@DanSBHawk, I think the issues might be something along these lines. There’s a difference between researching and reading papers, letters and other accounts which you then write in your own words vs. a specific event or situation which ( if you’re lucky) there is a soldier’s letter home or a diary containing an eye with meds account of the specific situation.
A good writer, should share the references that they received general information from - and a good writer should also show where specific quotes from eye witnesses were found.
But, in the first description, just because an author reads several books and therefore becomes more knowledgeable about a subject which they now write about- the author is now only referring to the information they read. And one is entrusting the reference materials used for this background knowledge were written in the same manner of how you would prefer your information was discovered.
So, there still is a human, even subconscious trait, to gravitate to the information based on your personal beliefs about the subject. And, technically, yes, “Book A” might’ve said 15 positive things about the person they are writing about but you don’t believe those 15 positive things so you chose to find the one negative issue which was a part of “Book A.”
By choosing the best accounts which were proven to be created by primary sources, then your references- either for or against the person who is the subject of your writings- is protected in that the information was as pure as could be based upon primary sources.
But, if you choose authors who aren’t as stringent to their research, that’s when mistruths ( both way- for or against) get propagated. And, as the years go by, it become more ingrained and more difficult to prove to the contrary and change a general impression held by those interested in the subject matter.
That’s why I personally prefer primary sourced materials which let the reader see the data and they are then able to take from these primary sources the information to heart. And, you don’t have to worry about conjecture continuing to be propagated on down the line.
I think a month or so ago, I used this same illustration with you that a book of such information wasn’t unlike the telephone game. Honestly, the beginning quote was said by Ms. Smith into the ear of the next person. It would be shown as Ms. Smith shared the information - which is the honest truth. But, by the time this information is shared down the line and written in other books for referenced material, it’s like the telephone game that the statement gets all distorted. It all can be referenced back to the statement made by Ms. Smith, but everyone has taken her information and had heard and interpreted it differently.
That is why I’m cautious about the authors I choose to read who share information that is not rooted in primary sources.
And, I speculate this lack of primary sourced information is where the breakdown in the truth of a person or matter can happens.
Now, primary sources aren’t always the end all be all for honesty. And, that is a consideration which needs to be considered. But, through a personal diary one would feel there was nothing to be gained nor information exaggerated within the pages. Now, if a letter was sent, there could be a bit exaggerated or padded information to make the letter more exciting especially if the letter was being sent to someone a person wished to impress. So, my thoughts are that I try to find personal diaries first, along with neutral documents of events, then letters and lastly the works of trusted historians who are well respected in their fields.
Most can write a book. But not everyone has the humility to only share the complete story as most of the time that account isn’t nearly as glorious or exciting to a modern reader. Today’s reader seems to require even more conjecture and that is why certain writers, as have been discussed on the forum, are known for their dislikes or adorations of certain officers or sides in the Civil War. It’s human nature to align yourself to a writer which thinks as you do. But, is this alignment really the most honest story of the person or battle? I believe this may touch on the issues concerning the back and forth on referenced works.