Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bill

Thoughts About Long's Book, " Making Of Bigfoot "

Recommended Posts

Bill

I finally got Greg Long's book, "The Making of Bigfoot"

I had a chance to start reading through it today. It'll take awhile to get through it all, but I thought I'd kick this discussion off with two initial observations:

1. The forward talks about how "a costume that was worn for a film that was made to deliberately deceive people, while earning "millions" of dollars (the word "millions" was actually italicized in the book for emphasis)for its promoters during the past nearly forty years in what can only be called fraud "consumer fraud" (again, those words were italicize in the book)to be precise. The public was "sold" both a story and a product that were bogus, which is illegal, and the scam continues today!"

This was written by Kal Korff.

Isn't he the guy Kitakaze said ripped off Bob H and Morris in some filming of a documentary, taking the fees to be paid to Morris and Hieonimous? If so, I do have to wonder if a con man rip off artist is writing a book forward accusing another man of being a fraud. Not an auspicious beginning, I must say.

2. The first chapter, titled "October 20, 1967" is written like a Truman Capote novel, with literary embellishments of factual circumstances of two real men, one whom the author could not interview (being dead). As literature goes, its not bad. But what is a literary piece of fiction doing opening a book proported to be a factual investigation? The author is apparently trying to tell us that Roger can con people with fanciful stories, so why is the author showing us how capable he (Long) is, telling a fanciful story? Doesn't Long want to impress us with his purely factual investigative skills. It seems starting right off showing us how well he can embellish the facts isn't a wise step for establishing his own credibility as a factual reporter or investigator.

Anyways, that's as far as I've gotten, but I welcome any thoughts other might have on this book, and if I'm mis-interpreting the value of a rip-off guy writing the forward for a book, or the merit of an investigator starting off by showing us what a great fiction writer he is, please show me the error of my ways.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

I never got past the preview of that book at Amazon.com. Long writes as if he knows exactly what Roger and Bob G. are thinking and he refers to Roger as 'the Little Man' over and over again. It kind of made me nauseous right off the bat and, I certainly didn't see anything that would make me think that the book is a fair and accurate piece of investigative journalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

xspider1:

Yeah, that's the first chapter, written in the "literary" style, where Long embellishes the thoughts of the two men for dramatic interest.

He also has the color of both Roger's and Bob's horse wrong, which doesn't indicate much attention to accurate detail.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drew

The color of Bob Gimlin's horse? or the color of Bob H's horse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

Are we talking about.. wait..

for.. it..

A horse of a different color?

:rolleyes:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Drew:

The color of the horses the men were supposed to be riding at Bluff Creek.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Continuing the thoughts on Long's book, I am intrigued by how much of his own story he put into it, and how he keeps the literary style of writing so prominant. Just as a matter of personal taste or preference, I think his effort would have been the better if he'd spent less time talking about himself. But that's just an observation, not necessarily a criticism, at this point.

One passage did bring me to a halt though. Page 64, third paragraph

"Glenn said that the Patterson family was composed of Clarence, Clarence's wife, and their three sons and two daughters. The oldest to youngest were Loren, Lester, Phyllis, Glenn, Roger, and Iva."

3 + 2 = 6

Doesn't isnpire a lot of confidence in the author's attention to detail in proofing his manuscript.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Spazmo

Huh.

Attention to detail seems kinda important when investigating something, doesn't it?

Oh, well, who am I to judge...I've never finished writing a book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drew

Drew:

The color of the horses the men were supposed to be riding at Bluff Creek.

Bill

You are referring to BobH's horse Chico, and Peanuts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Drew:

I'm referring to the color of the horses I see in the packhorse footage, regardless of what their names are. If those horses are Peanuts and Chico, fine. I've never authenticated the horses by name, so I don't use the names.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

I've gotten to the part where Long interviews Roger's brothers. I must admit that I am learning to admire Roger more, for knowing about his early life. He is more fascinating than I had realized.

But the descriptions of his talents does bring up a relevant point. His drawing skills, his acrobatic and tumbling skills, things like that, are shown to have developed over time, and family and friends observed these skills developing. So this establishes that, yes, if Roger sets his mind to do something, he succeeds, rising to a level of polished capability, but it also shows that skill was developed over time and with obvious awareness by other people involved in his life.

Creature costume making is a rare skill, and it doesn't develop in a vacuum. It develops over time, with repeated attempts and perserverence, and it's a big, messy and costly thing to do, so it doesn't develop cheaply or secretively. Yet there's nothing in Roger's history of activity that is remotely connected to creature costume making. So the idea Roger just decided to make a constume, or modify a Morris one, first time lucky, is a great leap of faith.

Another curious thing about the book, so far, is that Long considers rodeo "show business". That's a new one on me. I've been in show business almost all my life, and if you'd asked me if rodeo is show business, I'd have said "no way". Seems Long is stretching the rodeo thing in faint hopes of hyping the "show business" angle and stretching that to the costume/suit angle. Curious.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incorrigible1

Having not read Long's book, personally, I'm a little surprised his biggest proponent, Parnassus, hasn't jumped into this thread full force.

Where ya at, Parn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

incorrigible1:

I had wondered about that too. I certainly welcome his comments, and this did seem like a topic he can't say enough of.

Curious, the silence now.

:)

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Am I reading the same book Kitakaze and parnassus read? Seems in all the time the book has been talked about, and multiple quotations taken from it to show that Roger was just a con man, and nobody trusted him or believed him, and I don't recall any reference to these remarks, from one of Roger's neighbors, Bob Campbell, and Roger's music/movie buddy, Jerry Lee Merrit

Bob Campbell, page 92, almost 1/2 way down:

"Roger was unique" And a tone of adoration crept into Campbell's words. "He was honest. He was so honest. The guy was so honest. In all my life, I never knew him to tell a lie. He just absolutely didn't know how to tell a lie. That wasn't part of his makeup. He was just plain honest (last sentence italicized)."

Jerry Lee Merritt:

Page 100, first paragraph:

"Roger went crazy when he took the film. He didn't expect it to happen. He had found what he was actually looking for. I actually believe he was telling the truth"

And on Page 110

He (Merritt) didn't answer me (a previous question), but said, "And what they did, once he got that other film clip, which I think is real,. . . I knew Roger on his deathbed. Roger said it was real. So I-" (Merritt cut off by next question from Long)

Now there are some others who think Roger was a liar, and they've been referenced many times. It just seems curious that these comments (above) got little attention by comparison.

Curious how the reality of the book compares to the hype I'd been reading in the forums for the last year or two.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

What you are seeing Bill is interesting. Long set out to destroy Patterson and by 'association' the PGF, but his shoddy methods, poor editing, and careless inclusion of conflicting testimony and facts from the folks above, as well as poor old Bob H, simply show that nothing conclusive can be inferred from his book, IMO.

In a way, Long approached his objective (decimate Patterson's character and create a new and 'dark' backstory for the PGF) same as Patterson did in his quest for BF, all out, full speed ahead **** the torpedoes. As a result, they both made mistakes, possibly took some liberties with the truth, but should probably both be taken for face value as to what it is.

Patterson became obsessed with BF and filmed one in the woods of California. He thought the film would prove the existence of an unknown animal - but it did not do that, it has inflamed many passions but it remains in question 43 years later.

Long wrote a book that attempts to explain, 30 years later, what Patterson filmed - by conducting a scorched earth attempt at character assasination on a man dead 20+ years at that time. He thought his book would kill the PGF and end the discussion, but it did not do that, and it too remains in question.

The only difference is that where millions have seen the PGF and made their own determination, a far more limited number have been exposed to Long's book.

Will Long's book be a subject of discussion 43 years after it was created?

I think not.

Edited by infoman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...