Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
11:25 am
August 27, 2011
Offline
The difference between Weir and Gregory is this. Gregory writes FICTION. Weir writes FICTION and NON-FICTION and the only way you can tell the difference between the 2 with the Weir books is the format. That is the problem. I always walk away from Weir feeling as if she does not like the Boleyns. With Gregory, I think she respects Anne, but does not like her. Anyway she hates Henry MORE and thus, she has this waffling kind of narrative between a grudging respect and a catty back-biting…if you will.
Kimberly
12:48 pm
August 22, 2011
Offline
WilesWales said:
I used to be a member of “Wiki Tudor”, but cancelled my membership basically because of one of Claire's “Announcements” on “Posts.” Weir on that group even debated and agreed that a lot, and I mean a lot, of her sources were incorrect. Hope this helps!
I think I wrote a confusing statement here, but the comment after my initial one is great. I did not know that about Weir's fiction vs. non-fiction. Thank you.
What I meant to say was that on Tudor wiki they were a bunch of never minds, as I can't criticize them as they do know some of their stuff, but with A LOT of arguing. I was referring to using educational credentials, etc. and wrote her that perhaps I had made a mistake.
Thank you once again on the inforamtion on Wier's non-fiction vs. fiction. This is good stuff to know. Thank you!
"This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes." Psalms 118:23
5:11 pm
August 27, 2011
Offline
Yes Weir does write both and her fiction books can be very entertaining. However, her non-fiction books have a biased feel to them. She seems unable to keep her personal feelings or opinions from seeping into the pages, thereby tainting the research. I do own several of her books, but I do not plan to use them as a source or site them in my thesis.
Kimberly
5:37 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
You could always cite her as an example of ” How Not To….”
It's always bunnies.
5:58 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
No, the difference between Gregory & Weir is that Weir is actually named a Historian and Gregory likes her Fiction status but tries too hard to be a historian. PG writes lies, calls it fiction then brags about how she knows everything about everything thus making everyone believe she's a historian. And she's not. She should try accepting she doesn't know everything and try to accept she's not a historian…she's a FICTION writer. And if not doing that then stop writing period…would anyone really miss seeing her books on the shelves? I sure wouldn't.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
8:41 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
No I wouldn't miss seeing PGs books on the shelves either. Although the covers are always pretty…. but that's about as far as PG goes.
9:26 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Bella44 said:
No I wouldn't miss seeing PGs books on the shelves either. Although the covers are always pretty…. but that's about as far as PG goes.
yeah the covers are pretty cool. Like the Red Queen cover. But like you said, that's as good as PG gets.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
10:28 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
It's the same with Alison Weirs books incidentally…..
6:55 am
August 27, 2011
Offline
Anyanka! That made me laugh!
*Oh sorry for the site/cite mix up. Apparently my cell-phone (which as I explained in my intro) has a self-correcting mechanism with a mind of its own. Apparently it felt site fit better than cite and changed it. I am seriously considering calling my phone Henry because it always thinks it knows better than me no matter what I do!
As I stated once before on this site somewhere, not in the forum but the site itself, I find it fascinating that all these writers have access to the same research and yet they all come up with a different story. But I do enjoy a good fictional story and PG does spin a good fairy tale so I don't mind her too much, nor do I mind Weir when it is fiction. As long as they are admitting it is fiction. My problem is when they call it non-fiction and then take liberties with it. THAT I have little tolerance for.
Kimberly
11:09 am
August 22, 2011
Offline
Mya-Elise. said:
No, the difference between Gregory & Weir is that Weir is actually named a Historian and Gregory likes her Fiction status but tries too hard to be a historian. PG writes lies, calls it fiction then brags about how she knows everything about everything thus making everyone believe she’s a historian. And she’s not. She should try accepting she doesn’t know everything and try to accept she’s not a historian…she’s a FICTION writer. And if not doing that then stop writing period…would anyone really miss seeing her books on the shelves? I sure wouldn’t.
I feel as much about PG as well. I've read when I was a member of Tudor Wiki that a lot of the sources Weir uses in her non-fiction books are questionable. I agree with May-Elise 100% and more about PG. I went yesterday and traded in all seven books I had by her, and received store credit and got some things I'd really like to read. PG is no more an historian than Kitty Kelley. I am a little bit more hopeful that if one reads a PG book, it might begin to interest them in real history. I've looked at her site, and it made me at first laugh, and then go almost crazy (as they say one can change the channel if they don't like what they're watching). I got to the point I couldn't take it. I do agree about the FICTION, and if she did not stop writing, period; would anyone really miss seeing her books on the shelves? LOL! Mya-Elise is making me laugh so hard at the truth, I can barely stop. Thank you!
"This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes." Psalms 118:23
1:16 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
: ) Your very much welcome WilesWales.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
8:01 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Milady12 said:
Anyanka! That made me laugh!
*Oh sorry for the site/cite mix up. Apparently my cell-phone (which as I explained in my intro) has a self-correcting mechanism with a mind of its own. Apparently it felt site fit better than cite and changed it. I am seriously considering calling my phone Henry because it always thinks it knows better than me no matter what I do!
As I stated once before on this site somewhere, not in the forum but the site itself, I find it fascinating that all these writers have access to the same research and yet they all come up with a different story. But I do enjoy a good fictional story and PG does spin a good fairy tale so I don't mind her too much, nor do I mind Weir when it is fiction. As long as they are admitting it is fiction. My problem is when they call it non-fiction and then take liberties with it. THAT I have little tolerance for.
I aim to please and with some people they set themselves up so easily…you just can't miss.
It's always bunnies.
10:46 am
February 16, 2009
Offline
I think I've probably stirred up a right hornet's nest with my article on Thomas Boleyn's tomb and Alison Weir's new book! I have started to go off Weir's books recently because I find it so hard to figure out what sources she is using to back up her case, because of the lack of referencing, and also she has a tendency to put her theories forward as facts. See my recent article – /the-lost-boleyns-thomas-and-henry-boleyn/14594/ and also John Guy's review of “The Lady in the Tower” – http://entertainment.timesonli…..894033.ece. All of us make mistakes, though, and it is easy to do with history.
I would still recommend her books, I love her one on Elizabeth I, but I think we have to be responsible readers and keep our minds open and check sources for ourselves, where possible.
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
11:09 am
August 22, 2011
Offline
Anyanka said:
You could always cite her as an example of ” How Not To….”
You made me laugh, too! Thank you! WilesWales
"This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes." Psalms 118:23
11:40 am
June 7, 2010
Offline
Claire said:
I think I've probably stirred up a right hornet's nest with my article on Thomas Boleyn's tomb and Alison Weir's new book! I have started to go off Weir's books recently because I find it so hard to figure out what sources she is using to back up her case, because of the lack of referencing, and also she has a tendency to put her theories forward as facts. See my recent article – http://www.theanneboleynfiles……eyn/14594/ and also John Guy's review of “The Lady in the Tower” – http://entertainment.timesonli…..894033.ece. All of us make mistakes, though, and it is easy to do with history.
I would still recommend her books, I love her one on Elizabeth I, but I think we have to be responsible readers and keep our minds open and check sources for ourselves, where possible.
Claire,
Your article on Thomas Boleyn's tomb was wonderful, and showed the true nature of good, investigative research. You did the grunt work: checked the actual tombs, looked through records, searched out other written materials. Your findings are the coming together of these pieces, and no one can fault you for that.
Weir should have done the work. It appears, sadly, she took the easy way out, and relied upon less than scrupulous research methods. There is no justification for that behaviour. If she wants to write a book, make new claims about the Boleyn family, then she needs the evidence to back it up. She relies heavily on inferences. Make enough inferences and we can all come to some conclusion. In this case, it was a poor conslusion which you easily deconsturucted with old fashioned research. Weir should be take a page from your book, Claire, and do the work before she writes her “history” books.
I know we can all make mistakes, and no one's perfect, but Weir has a track record of poor research, questionable conclusions, never properly cites her sources, and makes outrageous claims, which she usually has to backtrack on in another of her books.
Thanks Claire for clearing of the issue about Thomas Boleyn's tomb. As a lover of all things Tudor (and a researcher myself), I appreciate the time and committment you took into solving this puzzle. Not only that, but for all you do in the name of truth (not just for Anne, but all the Tudors).
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
12:02 pm
August 22, 2011
Offline
I couldn't agree with DuchessofBrittany more! I thank both Claire and DuchessofBrittany for Claire's extensive, adventureous, and informative research, and for DuchessofBrittany for sharing what they know in such a way as only she can write! There's no thinking about it. I'm laughing again! I only wish I could add more to this forum. WilesWales
"This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes." Psalms 118:23
12:11 pm
February 16, 2009
Offline
Thank you, DuchessofBrittany, your words really mean a lot to me. I love mysteries, detective work and research so I've really enjoyed looking into this. I do, however, hate confrontations and upsetting people though! I wonder if she was under pressure to get the book out quickly and so didn't double check things, not sure.
I'm really glad that you enjoyed the article and my findings, I'm still on the trail…
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
12:50 pm
February 24, 2010
Offline
Claire I love you! Thank you for your article about Thomas Boleyn's tomb. That's what I call real detective work.
Weir could certainly learn a thing or two from you about how to conduct a well researched investigation. Honestly, I just don't get her. If she is unwilling to go all out while investigating, she should also be unwilling to go all out with her opinions, inferences, and/or conclusions.
1:29 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Maybe Claire should take Weir's place as the historian : )
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
1:58 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Claire said:
I think I've probably stirred up a right hornet's nest with my article on Thomas Boleyn's tomb and Alison Weir's new book! I have started to go off Weir's books recently because I find it so hard to figure out what sources she is using to back up her case, because of the lack of referencing, and also she has a tendency to put her theories forward as facts. See my recent article – /the-lost-boleyns-thomas-and-henry-boleyn/14594/ and also John Guy's review of “The Lady in the Tower” – http://entertainment.timesonli…..894033.ece. All of us make mistakes, though, and it is easy to do with history.
I would still recommend her books, I love her one on Elizabeth I, but I think we have to be responsible readers and keep our minds open and check sources for ourselves, where possible.
It's her lack of referencing that gets to me too, Claire. And sometimes her conclusions get lost in a passage and I'm looking for itwondering what she's now talking about.
It's always bunnies.
