I live in a land where everyone speaks no evil in public (but plenty in private). Hence, one gets no idea of the context of a situation. I don't have much truck with that, and I fall in Joe's camp that way (and a bunch of others).

To simply say, so and so succumbed early due to the perils of the bottle or whatever is fine. No need to embellish it a whole bunch, but call it like it is. If so and so hates so and so, and somehow that is relevant, and it sounds like it is, then saying so simply and moving on is quite reasonable. To edit it out is dishonest. Dwelling on trash talk like, for instance, modern sports news does today, is stupid and an insult to the readers. But knowing the basic lay of the land is probably informative relative to how a guy does his work and - for that matter - doesn't do his work.

In the 10 yrs or so that I have been paying closer attention it seems to me that gunsmiths have a higher rate of anti-social issues than some other people grouped by profession. I do not know if that is true, but the problems that I, and others, have encountered are seemingly as endless as they are unnecessary. Makes me wonder why, or if it is really the case, but so be it. Without data, we can never even begin to guess.

There are a lot of biographies out there, and that is effectively what you are talking about. Look at the best biographers and the best biographies of well know people. They all include the bad with the good but without titillation or embellishment. Just enough to let us know who the person was and what his or her life might have been like. That's all you can hope for in a good biography.

Brent

_________
BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan)
=>/

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]