In the 12-15-00 thread concerning his pending documentary on
Frank Luke, Mr. King clearly states his intent of completing a work of distinct historical integrity: I cannot see where the responses to his comments give any recognition of these laudable ambitions.
One contributor cites (and "agrees" with) an "esteemed" writing coach in offering that "The Truth" would be difficult to "evoke" without "fictionalizing scenarios." "Fictional liberties" are, I read, necessitated if "listeners" and "audience" responsiveness is to be sustained. I suggest that if Mr. King was susceptible to these temptations he would not speak so clearly to the contrary- and he would not be working in documentary film.
Another offers "let innovation fill in the gaps." He additionally endorse another Forum contributor with the statement "anything he undertakes will be accurate." This said of an individual who chooses to ignore oft-repeated theme of Hartney as to putting Luke over the balloon line "after dark? (There "Must Be Light"? or else "eye-witness testimony" is precluded as affirming a Luke "defiant to the end"!) Frey with the assistance of comment from the German side pretty much "said it all" of the premise that "Luke brandished a weapon/shot it out" when he flatly stated "Don't believe it". To contradict this material, from such as HH and RF, without any supporting evidence offered to the contrary does not suggest a concern, by this other individual, with being "accurate." Quite to the contrary- Perhaps this off-hand refutation of known fact-based material is merely another use of "innovation"?
Another respondent offers that "Historical accuracy is not betrayed, in a documentary, if the narrator specifies this speculation." He, oddly then shifts his attention to " certain Lt. Rieper" of whom we are told : "He ran the balloon line and was Luke's nemesis."
No mention that this (re. Lt Rieper) is "speculation" so we can then assume the Rieper material is a historically valid offering? The Lieut. was in truth then, "Luke's nemesis"?
Well, this is certainly a departure from the documented factual report that Lt. Peter Rieper was evacuated to a Munich hospital with broken legs and underwent amputation of an arm in June of 1918. This date is of some two months prior to Luke's arrival at the 27th Pursuit! Rieper (then awarded a PLM) never returned to the Front.
This type of misinformation on one needs to find on a site where responsible historical dialogue is intended. I'm sure Mr. King or anyone working to promote a better understanding of the individuals and issues of WWI Aviation can only observe such offerings with a great sense of dismay. Seasons best to all....Lee