What do you think?
Rate this book
Lizzie
Reconstructs the events leading up to the Borden murders and their aftermath, buttressed by a new explanation that fits all of the facts, to provide an account of this celebrated crime and of the personality of Lizzie Borden and her sister Emma
242 pages, Hardcover
First published June 12, 1984
7 people are currently reading
211 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
September 24, 2012
I have been to Lizzie Borden's house and taken the tour of the day her stepmother and father were hacked to death with an axe; it was one of the creepiest tours I have ever been on. I have explored Fall River's cemetery, where the only claim to fame the now-sleepy town can make is that of the final resting place for Lizzie Borden. I find the story of the Borden tragedy fascinating, yet it was at times painful to get through this book.
To begin, it read like a high schooler's final history paper; there were many details but little narrative. Instead of investigating the story and journaling it back to us, Spiering seemed to just cut and paste ideas and concepts from sources and connect them with weak transitional sentences. The characters were never really developed, which allowed for most of them to get lost in retelling of the trial (turned circus) that flipped Massachusetts upside down.
Secondly, Spiering gives a potentially unique explanation for how Lizzie was charged and acquitted for the murders of her father and stepmother, and ultimately how the murders were committed; this version of the story is not backed up by any pertinent evidence, or really any chain of logic resulting from new combinations of old evidence. While Mr. Spiering may be well-versed in Borden-related information, I need more than his word in order to believe a theory.
Those items being said, I did appreciate the thoroughness of this account and can honestly say there wasn't a question I had that remained unanswered (other than the obvious 'So who really committed these acts?').
If you read this book, do yourself a favor and visit Lizzie Borden's house in Fall River and take the tour (and stay the night, if you're feeling brave) before you do.
To begin, it read like a high schooler's final history paper; there were many details but little narrative. Instead of investigating the story and journaling it back to us, Spiering seemed to just cut and paste ideas and concepts from sources and connect them with weak transitional sentences. The characters were never really developed, which allowed for most of them to get lost in retelling of the trial (turned circus) that flipped Massachusetts upside down.
Secondly, Spiering gives a potentially unique explanation for how Lizzie was charged and acquitted for the murders of her father and stepmother, and ultimately how the murders were committed; this version of the story is not backed up by any pertinent evidence, or really any chain of logic resulting from new combinations of old evidence. While Mr. Spiering may be well-versed in Borden-related information, I need more than his word in order to believe a theory.
Those items being said, I did appreciate the thoroughness of this account and can honestly say there wasn't a question I had that remained unanswered (other than the obvious 'So who really committed these acts?').
If you read this book, do yourself a favor and visit Lizzie Borden's house in Fall River and take the tour (and stay the night, if you're feeling brave) before you do.
January 4, 2015
I read this when it first came out and it is still my favorite book on the Lizzie Borden case.
September 9, 2018
It is well-written and interesting but I take offense to the author claiming he found “the solution”, when it’s really just theory and conjecture. Not a bad theory but he shouldn’t claim it as truth.
August 16, 2013
Frank Spiering has spent years obsessing over and researching the murders of Andrew and Abby Borden on August 4, 1892. Here, he tells the story of of their murders- using his research as much as possible and filling in the gaps of that day that are unknown with what he believes happened. He goes on to describe the trial, after events, and the lives of Lizzie Borden and her sister Emma Borden. The whole book, from beginning to end, effectively argues that although Lizzie Borden is the name that went down in history as the murderess who got away, the more likely killer is actually Emma Borden. He explains motive, means, as well as evidence and statements from their post trial lives that will leave few if any unconvinced that while Lizzie clearly knew what happened, Emma is far more likely to have been the axe wielding killer.
July 9, 2014
Long after I've lost interest in true crime narratives, because really, stories about people who are venal and mean get old fast, I continue to be absorbed by the story of Lizzie. It saddens me that she was acquitted, but that no one ever believed her innocent thereafter. Spiering's theory fits the facts and seems plausible.
June 22, 2013
I've read four different books [2 mostly fiction and 2 non fiction] which present the evidence which is all fact but come to different conclusions on the murderer. I do believe Lizzie Borden did not wield the murder weapon but was guilty of protecting or helping the real murderer. I reach this conclusion because the murder weapon was never found nor any blood splattered clothes. There is no way that Lizzie or Bridgett, the maid, could have gotten rid of the evidence and they were the only known people in the house when the murders took place. You hear about Lizzie burning the dress, but the dress was actually examined by the police days before she burned it. Nor did the police find the 'hatchet' that killed the Bordens. It certainly appears that a thorough search was done by the police even though they did not have today's crime tools nor did the group seem the cleverest ones.
The author has done a thorough job of presenting the evidence and his conclusion, but he and one of the other authors has made a mistake in the book which I found offensive. Both of them stated that the original Borden to arrive in America was John, but in fact it is WELL documented that it was his father, Richard, who came from England to Rhode Island in the early 1600's. Either author could have checked that fact easily enough since Richard was prominent and much has been written about him. Most people wouldn't care but as the family genealogist it does bother me and make me suspect of other facts presented. However, being offended I still think the basic facts were correct since all authors present the same thing just interpret them differently.
The author has done a thorough job of presenting the evidence and his conclusion, but he and one of the other authors has made a mistake in the book which I found offensive. Both of them stated that the original Borden to arrive in America was John, but in fact it is WELL documented that it was his father, Richard, who came from England to Rhode Island in the early 1600's. Either author could have checked that fact easily enough since Richard was prominent and much has been written about him. Most people wouldn't care but as the family genealogist it does bother me and make me suspect of other facts presented. However, being offended I still think the basic facts were correct since all authors present the same thing just interpret them differently.
October 11, 2019
This book came highly recommended from Lizzie Borden buffs. And I can see why. It undoubtedly got some readers hooked on the Borden story when it first came out in 1984. Spiering is an unusually lively storyteller and this book is told in an engrossing, novelistic way.
But I don't recommend it. For all his writing ability and for all the research he did for this book, what Spiering has created is a true mishmash of verifiable historical evidence and pure conjecture. I wouldn’t even call it creative non-fiction. At most, I’d call it a non-fiction-inspired novel.
That’s not to say much of it isn’t accurate. Spiering often quotes directly from the trial transcript. The characters are all true to history, as is the city and the murders. The bodies are described just as they were found. The story has the usual details — the window washing, the pears, the dress that gets burned.
The problem is that Spiering blithely mixes these facts drawn from historical sources and eyewitness accounts with his own speculations and invented scenes, descriptions, and characterizations — and presents them both as “fact.” He never distinguishes between things that can be verified by primary sources and things that are just his own speculation. He describes Lizzie as changing from a light blue dress to a pink and white striped wrapper on the day of the murders. Yes, evidence shows Lizzie did change into a pink-and-white wrapper (verifiable info) but it is not clear what color her prior dress was — light blue? Dark blue? (contested info).
Does it really matter? Well, yes. History books are about truth. That’s why historians include endnotes and bibliographies (Spiering has these. There are lots of notes and sources and books and interviews listed at the end.) Still, while the bare bones of a scene might be available from eyewitness accounts, the stories Spiering tells are often created from his own speculations and theories about what happened, using the same omniscient voice he uses for the entire book. A reader has no possible way of knowing what is factual and what is invention. Contested info about the dress was important in clearing Lizzie — few could agree on what the dress she was wearing when the murders happened looked like.
There are other books, of course, mix imagination and non-fiction. Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood and Erik Larson’s Devil in the White City come to mind. Both are good examples of how a talented writer can use his imagination to bring dry facts to life, using educated guesses to flesh out a scene and make a story more engaging. But it’s a very slippery slope. What is the line between novelistic storytelling and wildly exaggerated fabrication?
Spiering’s primary theory is the intriguing one that Emma Borden was the murderer. But this is not presented as a theory; it’s presented as fact. And it’s presented in a vivid scene, describing Andrew Borden’s eyes fluttering open as he sees Emma standing over him with a hatchet. It’s compelling, but did it happen? The evidence Spiering presents is highly speculative — and no other Borden scholar since has agreed with him or come up with any more solid evidence that this has any basis in truth.
If you’re just looking for a rollicking good read, this might be satisfying. But if you want to learn about the Borden murders, be prepared to get a mix of invention, speculation, and creative embellishment alongside your history.
But I don't recommend it. For all his writing ability and for all the research he did for this book, what Spiering has created is a true mishmash of verifiable historical evidence and pure conjecture. I wouldn’t even call it creative non-fiction. At most, I’d call it a non-fiction-inspired novel.
That’s not to say much of it isn’t accurate. Spiering often quotes directly from the trial transcript. The characters are all true to history, as is the city and the murders. The bodies are described just as they were found. The story has the usual details — the window washing, the pears, the dress that gets burned.
The problem is that Spiering blithely mixes these facts drawn from historical sources and eyewitness accounts with his own speculations and invented scenes, descriptions, and characterizations — and presents them both as “fact.” He never distinguishes between things that can be verified by primary sources and things that are just his own speculation. He describes Lizzie as changing from a light blue dress to a pink and white striped wrapper on the day of the murders. Yes, evidence shows Lizzie did change into a pink-and-white wrapper (verifiable info) but it is not clear what color her prior dress was — light blue? Dark blue? (contested info).
Does it really matter? Well, yes. History books are about truth. That’s why historians include endnotes and bibliographies (Spiering has these. There are lots of notes and sources and books and interviews listed at the end.) Still, while the bare bones of a scene might be available from eyewitness accounts, the stories Spiering tells are often created from his own speculations and theories about what happened, using the same omniscient voice he uses for the entire book. A reader has no possible way of knowing what is factual and what is invention. Contested info about the dress was important in clearing Lizzie — few could agree on what the dress she was wearing when the murders happened looked like.
There are other books, of course, mix imagination and non-fiction. Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood and Erik Larson’s Devil in the White City come to mind. Both are good examples of how a talented writer can use his imagination to bring dry facts to life, using educated guesses to flesh out a scene and make a story more engaging. But it’s a very slippery slope. What is the line between novelistic storytelling and wildly exaggerated fabrication?
Spiering’s primary theory is the intriguing one that Emma Borden was the murderer. But this is not presented as a theory; it’s presented as fact. And it’s presented in a vivid scene, describing Andrew Borden’s eyes fluttering open as he sees Emma standing over him with a hatchet. It’s compelling, but did it happen? The evidence Spiering presents is highly speculative — and no other Borden scholar since has agreed with him or come up with any more solid evidence that this has any basis in truth.
If you’re just looking for a rollicking good read, this might be satisfying. But if you want to learn about the Borden murders, be prepared to get a mix of invention, speculation, and creative embellishment alongside your history.
June 26, 2024
Interesting take on the Lizzie Borden story. I never knew that she had a sister who might have been involved in the murders. Most of the book was really interesting...a look at how the murders might have actually happened and the aftermath of the trial were all good reading. Where the book bogged down was during the trial. It was just long and very detailed and not fun to read. So I guess I enjoyed the beginning and the end more than the middle. Really makes you wish there had been forensics back in the day and that the police investigators had been a little more competent.
July 2, 2021
I have had Lizzie Borden books as my want to get to read someday kinda things since I watched and learned about her. But this book was one of the books I got from Tender Hearts (in very bad condition) and had to read it. However, the book sucked. The author acted as if this book was a ‘solution’ to the unsolved issues from the murder but in reality it was a theory. The book seemed more fiction than not by what I read. It literally was poop
June 11, 2024
The only thing I knew about Lizzie Borden before this book was the short poem every one has heard about the 40 whacks. The author does a great job of explaining his theory about the killings, which actually makes quite a bit of sense.
December 29, 2017
Very interesting...not saying much here for those who have not read it and who know little about the story...
January 28, 2019
Very good. I never thought of it that way. I'm going to throw up now.
March 1, 2019
The author reveals who he thinks committed the murders in the first few chapters. Since I was unfamiliar with any details, I read the entire book. It was rather dry and I forced myself to finish it.
March 25, 2019
Just reread this after finishing The Trial of Lizzie Borden. This is interesting, but more speculative without much fact to back up his theory.
July 18, 2021
Wasn’t aware of the suggestion Emma was the sister who actually committed the murders so something to research. A fascinating, well-researched true crime novel.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 5, 2024
Very dry narrative of the Borden murders. But there were a few things here and there that I hadn't read before.
August 25, 2024
I loved all the thorough details and I thought it was well written but I gave it 3 stars because he told the history around his personal idea of who the actual murderer was.
February 27, 2025
Rampant speculation. Also repeats myths that have been disproven. To as insult to injury, he just cuts and pastes chunks of wild speculation, so there is no path to follow. I struggled to finish.
March 6, 2017
"Lizzie Borden took an ax
Gave her mother forty whacks.
When she saw what she had done,
She gave her father forty one."
I read this book going into it that Lizzie was the guilty party. But no. My god.......Emma the sister killed their father and step mother. Because of greed.
Gave her mother forty whacks.
When she saw what she had done,
She gave her father forty one."
I read this book going into it that Lizzie was the guilty party. But no. My god.......Emma the sister killed their father and step mother. Because of greed.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 29, 2015
This was a really good read. It was very informative and the author sited some really great articles, as well as shared some really great witness accounts. I especially loved Part III: Two Sisters because the author shared what happened to Emma and Lizzy Borden after the trial and Lizzy's release from jail. Do I think Emma was the real killer? Unfortunately, I do not think that the author gives complete proof of this but he does bring up some very convincing facts as to why she most likely could be the killer. I don't think mystery will ever be fully solved. I think that the truth died with Emma and Lizzie. If they were both telling the truth and had no clue at to who the murder was (which I highly doubt), then the truth died with A.J. Borden and their stepmother. In any case, this book is definitely worth the read non the less.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 1, 2011
I have always been drawn to this case. I like this book very much although I don't agree with the author's conclusion. I mainly purchased it, because, 1. it was another book on the subject to add to my library. 2. It's the first time I read someone discussing Nance O Neal in detail.
I think as we look back at how different times were then in how women were viewed and treated by society as a whole it gives us an insight to better understand a woman who most likely was a victim of incest and could have easily been bi-polar. Never do I believe Lizzie killed her father for money. The money later served as a means to an end. It is without a doubt a most fascinating case.
I think as we look back at how different times were then in how women were viewed and treated by society as a whole it gives us an insight to better understand a woman who most likely was a victim of incest and could have easily been bi-polar. Never do I believe Lizzie killed her father for money. The money later served as a means to an end. It is without a doubt a most fascinating case.
January 29, 2013
Excellent book on the Fall River murders. I read this book over 25 years ago, I believe the author uncovered the true killers. It was Emma and Lizzie who killed the Bordens. I can't see how it could have been anyone else. They stood to lose everything to their stepmother Abby, whom they both despised, and made no bones about it! Uncle John Vinnicum Morse, Lizzie and Emma's maternal uncle, was visiting to assist Andrew change his will leaving his estate to Abby, so they had to kill Andrew and Abby quickly before it could happen. Abby had to be killed first, otherwise, the estate would have gone to her family instead of to Emma and Lizzy.
November 9, 2009
This book documents the true tale of Lizzie Borden and the grisly killing of her father and stepmother. This legendary case has aroused peoples' curioustiy for decades. Lizzie was tried for the ax murders of Andrew J. Borden and Abby Borden. This book offers a fascinating look at a harrowing tale and an interesting period in history. This book definitely held my interest, and I think that most would enjoy its rich detail. I do feel, however, that the contents might not be appropriate for the faint-hearted!
December 23, 2009
Lizzie Borden took an axe
And gave her mother forty whacks;
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.
I didn't know the family was loaded. At the time of their death, the Bordens were worth what would be equivalent to $12 million dollars today. The author, who has researched the murders for at least ten years, claims that Lizzie did not kill her parents but was present when her sister, Emma, did it. The theory is believable. The book was a good read and kept me engaged the whole time!!
And gave her mother forty whacks;
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.
I didn't know the family was loaded. At the time of their death, the Bordens were worth what would be equivalent to $12 million dollars today. The author, who has researched the murders for at least ten years, claims that Lizzie did not kill her parents but was present when her sister, Emma, did it. The theory is believable. The book was a good read and kept me engaged the whole time!!
May 8, 2009
Rather dry but interesting book on Lizzie Border. The author purports to have uncovered new evidence and names the murderer of Lizzie's parents....not Lizzie, but she's not entirely guilt free. A plausible case is actually made if his new facts are true.
It sure is interesting to see all the scenarios on whether Lizzie did it or not. Too bad we'll never know.
It sure is interesting to see all the scenarios on whether Lizzie did it or not. Too bad we'll never know.
November 10, 2013
I don't think I lasted 10 pages. This is absolutely not non-fiction — it's historical fiction masquerading as fact. The embellishments are as absurd as they are undocumented. There are also chunks of borderline plagiarized phrasing in the first chapter that are easily identifiable as derivatives of Victoria Lincoln and Edward Radin.
May 26, 2015
Liked the story, and I think it is more than possible that Emma was the mastermind.
Given the year the crimes took place, the scene wasn't 'worked' like now-a-days. And given Mr. Borden's 'attitude' in general? I don't wonder that no-one really paid too much attention in the house's general direction.
Given the year the crimes took place, the scene wasn't 'worked' like now-a-days. And given Mr. Borden's 'attitude' in general? I don't wonder that no-one really paid too much attention in the house's general direction.
October 19, 2008
I was obsessed with this book when I was a child. I must have read it at least ten times. I would examine the gory photos and think, "I know she didn't do it". I still think she is innocent! Great read for someone who enjoys grisly true crime stories.
September 1, 2009
Yet one more Lizzie Borden book which now exhausts my interest temporarily at least.
This book, written in 1984, has yet another take on the who done it mystery of the murder of the Bordens. Spiering's belief is that Emma killed her step mother and father and Lizzie took the "hit" for it.
This book, written in 1984, has yet another take on the who done it mystery of the murder of the Bordens. Spiering's belief is that Emma killed her step mother and father and Lizzie took the "hit" for it.
August 19, 2011
This is a pretty good book on the Borden murders which bogs down a little in the middle, which deals with Lizzie's trial. Spiering posits a different suspect (mild spoiler: Emma Borden; he reveals it very early on in the book). Not a bad introduction to this fascinating case.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews