin's LBJ account in his biography of Douglas MacArthur.
Now that these two respected historians have cited Caidin, others will, too,
not even bothering to go to the original Caidin source, but picking the story
up from Caro and Perrot, helping make it respectable (in a sense making
_them_
the authors of the account, not Caidin, who fades into the background).
And so the fictional account assumes the form of fact.


Chris Mark


Guess you can't believe anything you didn't see for yourself.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Subject: B-17's and Strategic Bombing (Was:Was D VII a good plane)
From: "Emmanuel Gustin"
Date: 4/18/04 2:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


Those who talk of the innacuracy of our bombing have never seen Germany in
1945. We left damn little standing.

Art, "leaving damn little standing" seems to me to be an
indication of inaccuracy, not accuracy...

--
Emmanuel Gustin
Emmanuel dot Gustin @t skynet dot be
Flying Guns Books and Site: http://users.skynet.be/Emmanuel.Gustin/



Not when the goal is to leave nothing standing.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

(ArtKramr) wrote:


Guess you can't believe anything you didn't see for yourself.


sigh
--

-Gord.

Subject: B-17's and Strategic Bombing (Was:Was D VII a good plane)
From: "Emmanuel Gustin"
Date: 4/18/04 4:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Not when the goal is to leave nothing standing.

In that case, why bother to be accurate?


When it comes to bombing accuracy photographs mean everything, words mean very
little. Visit my website and see the direct hits that wiped out the petro
facilities at "Wurzburgh" with secondary and tertiary explosions to 10,000
feet. Then go to"The Bridge at Verberie" to see pinpoint bombing like a bomb in
a pickle barrel. Then see "Death of a Bridge" for more pinpoint bombing
accuracy. I provide photographic evidence. What do you provide? Anything other
than talk and opinion?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Art, "leaving damn little standing" seems to me to be an
indication of inaccuracy, not accuracy...

--

Not when the goal is to leave nothing standing.


An important point, Art!

Walt

On 18 Apr 2004 18:35:30 GMT, ost (Chris Mark) wrote:

I know of two instances where very good historians have used Caidin as a
source. Both Robert Caro and Geoffrey Perret cite Caidin's account of how
Lyndon Johnson got his Silver Star

I always read a history or biography with my right thumb (or if I'm
really interested, a moving Post-it Note) in the citations. My
amazement was total when I discovered that Caro used Caidin's book as
his sole source. It shook me for a while, but I finally got back to
enjoying the book. But I still think of it whenever I read Caro or see
him on TV as an expert: the man who cited Martin Caidin!

I don't know Perret. Is it possible that he was simply parotting Caro?
(Or vice versa, I suppose.) This is how the story perpetuates itself
about "the Flying Tigers, who were fighting the Japanese in China
before Pearl Harbor." You see that line in serious histories to this
day, by reputable historians. The actual source of the myth is a John
Wayne, Republic studios, wartime B flick


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org

On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:53:57 +0200, "Emmanuel Gustin"
wrote:

French author Bernard Baeza:

"It was, incidentally, Henry Sakaida, a close friend of Saburo
Sakai, who told me the real story of "Samurai",

Pity Henry didn't include that in his "Pacific Air Combat WWII"!

Thanks for the information.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org