John Brown - A Real and True Hero

 I first heard of John Brown when I was a little boy collecting action cards from the nickel machine in front of the 7-11 store within walking distance from my house.

Actually, these days, I would not call it walking distance for my two sons if they were the same age. (I think I was between the ages of six and ten. It was a long walk, maybe four miles one way, which covered a distance up the street, cut across some railroad tracks and through an orchard.

But back in those days, it was not an issue, and we made the walk, or sometimes a bike ride regularly. I discovered some cool collector's cards in this machine. You put in a nickel through one of those slide in things and out came five random cards.

The first ones I tried to collect were the Mars Attacks cards. For an eight year old, they were so cool. Martians invading earth, and destroying everything in their path. The artwork on the cards was very graphic and bloody. Sheesh, these days the establishment would be censoring the hell out of those cards. But not back then.

Sadly, I discovered them on the last run of the series, and one day I put my nickel in and something else came out. It was a random five card selection of the next collector cards series. Civil War cards.

But these cards were not fiction. They were historically accurate. Even so, the artwork was just as graphic and just as violent as anything fiction could dream up. So for an eight year old, they were cool enough, and I went ahead and collected them and eventually managed to get the entire set.

Civil War Card no. 1

And since the cards depicted historically accurate events, the card that was number ONE was a card that featured JOHN BROWN and his raid on Harper's Ferry to end slavery. On the back of the card, a newspaper article from the time described the event. 

I heard some old movies featured John Brown. I never saw them, but I'm glad to see there has been a recent TV movie and miniseries that included John Brown. Neither one was about him. The Good Lord Bird was more about a boy in a dress pretending to be a woman. 

Last night I saw Emperor and it was about a former slave named Shields Green. He had fought alongside Brown at Harpers Ferry, but escaped and avoided being captured. Or that's what the movie would have you believe. A quick Google search revealed he did not escape capture. But the retelling of true stories allow for "poetic license" which is fine. After all, it's something I did with my own historical novel John Dunn. It adds some flair. In Emperor, it made for a happy ending.

One day, I would like to see a fuller portrayal of this man, John Brown, and his real life and real heroic cause to end slavery. He gave his life for black people. I would think he would be more famous for that. Maybe even have a holiday named after him. Maybe one day there will be.  

Nineteenth Century Muskets and the John Dunn Story

During the 1800s in South Africa, there were a lot of muskets used by the Natal colonists, the British military, and even the African natives. During my research for my John Dunn historical novel, I did not pinpoint the exact brands and makes of the majority of those muskets. But I did find a lot of information about guns and muskets of the time. For example, the Enfield 53 was a state of the art musket being used at the time. The Enfield 53, (named that because it came out in 1853) was one of the first  "rifled" barrel muskets. That was a revolutionary improvement. In addition to that, it used the "Minie Ball" but that name is misleading. You see, the Minie Ball wasn't a ball-shaped projectile, like the lead balls which muskets usually used.

The Minie ball projectile was called a Minie ball for its inventor, a dude named Minie. It was cone shaped, somewhat like a modern day bullet. And because of the cone shape and the grooves in it, along with the rifled barrel, the Enfield 53 could shoot farther and with more accuracy than the muskets used prior to that. Of course, shortly thereafter, the breech-loading guns came out, and one of the first of those types was the Holland & Holland double-barreled rifle, which John Dunn had written about in his autobiography, John Dunn, Cetywayo, and the Three Generals. That was, of course, one of my main sources for my book. Dunn also wrote about his Snider, which was another breech-loading rifle he used and wrote about.

So in my book, John Dunn; Heart of a Zulu, which is due to be released next month, I made note of the Holland & Holland rifle Dunn used, and I made note of the Snider. But beyond those two rifles, Dunn didn't name the guns he used. Sure all the historians wrote about the Martini-Henrys, which was the British military gun issued to British regulars. It was the rifle the British used during the Anglo-Zulu War and a state of the art gun at that point.

So the book is good for now as far as editing is concerned. I sent my latest revisions yesterday, and I'm just waiting for the edits to start. And when they do, I'll be sure to let you know. All in all, I'm thinking my John Dunn book will be my best. It's the longest, the most involved, and it's based on a true story. Yes, I added some fiction. I gave Catherine Pierce a larger role in my story. No other writer or historian had much to say about her. Not even John Dunn in his autobiography had much to say about her or any of his other 48 wives. Still, I wanted a strong female character in the story, and I figured she was the right person for the part.

It was noted by several historians that Catherine Pierce was not happy about Dunn taking those additional wives. So there's some true life conflict right there for the story. Not that a story that spans the years between the Zulu Civil War and the Anglo-Zulu War is in need of any more conflict. It's already overflowing with conflict. But hey, there were no women involved in those conflicts, other than the 20,000 women and children Prince Cetshwayo and his army slaughtered in the Battle of enDondakusuka. Nevertheless it all makes for a very rounded and intriguing story. Stay tuned.

Great Endorsements, but Can't Post an AIS

I tried to post the attachment of the AIS to Second Chance here on the blog, but it wouldn't let me. It turned out that only photos or images can do that. It's more than an image. It has a lot of text on it, as well as the image of the book's cover. Too bad, too. Because I finally taught myself how to put the image on there. You have to insert a "text box" onto the document, and then you insert the photo or image. No sweat, really. I wish I can show everyone. It's a publisher's way of introducing their books to bookstores so the bookstore can decide if they want to stock it in their store.

I like my Knox Robinson Covers. Not only are they top notch cover designs, but they include the endorsements on the covers, which I think is very important. As Dana says, if those endorsements are to appear on a book's cover, it's vital that they are from nationally recognized authors who are published by well known houses. And you can't be more well known than the Big Six. (But now that Random House and Penguin have merged, they're more recently known as the Big Five.)

And the authors I have endorsing me are published by Random House, Hachette, and MacMillan. Those are three of the five.The other two are Harper Collins and Simon & Schuster. So, yeah.

Here's Second Chance, a Football Story. It's got the endorsement of two nationally recognized authors: Carl Deuker and John Coy. Carl Deuker is a great sports author who has written several great sports books, including Gym Candy, as listed in his quote there at the top of my book's cover. But he also wrote Payback Time, Runner, Heart of a Champion, and Night Hoops. Several more great titles are to his credit.

I must credit John Coy, however, as being the first great American sports author to support me. John Coy has also written several great sports books. Including Crackback, Box Out, Top of the Order, and Strong to the Hoop.

Both of these great authors seem to have a great range of sports understanding, meaning they don't just write about football. They have also written books about baseball and basketball. As for me? I'll stick to football, thank you. That's my sport. Will I write any more books about football?  I just might. I love the game, as I've explained very clearly in a recent post. So never say never.

Which brings me to my John Dunn book. I love history, too. I love learning about great empires. Like the Roman Empire and the British Empire. And the John Dunn book covers an episode in the history of the British Empire. It's actually also an episode in the history of South Africa.

Here's the cover to the left, and you can see that the endorsement of the great Ian Knight is now on there. Talk about nationally recognized. Well, Ian Knight's recognition goes way beyond that. His recognition is global. This great man is the world's foremost authority on all things Zulu and the Anglo-Zulu War. He's written several books on the subjects. I was remiss not to have read them. But I'm correcting that huge flaw right now. I've purchased and am now reading the book that is credited to him on the cover of my book. Zulu Rising; The Epic Story of iSandlwana and Rorke's Drift. And I'm glad I am. I have found some new information in that book, and I've emailed Mr. Knight asking him if I should use it in my book, which is being edited right now.

So times are great for this small time author. Small time I may be, but with the endorsements I've received for both of my Knox Robinson Books, I couldn't be better supported. Here's to hoping readers and book buyers will also give me support. Fingers crossed.

I Agree with Snoop Dog

There's an article about Snoop Dog's complaint concerning the new Roots TV show that is airing right now on the History Channel. He's pretty much saying that throwing these slave stories in our faces over and over again is not cool. I agree with that. Why do it? Levar Burton, the star of the original show, and the executive producer of the current show says it's a topic that needs discussing. Clearly he has a lot invested in the show, so he's defending it. But I ask why does it need discussing? We got that in our history classes, didn't we? It's not a pleasant thing to see or to discuss. It was a dark time in our history. So yeah, we acknowledge it, because it happened.

But discussing it over and over again and seeing these slave movies over and over again seems to promote the idea that only America had slaves. And only white people had slaves. And only black people were slaves. The fact is that pretty much all countries and all races had slaves at some point in their histories. And every group of people had been subjected to slavery at one time or another. Not just black people. So get it through your head: white people weren't the only ones to have slaves and black people weren't the only ones who were slaves.

Blacks had slaves. (And still do in Africa. Even now in 2016. Hasn't anyone seen Blood Diamond with Leo DiCaprio?) And Arabs had slaves. Arabs were big players in the African slave trade, but you wouldn't know it by what Hollywood shows you. The ancient Romans, Greeks, and Babylonians made slaves out of anyone. Didn't matter what race. The Egyptians made slaves out of the Jews and black Africans. It seems with this focus on the African slave trade, all other slave horrors are forgotten. The recent STARZ show, Spartacus focused on the Roman slave trade. Didn't matter what color you were, the Romans made slaves out of anyone. They were equal opportunity slavers!

So throwing the African slave trade in our faces, like Snoop Dog is saying, is misleading and divisive. Why throw it in our faces over and over again? The first Roots story was a good story, to be sure. It was well made, well acted and it's been done. It doesn't need redoing. Take the 1930s movie King Kong for example. It was a well made movie. But it was made in the days before animation was computer generated. Sure, Willis O'Brien was a great animator, but with the new computer technology, Peter Jackson's King Kong was a welcomed remake.

But that's not the case with Roots. It was well done, and didn't need remaking. But the simple point of it not being necessary as a remake is not Snoop Dog's complaint. He's complaining that we don't need that "sh_t" thrown in our faces over and over again. He included Twelve Years a Slave also. He says why not make movies about the success of black Americans? I think they have. Isn't Empire an example of that? I would think Denzel Washington's Glory is another example. There's plenty more.

This brings me to my upcoming book, John Dunn, Heart of a Zulu. It's the true story of John Dunn, a white man who lived with the black tribes in Africa, particularly the Zulus. The story is about Dunn, but it also celebrates the great independent nation of Zululand and their king Cetshwayo. A large part of that story includes the Anglo-Zulu War. Dunn fought in that war. But he also fought in the Zulu civil war that pitted blacks against blacks. Zulu vs. Zulu. It was a horrible event in which 25,000 black Africans, (Zulus) were killed in one day. But they weren't killed by white men. They were killed by other black Africans, just as white Americans killed other white Americans in the American Civil War.

It was an unfortunate turn of events during that time in that part of the world, but Heart of a Zulu is not about slavery. It is about Africa. South Africa, in particular, and one white man who played an integral role in the history of an independent black nation. The Zulu nation. Watch for John Dunn - Heart of a Zulu, available in bookstores this coming November from Knox Robinson Publishing.

To Register or Not - John Dunn

I'm going to wait before I register John Dunn for a copyright. For one thing, I didn't invent John Dunn. He was a real person who lived in a real world, and experienced real historical events. None of it was from my imagination. All of it was true. I invented no characters, no setting, and no events.

Well, I did throw in a couple invented events, actually, but that was only because I wanted to give Catherine Pierce, his first wife, a subplot. I wanted to give some kind of focus onto a woman in the story. But I had to invent something. And that's because in all of the books I read about Dunn, none of them featured or described any of the women in his life. Even Catherine was only mentioned as little more than a side note. None of his other 49 wives were given any coverage at all.

Surprisingly, none of his 117 children were described either. Even in Dunn's autobiography he mentions only his oldest son, and that was only about the incident when his oldest son fell ill. It happened when Cetshwayo was supposed be crowned the Zulu king. (And even then Dunn never mentioned his son by name!) In Dunn's autobiography, which is titled John Dunn, Cetywayo, and the Three Generals, Dunn wrote that he had to stay by his son's side because he thought he was going to die. And Cetshwayo refused to be crowned king unless John Dunn was present. What made this particular part of the story even more interesting was that none of the white doctors could cure his son. It was a Zulu witch doctor who did.

So it's in my book. But the point is, because it's all true, anyone can write about it. Even if I copyright this book, the story's not mine. It's anyone's. I guess the prose is mine. But the story is not. The same is true about other historical figures. How many Abraham Lincoln stories have been made? How many about George Washington? King Henry VIII? Jesus Christ?

So I'll wait until it's published. Who knows? The publisher might want to change the title of the book or ask me to add something or delete something. So it's already copyrighted automatically, but once the final version is published then I'll register it. Or not.

John Dunn was a Controversial Figure

In the latter half of the Nineteenth Century, not very many people in the English colony of Natal liked John Dunn. He was a white man but he lived with the black tribes in Zululand. It was his own choice. When he was seventeen, he worked for a group of white men, making a delivery through dangerous Zulu territory. He did the job, but when it came time to get paid, they didn't pay him.

So he moved away from white society with a girl who was half-black and lived in Zululand until one day by chance Captain Joshua Walmsley, the Natal border agent, found him.

By then, Dunn was more Zulu than white. He barely remembered how to speak English. But Captain Walmsley retaught him English, how to read and write, and provided a home for John, his wife, Catherine, and the three children they had in the years they lived in the wild. Walmsley even hired John as his assistant. But Captain Walmsley and his wife, Maria, were about the only white people to like John. They were the only white people who didn't care that he was married to a colored girl.

The word "colored" to people in South Africa back then meant a person who was half white and half black. Catherine's father was an Englishman, but her mother was a native from the Cape Colony. And she had to deal with racism all of her life. But not from John. John Dunn, in my  opinion, was a perfect example of a man who didn't care about skin color. To John Dunn, people were people no matter what the color of their skin. To John Dunn a man was a man, no matter what race he was or what language he spoke or what kind of home he lived in.

I believe I'm the same way. Race never mattered to me. I can honestly say that all my life, skin color did not matter to me. Nor the country of a person's origin. Nor the language that a person spoke. I have always believed that people are people no matter what color is their skin. I am proud to say that, because I know that it's true. Anyone who's ever known me knows that it's true.

And John Dunn was like that. But he had to deal with racism. He had to deal with prejudice. He had to deal with the English belief that they were superior. And they took their racism to the Zulus by making war against them. The Zulus didn't do anything to the English. But the English declared war on them anyway. It's all in my book, John Dunn, Heart of a Zulu.

And John Dunn, Heart of a Zulu is quite a story, beginning with his participation in the Zulu Civil War of 1856 to the end of the Anglo Zulu War of 1878-79. That means he fought in, not one, but two Zulu wars. And he survived them.

As Mr. Spock raising an eyebrow in Star Trek would say: Fascinating!

Or as that German soldier smoking a cigarette in Laugh In would say: Verrrry Interesting!

TV Shows-Premium Channels Have Advantage

When it comes to TV shows, which I watch upon occasion, the Premium channels really do have an advantage over network TV. No commercials. That's the advantage I appreciate the most. And they are not burdened with the "family"guidelines in terms of nudity, sex, violence, and foul words. They are able to be on a par with Hollywood, in that they can be rated R, or even X.

Cable channels, like AMC are in between. They can go a little farther than network channels, but not as far as Premium channels. At least not where sex and nudity are concerned. But when it comes to blood and gore, the sky seems to be the limit.

For example, The Walking Dead is on AMC, and it has more violence, blood, and gore than most shows I've ever seen. No sex or  nudity, though. I guess the Premium channels have a monopoly on that. But The Walking Dead doesn't need it. It's the number one show on TV. I watch it, and I like it. I like zombie movies, and The Walking Dead does it very well. A lot of people must agree with me.

But it does have commercials, unfortunately, and that's the only drawback. I don't like commercials. Never did. But you deal with it if you like the show, and I do. AMC has another show out now that has caught my interest. TURN. It takes place during the American Revolutionary War, and focuses on America's first spy ring. I think it's done pretty well, and it's worth watching. Despite the commercials. It's not quite as bloody as The Walking Dead, but it doesn't have to be.

You see, when it comes to blood and gore, and sex and nudity, too, btw, when a channel is allowed to have that, like the Premium channels, sometimes, imo, they take it too far. Like the recent HBO show Spartacus. I liked that show, but the violence, the blood and gore, and even the sex and nudity were deliberately over-the-top. It was as if the makers of that show, knowing they had the green light for all of that, decided to go overboard. And they sure did. Go overboard, that is.

They didn't need to. The slow motion shots of blood spattering were not necessary. And the needless full frontal nudity, (mostly of men, btw,) seemed more in tune with gay porn to me. It just wasn't necessary. The long and graphic scenes of sexual activity were just not necessary. I'm no prude, mind you. But it seemed to be an executive decision to go over the top in all areas not allowed on Network TV. And it was way overdone.

Did it ruin the show? No. It was still a good show. I still liked it. But not for the blood and gore. And certainly not for the sex and male nudity. I could have gone without that. I happen to like historical epics. Like Historical Novels. I'll automatically like anything that has to do with the Roman Empire. And the American Revolution. And the American Civil War. And the era of Leonardo DaVinci, like the current STARZ show.

The bottom line is the writing. Is it good? That's what counts. But even when the writing is lacking, like DaVinci's Demons, I'll still watch if the subject matter is appealing to me. And whenever a subject matter includes Leonardo, then that's enough for me. Until the writing gets so bad it makes it difficult to watch. DaVinci's Demons has almost reached that point. But not quite yet.

True History vs. Historical Fiction

I mentioned yesterday that in my later years I prefer to read, (when I do read,) about true historical events. That is to be differentiated from Historical Fiction. Meaning Historical Fiction can actually be about a true historical person even though it's fiction. I mentioned the oft-written-about historical figures Julius Caesar, Mark Antony, and Cleopatra. Those historical figures may have been written about in historical novels more than any other historical people. Even Shakespeare took a turn at it. But how many of those books were historically accurate? Sure they were based on the true story. And all were generally true to the real events, I would guess. I wouldn't really know, because I never actually read them.

I did see the movie, Cleopatra, with Elizabeth Taylor, and I saw the HBO show called Rome. Both were based on the historical events surrounding Julius Caesar and his best friend and right hand man, Mark Antony, but an awful lot of "artistic liberties" were taken, as well, in both shows. And if you're looking for an entertaining story about a real life person, then I don't mind those liberties. But sometimes, I think, those liberties are taken too far. It's an opinion, of course. In the show Rome, they made it so that Julius Caesar's son, Caesarian, was not really his son, but fathered by another Roman Cleopatra used to get impregnated.

In the movie Cleopatra, they left out completely the children Cleopatra had with Mark Antony. So did either story ruin the entertainment value of the shows? No. Not as long as the story lines were still generally accurate to the historical events. And they were.

But when I read a book I want to know the real events, and an accurate account of them. I don't read historical fiction for entertainment. I want the real deal. I want to know just what did Julius Caesar really do, and wow, what he really did was really amazing. From his conquest of Gaul to his later conquest of Egypt, which in both campaigns his army was overwhelmingly outnumbered, and yet both times he was overwhelmingly victorious.

Of course the whole Cleopatra thing was exciting and intriguing, and his assassination by the Roman Senators who feared his domination was a great twist in the story, as was Mark Antony's rise to power, as he hunted down and killed the assassins one by one.

And then you have the sudden and unexpected rise of Octavian, whose shrewd manipulations would eventually make him the ultimate master of the entire Roman Empire. Yes, this was a story that really needed no "artistic liberties" as it's a wonderful story as it really happened.

But sometimes artistic liberties do make a real life story more interesting, and that's what I did with my story about John Dunn. I didn't take too many liberties, mind you. Yes, I mentioned that I had one of his 50 wives be the daughter of the Zulu king. But that wasn't too drastic, as Dunn did marry many daughters of fellow Zulu chiefs. And the Zulu king, Cetswayo, had about as many kids as Dunn. I'm talking about in the hundreds.

And that's just about it, except for one other liberty. Dunn's main antagonist in my story, as in real life, too, I might add, was the Anglican Bishop Colenso, the religious leader who was trying to Christianize the natives in South Africa, including Zululand. He hated John Dunn. He saw Dunn as a white man who had lowered himself to the level of the natives, living amongst them, marrying them, and having children with them. To Colenso, this was unconscionable. And his vehement hatred of Dunn was well known.

But in my book, I gave Colenso some props. Colenso did do some good things for the Zulus, and I wanted to show his good side by having him take in Dunn's clan during the war, when Dunn brought his people to the British side of the Tugela River. In real life, Dunn's people were forced to camp out in an unincorporated part of Natal, (the British colony next to Zululand.) But in my story, I portrayed Colenso as the "good Christian" who did a hated rival a "Christian" favor, by helping him in a time of need. Was that too liberal of me? Maybe. But I thought it added to the story.

Still, it's a long way from being completed. I'm still revising and fixing some holes in Killer Eyes. That should be finished in a couple months. Then John Dunn will get its turn. Can't wait for that.

Genre Preference

I guess a lot of people have a genre preference. I don't really. When I was a kid I liked science fiction, but I also liked historicals. I was into the American Civil War for a long while. Didn't read a lot of books about it though. I never even read Red Badge of Courage. But I did read a few Ray Bradbury books, Edgar Rice Burroughs, and H.G. Wells. It was when I discovered Conan and Robert E. Howard did my genre preference for Sword and Sorcery develop. But only in reading. I wouldn't try writing a story like that.

My first attempt at writing was science fiction. I didn't get too far, but I was only eight. My next effort was actually an attempt at creating a science fiction graphic novel. Got two of them completed in what was supposed to be a four part series. I hope to post them on the blog one day. But I don't suppose I'll ever get the other two done. It's not where my head is at. I'm only into the writing now. And what I like writing is contemporary thrillers, and of course my WIP which is historical fiction. But I do believe, at this point anyway, that this is an exception. Too much research involved to do this again. I should have been done a month ago.

As for art, I'm just a teacher now. I'm not even sure I want to illustrate my own covers, although a few people have suggested I do. You know, they say, "Hey, you're an artist. You should do your own cover." Maybe I will. I'm thinking about it.

How Much Action?

I'm trying to determine how many of the Anglo-Zulu War battles I should include in my story. The most famous ones are the Battle at Isandlwana and the Battle at Rorke's Drift. They're famous because both have been made into movies. One was ZULU DAWN, starring Burt Lancaster and Peter O'toole, and the other was ZULU, starring Michael Caine and Stanley Baker. They were both good movies, and I liked them when I saw them so many years ago.

But I realize now that neither one was completely true to history. I suppose had they been books, they would have been designated historical fiction. So that's all right. So is my WIP, John Dunn, Heart of a Zulu. You don't refer to them for historical facts. They were interesting because they were based on true history, but that's it.

It kind of reminds me of that HBO miniseries a while back called ROME. I really liked it. It was based on the real historical events surrounding Julius Caesar and others during that time period, but it contained an awful lot of things that just didn't happen. Thus, historical FICTION, to be sure. But entertaining, yes.

Writing About Real People

You know what? I've been getting weird feelings the last couple days writing about real people. It's one thing writing about people I made up like in KILLER OF KILLERS and THE VASE. But John Dunn, Cetshwayo, and all those people I'm writing about now, well, it's different. I hope they're not looking down from heaven or anything like that. But in case they are, I hope they realize I'm putting them in a good light. Really.

A Lot of Progress on John Dunn

My research isn't complete, but I have a good start already on my historical novel on John Dunn.

I am finished with the research on the Zulu Civil War battle in which John Dunn fought, and a bunch of stuff about his early life. So I went ahead and started the book. I had about five pages done, as I’ve posted earlier. But today I put in a marathon of writing. Got the first chapter done, and it’s near seven thousand words and 24 pages now. That was over five thousand words and near twenty pages of writing I got in today.

But what a chapter! Talk about beginning a book with a lot of action. How about a huge final battle of an African civil war? I mean the Zulus did NOT kid around when it came to waging war. Anyone who knows anything about Shaka Zulu knows that. We’re talking about 30,000 to 40,000 fatalities here. In one day of fighting. And that includes not just soldiers, or impi as the Zulu called their warriors. But we’re talking about women, children, the aged, the infirm, the whole deal slaughtered on the losing side.

A River Runs Red. That’s what happened to the Tugela River when the killing was over. It ran red with the blood of Mbuyasi’s clan. I think it’s a great name for a chapter. Maybe even for the book. I don’t have a title for it yet. (John Dunn as a title just doesn’t cut it.) But A River Runs Red sounds good. That will be something I’ll consider, anyway.

And I found out in my research that John Dunn wasn’t the only white man to fight in that battle. It’s true he was the only white man on Prince Mbuyasi’s side. But not to be outdone by his brother, Cetshwayo went and got a white man to fight for his side, too. That is a fact, but I had a little fun with it, and in my story the two faced off for a showdown of their own. I don’t have to tell you who won. (Hey the book’s about John Dunn!) So I got a little fiction in there. It’s based on the true story of John Dunn, but I’m going to spiff it up a bit.

Heck, I don’t have to spiff it up too much. I mean how much spiffing up does a guy with fifty wives and a hundred plus kids need?

Historical Fiction

A lot of people love Historical Fiction. You might think the words are a contradiction! No wonder it's a popular genre. You can write about a true life person from history, and make up your own version of their life. You can spin it into any kind of story you want. Thus, the fiction! And since most people prefer novels to academic reading, it's just right for them. Thus the Historical "Novel."

For my fourth novel, The Adventures of John Dunn, (working title) I will keep Dunn's achievements and the historical events accurate. It's what makes him a great source for a story. But I will need to forge a ficticious plot and subplots so as to make my novel a great read. Hey, I want people to buy it after all. Can't wait to get this research done and get on with the writing!

Research

Well, the research into the adventures of John Dunn will take some time. I have enough books to last me several weeks of reading. I am eager to continue writing, and make progress, but I want to get most of the details right. Even though it's historical fiction and it doesn't have to be accurate, I'd rather have the time line correct.

Sure I'll add romance since he did have a faithful white wife along with 48 black ones, but it's the conflict on which I will concentrate. And besides the wars in which he fought, there's plenty of conflict right there. I mean, if your husband had 48 additional wives, are you telling me there wouldn't be conflict in that element alone? There was!

The Adventures of John Dunn

Well I think I have decided on which book to write next. Tuesday night I started the manuscript on John Dunn, and I’m over a thousand words into it now, so that’s what it will be. Don’t have a title for it yet. John Dunn, the White Chief of Zululand is already taken. That’s the name of the biography written by Charles Ballard. And what I would give to get a copy of that. Still looking.

But the reason I’m choosing that story is because of all the tension, conflict and the improbable success John Dunn achieved. I mentioned in Tuesday's post the fact that Dunn’s story contained a lot of conflict. Well, check this out. Not only was he stuck between the black/white tension of the time, and all the conflict that came with that, but he was involved in two major Zulu wars. The Anglo-Zulu war which I mentioned already, and the Zulu Civil War that took place twenty-two years before that. So here we have a guy involved in two major African wars in his lifetime, and both in the prime of his life. He was twenty-three years old when the Zulu Civil War ended, and forty-five when the Anglo-Zulu War began. So this will be the time span of my book.

The story will begin in 1856, when the Zulu king Mpande was getting old, and two of his sons, Cetshwayo and Mbuyasi vied for the right to succeed him. And the issue was not decided with any kind of chivalry. It was an all out war. I’m talking to the death. Not only for one of the brother princes, but of thousands of their followers, too.

Now I’m not sure if John Dunn had met Cetshwayo at this point in time, (still researching that) but I do know that he sided with Mbuyasi, even though Cetshwayo had a much larger army. Maybe it was Mbuyasi who solicited John Dunn’s support, (and the guns to which he had access) and that’s how he got Dunn on his side. But regardless, after a horrible toll in terms of the lives of their warriors and of the massacres of women and children, as well, Cetshwayo won the war, and John Dunn barely escaped the deciding battle with his life.

He dived into the Thukela River (which at that point was red with the blood of thousands of slaughtered Zulus. I found in my research that as he struggled to keep from drowning, he clutched onto the nearest floating object and discovered to his dismay that it was a woman’s dead body, and her baby had been impaled onto her before being thrown into the river by Cetshwayo’s victorious troops.

So yeah, it’s going to be a fascinating story. But still got a lot of research to do. Can’t wait.

Summer Coming! It's Time...

Summer is approaching, and that means it’s time to write my fourth novel. I have two ideas and I’ll talk about one of them right now. Like THE VASE, it’s a story that’s been brewing in my head for a long time. But unlike my fiction stories, it’s actually a TRUE story. Thus it would be a Historical Novel, also known as Historical Fiction. You know the old saying that sometimes truth is stranger than fiction – or more interesting, anyway, for the mere fact that it’s true, and there are a lot of true stories that are quite fascinating.

And one of them is the story of John Dunn. If you never heard of him, go ahead and Google him. He’s a 19th Century white man who lived in Africa. And even though he was white, (Scottish descent,) he became best friends with the Zulu king, Cetshwayo, and rewarded by Cetshwayo with his own Zulu sub-kingdom. So yeah, he was actually a white Zulu king, with near fifty Zulu wives and he fathered over a hundred Zulu kids. (He also had a white wife, and she wasn’t so fond of sharing him with so many black ones. But, hey, he was a king!) I’m telling you it’s a true story. Otherwise, I wouldn’t dare think of such a premise.

This man, John Dunn, has a story worth telling, and though his biography was written already by Charles Ballard, I would like to tell it in a novel-type format. You know, focusing on the adventure and the conflict. (He was thick in the middle of the Anglo-Zulu war, which, for him, was a horrible situation. After all, his ethnic ancestry was from the UK, (Scotland) but his allegiance was to the Zulus. (Again, he was a king!)

But even though he was a Zulu king, he was no fool. He knew the British would win that war, and if he sided with the Zulus, guess what would have happened to him afterwards. The British would hang him for treason! (They told him as much!) So what would you do? Right. That’s what John Dunn did. He sided with the British. But he didn’t forsake the subjects of his sub-kingdom. He took them (near ten thousand) to the British side of the Tugela River.

Anyway, I haven’t decided yet. I’m only thinking about it. But as I do, I’m buying as many books about John Dunn, the Zulus, and Cetshwayo as I can for research, particularly the autobiographies of both men. Certainly, I want to stay true to the real events within the story. So yeah, it’s a story that needs to be written by someone. Maybe it’ll be me.