Sitharaam Jayakumar
asked:
I read Truman Capote's 'In Cold Blood' two months back. It is only recently I have made a shift to non-fiction books. But for all practical purposes this book reads very much like fiction. I later googled and found that Bobby Rupp had never met Truman Capote. There is also a lot of criticism saying many facts have been misrepresented. So how much credence can be placed on the facts described in this book?
To answer questions about
In Cold Blood,
please sign up.
Bruce Rusk
Capote definitely took artistic liberties with things like conversations and personalities, but the meat of the story is factual and most of it can be easily corroborated as true. If you are a purist, then you have to accept that he did embellish certain things, but understand that none of them alter the critical points of the events. In any case, it makes a cracking good read. I personally don't care if some minor things were invented since the core story is based on police and court records and many, many hours of interviews by Capote with the people involved.
Greg
Jai, like you, I've only recently made a shift to non-fiction, as well as to poetry. I still read fiction of course. But you're right to point out that "In Cold Blood" reads like the very best of thriller fiction. About Rupp never meeting Capote, well, in the book itself, Capote's voice is absent, so we never really know who he did and did not meet. I'd say that outside the dream sequences (which are intertwined beautifully with the story anyway) we can fully believe the who, what, when, where, how, and finally, perhaps, the why, although as far as the "why", no one may ever know the full truth. That's buried in the killer's brains.
Janice Robinson
I just read that Bobby Rupp did meet Truman Capote and answered a few questions from Capote, but didn't like him and refused to cooperate further. It may be that your information is incorrect.
Sheree | Keeping Up With The Penguins
Any non-fiction book about true events - whether it's a novelistic true crime book, like In Cold Blood, or a drier text with a standard non-fiction structure - will face some level of criticism about accuracy. It's inevitable. Even the most merticulous research and careful transcription will somewhere, somehow, piss someone off - because we each have a unique understanding and recollection of the "truth" of a matter.
Sure, Capote probably took a few more creative liberties than was fair in the presentation of the story as non-fiction, but in my mind he did so in service of the art form. He wasn't a journalist looking to report the "truth", he was a creative writer looking to tell a story. I wouldn't rely on any one book as a single source of truth on any matter - reliability and accuracy comes through a corroboration of sources - so of course relying on In Cold Blood for a completely truthful and accurate description of the Clutter murders would be a mistake... but it's a great book, regardless ;)
Sure, Capote probably took a few more creative liberties than was fair in the presentation of the story as non-fiction, but in my mind he did so in service of the art form. He wasn't a journalist looking to report the "truth", he was a creative writer looking to tell a story. I wouldn't rely on any one book as a single source of truth on any matter - reliability and accuracy comes through a corroboration of sources - so of course relying on In Cold Blood for a completely truthful and accurate description of the Clutter murders would be a mistake... but it's a great book, regardless ;)
About Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
Apr 15, 2016 12:56AM · flag
Feb 11, 2017 03:02PM · flag