My books are based 98 percent on documentary evidence.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
People never read my books for the quality of the documentary value.
The thing is that quite a few of my books have ended up as they are because of conversations I've had over the years with forensic scientists.
I began to feel that the drama of the truth that is in the moment and in the past is richer and more interesting than the drama of Hollywood movies. So I began looking at documentary films.
The key fact missed most often by social scientists utilizing documentary films for data, is this: documentary films are not found or reported things; they're made things.
But I can say what interests me about documentary is the fact that you don't know how the story ends at the onset - that you are investigating, with a camera, and the story emerges as you go along.
I'm not trying to acquire a reputation as serious documentary maker for its own sake.
I'm not one of those people who sees documentaries as a stepping stone to doing fiction. I love documentaries and watch tons of documentaries. But, I like fiction films a lot, too.
It's such a rich experience when you enter into a subject from a documentary point of view. It's hard for fiction to compete with that.
Films are always a fiction, not documentary. Even a documentary is a kind of fiction.
I offer detailed but mostly invented narratives about the provenance of my books.