G. Russell Overton's Blog, page 4
August 12, 2017
A Cancer Upon Our Democracy
There was a part of me, the leftist, liberal, Democrat that I am, that hoped, even after all the reprehensible things our president has done and said, there was a part of me that hoped he would say something meaningful. Instead, he cast a broad net of blame, daring to put racists and fascists on an equal footing with those who stand tall against oppression.
This is indeed the darkest hour of our democracy. We cannot let this pass. That creature occupying our seat of government is evil incarnate. He is the monstrous beast of prophecies old.
People of conscience must now be moved to lobby their members of congress, their governors, their aldermen, every person of authority, to have this cancerous boil lanced from our highest office. We must restore our democracy to a place of honor. We must never accept as normal that to which we find so repugnant.
This is indeed the darkest hour of our democracy. We cannot let this pass. That creature occupying our seat of government is evil incarnate. He is the monstrous beast of prophecies old.
People of conscience must now be moved to lobby their members of congress, their governors, their aldermen, every person of authority, to have this cancerous boil lanced from our highest office. We must restore our democracy to a place of honor. We must never accept as normal that to which we find so repugnant.
August 6, 2017
Writer's Block
I’ve been trying to expand my network both with readers and other authors on the Goodreads website. I’ve noticed that one of the questions that the Goodreads gurus always ask new authors is, “How do you deal with writer’s block?” I enjoy reading the responses to that question from other writers. The answers are as varied as the writers themselves, sometimes brutally honest and other times not. I am working on part 2 of Particularly Dangerous Work (PDW2) these days and have had some recent bouts with writer’s block. The manuscript is about 80% complete (first draft), and I am trying to make a push to get it finished.
The problems in getting to that 100% mark have been legion. My day job has been rather demanding lately – a good thing, but still a distraction. I am finding it difficult to sequester myself from the outside world so I can concentrate. No doubt someone is wondering why I am spending my time writing a blog post, but this actually creates an environment conducive to writing – writing about writing. It’s kind of like priming a pump.
This weekend I had been able to plan a quiet weekend aboard the Shtandart II, my sailboat. I was alone and had no pressing social obligations, so it seemed like the break I have long needed. I decided to use the opportunity to make some headway on PDW2. For awhile it worked. Friday night and part of Saturday afternoon and evening I cranked out some high quality prose. It all came to an abrupt halt when my neighbor at the marina decided to blast Phil Collins on his ship’s radio. All of the sudden my prose began to read like, “. . . me lookin’ at you, and you lookin’ at me . . .” Before I knew it, I couldn’t “feel a thing from my head down to my toes.” The serenade went on until midnight, and I had long given up on any productivity for the night.
Driving back to Lansing today, I thought about my distractions the previous night and my answer to the question about writer’s block. I realized that my answer was rather simplistic, and perhaps a little less than candid (though not intentionally misleading). In the interest of full disclosure, I thought it might be a good idea to dissect my answer, clarify, and correct as needed.
The answer I gave to the Goodreads question was: “Stop. Get up. Fix some tea. Move on to something else. Those blockages occur without warning. I will be in the middle of writing a critical passage, and all of a sudden I can't type. It usually results from some incongruity a few paragraphs (or chapters) back. It is as if my subconscious recognizes something illogical and is forcing me to go back and fix it.”
1. Stop: I don’t always stop when I should. When I hit a block, I try to force the issue by continuing to write drivel with the hope it will somehow jar me back into writing good prose. It never works, and I eventually have to stop.
2. Get up: Eventually I get up after I stop, usually after having starred at the silent keyboard for half an hour.
3. Fix some tea: If tea tastes like scotch, then yes, this was an accurate statement. It might also be nachos or a ham sandwich. The point is food and beverage can cure anything, right?
4. Move on to something else: This statement is completely accurate. Once I’ve realized I am not being productive at writing, it is better to spend energy elsewhere – go for a bike ride, do some laundry, work in the yard, work on another project, anything to distract and divert.
5. Those blockages occur without warning: I think this is a mostly accurate statement. Sometimes I see it coming, but it usually takes me by surprise. All of the sudden the characters just stop talking.
6. I will be in the middle of writing a critical passage, and all of a sudden I can't type: What I just stated.
7. It usually results from some incongruity a few paragraphs (or chapters) back: This statement is dead-on accurate. I might have stated in chapter two that Bob had green eyes, but in chapter six someone gazes into his piercing blue eyes. More often than not, for me, the cause of a writer’s block is something like this.
8. It is as if my subconscious recognizes something illogical and is forcing me to go back and fix it: This statement is also perfectly accurate. If an incongruity is the cause, I can’t move forward until I find the problem and fix it. Once I do, my fingers fly across the keyboard with new found vigor.
I think my answer was mostly candid so far as it went. Where I missed was in the part about causation. There can be many causes of writer’s block and the solutions have to fit the specific cause. I think what I described is what afflicts me the most. As for other causes, the only cure for demanding projects is to finish them. The only cure for Phil Collins blasting in my eardrum is more scotch. “I've been sitting here so long wasting time, just staring at the . . .” keyboard.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
The problems in getting to that 100% mark have been legion. My day job has been rather demanding lately – a good thing, but still a distraction. I am finding it difficult to sequester myself from the outside world so I can concentrate. No doubt someone is wondering why I am spending my time writing a blog post, but this actually creates an environment conducive to writing – writing about writing. It’s kind of like priming a pump.
This weekend I had been able to plan a quiet weekend aboard the Shtandart II, my sailboat. I was alone and had no pressing social obligations, so it seemed like the break I have long needed. I decided to use the opportunity to make some headway on PDW2. For awhile it worked. Friday night and part of Saturday afternoon and evening I cranked out some high quality prose. It all came to an abrupt halt when my neighbor at the marina decided to blast Phil Collins on his ship’s radio. All of the sudden my prose began to read like, “. . . me lookin’ at you, and you lookin’ at me . . .” Before I knew it, I couldn’t “feel a thing from my head down to my toes.” The serenade went on until midnight, and I had long given up on any productivity for the night.
Driving back to Lansing today, I thought about my distractions the previous night and my answer to the question about writer’s block. I realized that my answer was rather simplistic, and perhaps a little less than candid (though not intentionally misleading). In the interest of full disclosure, I thought it might be a good idea to dissect my answer, clarify, and correct as needed.
The answer I gave to the Goodreads question was: “Stop. Get up. Fix some tea. Move on to something else. Those blockages occur without warning. I will be in the middle of writing a critical passage, and all of a sudden I can't type. It usually results from some incongruity a few paragraphs (or chapters) back. It is as if my subconscious recognizes something illogical and is forcing me to go back and fix it.”
1. Stop: I don’t always stop when I should. When I hit a block, I try to force the issue by continuing to write drivel with the hope it will somehow jar me back into writing good prose. It never works, and I eventually have to stop.
2. Get up: Eventually I get up after I stop, usually after having starred at the silent keyboard for half an hour.
3. Fix some tea: If tea tastes like scotch, then yes, this was an accurate statement. It might also be nachos or a ham sandwich. The point is food and beverage can cure anything, right?
4. Move on to something else: This statement is completely accurate. Once I’ve realized I am not being productive at writing, it is better to spend energy elsewhere – go for a bike ride, do some laundry, work in the yard, work on another project, anything to distract and divert.
5. Those blockages occur without warning: I think this is a mostly accurate statement. Sometimes I see it coming, but it usually takes me by surprise. All of the sudden the characters just stop talking.
6. I will be in the middle of writing a critical passage, and all of a sudden I can't type: What I just stated.
7. It usually results from some incongruity a few paragraphs (or chapters) back: This statement is dead-on accurate. I might have stated in chapter two that Bob had green eyes, but in chapter six someone gazes into his piercing blue eyes. More often than not, for me, the cause of a writer’s block is something like this.
8. It is as if my subconscious recognizes something illogical and is forcing me to go back and fix it: This statement is also perfectly accurate. If an incongruity is the cause, I can’t move forward until I find the problem and fix it. Once I do, my fingers fly across the keyboard with new found vigor.
I think my answer was mostly candid so far as it went. Where I missed was in the part about causation. There can be many causes of writer’s block and the solutions have to fit the specific cause. I think what I described is what afflicts me the most. As for other causes, the only cure for demanding projects is to finish them. The only cure for Phil Collins blasting in my eardrum is more scotch. “I've been sitting here so long wasting time, just staring at the . . .” keyboard.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
July 31, 2017
Dunkirk, The Event and The Movies
I just saw Christopher Nolan’s latest release, Dunkirk. It was intense, gripping, exceedingly well done. It was a fine example of telling a story with imagery. As a form of metaphor, it exemplified British stoicism while portraying the horror of war. I felt genuinely moved by it.
I fear that the movie will play better with audiences that already know the story of Operation Dynamo, the British evacuation of northern France in May 1940. Aside from the German leaflets falling on surrounded British Expeditionary Force (BEF) soldiers at the beginning of the film, an uninformed viewer would have a difficult time finding a context for it. It would have helped the average viewer to know that the German army had crashed through France’s northern border overwhelming the wholly inadequate BEF and catching the main body of the French Army in the wrong place. It would have helped to inform viewers that the Germans had quickly moved to secure the northern third of France, surrounding the BEF, driving them to the beaches of an obscure harbor town. In fact, it would have helped viewers to understand that the ruthless enemy driving the BEF to the sea was Nazi Germany’s Wehrmacht.
The same criticism could be made of Leslie Norman’s 1958 film of the same name. Norman’s film offered a great deal more in the way context than Nolan’s did, but was still lacking. The 1958 version of the story offers a short introduction to the situation, makes it clear who the enemy was, and gives a little more in the way of explaining what Operation Dynamo was all about, but still leaves the viewer wondering how the BEF found itself in such a desperate circumstance and why the British Navy had to resort to using small vessels for the evacuation.
Both films captured the heroic efforts of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and civilians to evacuate the BEF and save what they could of the French army. Both films portray a dynamic that is rarely portrayed in film or print, that is the dogged determination of Great Britain to defeat Nazi Germany. American film and literature, both scholarly and popular, have always done a great job of portraying American heroism in World War II. In recent years, the Russian side of the story, especially at Stalingrad, has gained notoriety. Rarely does the British side of the story get much credit. It is almost as if the British were in the war to assist the Russians and Americans.
What most World War II presentations fail to portray is the British side of the story. It was Great Britain that drew a “red line” on the Polish frontier. Though Britain and its allies were ill prepared and ill equipped to backup the ultimatum issued to Nazi Germany, they were willing to go to war to stop Nazi aggression. Between September 1939 and June 1941, nearly two years, Britain and its allies offered the only challenge to Hitler’s imperial expansion. The Soviet Union stood on the sidelines, loosely allied with Germany, taking Hitler’s leftovers in Eastern Europe. The United States increasingly supplied Britain with ships and armaments, but kept a cool distance from the theatre of war. After the Dunkirk evacuation, France capitulated.
From June 1940 until June 1941, Great Britain and the British Commonwealth stood as the only credible challenge to Axis domination worldwide. This is where the significance of the evacuation at Dunkirk fits into context. The evacuation of some 340,000 Allied troops, including some 194,000 British soldiers, was critical to Britain’s ability to hold the Germans at bay.
Though they had lost the Battle of France, these soldiers were the best, battle hardened soldiers in the British Army. They had lost in France, not for a lack of bravery or will, but because they were ill-equipped and because their government, under the inept leadership of Neville Chamberlain, had failed them. These soldiers continued to fight. They fought through the remainder of 1940 and from 1941 through 1945. They defended their homeland from invasion, they fought in North Africa, the Pacific Ocean, Italy, and they returned to Northern France in June 1944 to drive the Germans out of France and into the German heartland. The veterans of the Dunkirk evacuation fought for six long years and embodied Winston Churchill’s admonition, “Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense.” (October 1941).
It is in this brand of British stubbornness that Christopher Nolan’s film shines brightest. Nolan portrays the terrified young men, seemingly bewildered by their defeat and encirclement. But they did not surrender. Despite their youth and inexperience, they lived to fight another day. It was the iron will of British civilians to support their troops to the point of risking life and property to effect their rescue. It was the ingenuity of British airmen and seamen to think creatively in devising a means to implement the rescue.
I wonder. I wonder if, in 2017, a large body of American soldiers were stranded without hope off the coast of our shores what we would do. Would yacht owners at Myrtle Beach, Grosse Pointe, or Tacoma pilot their ships to rescue those soldiers? Would Americans greet those returning soldiers with warm soup and tea and a word of thanks for their service? I want to say yes. I hope I can say yes.
https://bluewatertales.com
I fear that the movie will play better with audiences that already know the story of Operation Dynamo, the British evacuation of northern France in May 1940. Aside from the German leaflets falling on surrounded British Expeditionary Force (BEF) soldiers at the beginning of the film, an uninformed viewer would have a difficult time finding a context for it. It would have helped the average viewer to know that the German army had crashed through France’s northern border overwhelming the wholly inadequate BEF and catching the main body of the French Army in the wrong place. It would have helped to inform viewers that the Germans had quickly moved to secure the northern third of France, surrounding the BEF, driving them to the beaches of an obscure harbor town. In fact, it would have helped viewers to understand that the ruthless enemy driving the BEF to the sea was Nazi Germany’s Wehrmacht.
The same criticism could be made of Leslie Norman’s 1958 film of the same name. Norman’s film offered a great deal more in the way context than Nolan’s did, but was still lacking. The 1958 version of the story offers a short introduction to the situation, makes it clear who the enemy was, and gives a little more in the way of explaining what Operation Dynamo was all about, but still leaves the viewer wondering how the BEF found itself in such a desperate circumstance and why the British Navy had to resort to using small vessels for the evacuation.
Both films captured the heroic efforts of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and civilians to evacuate the BEF and save what they could of the French army. Both films portray a dynamic that is rarely portrayed in film or print, that is the dogged determination of Great Britain to defeat Nazi Germany. American film and literature, both scholarly and popular, have always done a great job of portraying American heroism in World War II. In recent years, the Russian side of the story, especially at Stalingrad, has gained notoriety. Rarely does the British side of the story get much credit. It is almost as if the British were in the war to assist the Russians and Americans.
What most World War II presentations fail to portray is the British side of the story. It was Great Britain that drew a “red line” on the Polish frontier. Though Britain and its allies were ill prepared and ill equipped to backup the ultimatum issued to Nazi Germany, they were willing to go to war to stop Nazi aggression. Between September 1939 and June 1941, nearly two years, Britain and its allies offered the only challenge to Hitler’s imperial expansion. The Soviet Union stood on the sidelines, loosely allied with Germany, taking Hitler’s leftovers in Eastern Europe. The United States increasingly supplied Britain with ships and armaments, but kept a cool distance from the theatre of war. After the Dunkirk evacuation, France capitulated.
From June 1940 until June 1941, Great Britain and the British Commonwealth stood as the only credible challenge to Axis domination worldwide. This is where the significance of the evacuation at Dunkirk fits into context. The evacuation of some 340,000 Allied troops, including some 194,000 British soldiers, was critical to Britain’s ability to hold the Germans at bay.
Though they had lost the Battle of France, these soldiers were the best, battle hardened soldiers in the British Army. They had lost in France, not for a lack of bravery or will, but because they were ill-equipped and because their government, under the inept leadership of Neville Chamberlain, had failed them. These soldiers continued to fight. They fought through the remainder of 1940 and from 1941 through 1945. They defended their homeland from invasion, they fought in North Africa, the Pacific Ocean, Italy, and they returned to Northern France in June 1944 to drive the Germans out of France and into the German heartland. The veterans of the Dunkirk evacuation fought for six long years and embodied Winston Churchill’s admonition, “Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never--in nothing, great or small, large or petty--never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense.” (October 1941).
It is in this brand of British stubbornness that Christopher Nolan’s film shines brightest. Nolan portrays the terrified young men, seemingly bewildered by their defeat and encirclement. But they did not surrender. Despite their youth and inexperience, they lived to fight another day. It was the iron will of British civilians to support their troops to the point of risking life and property to effect their rescue. It was the ingenuity of British airmen and seamen to think creatively in devising a means to implement the rescue.
I wonder. I wonder if, in 2017, a large body of American soldiers were stranded without hope off the coast of our shores what we would do. Would yacht owners at Myrtle Beach, Grosse Pointe, or Tacoma pilot their ships to rescue those soldiers? Would Americans greet those returning soldiers with warm soup and tea and a word of thanks for their service? I want to say yes. I hope I can say yes.
https://bluewatertales.com
July 14, 2017
FDR, A Model President
Recently I posted some quotes on my Goodreads profile. Among them was a quote made by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR), “A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.” He made this statement in a radio address on 26 October 1939, nearly two months after the start of World War II. A fuller excerpt of that address places the quote in his intended context:
“Extreme Rightists and extreme Leftists ought not to be taken out by us and shot against the wall, for they sharpen the argument, and make us realize the value of the democratic middle course—especially if that middle course, in order to keep up with the times, is, and I quote what I have said before, ‘just a little bit left of center.’ I am reminded of four definitions:
1. A Radical is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air.
2. A Conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
3. A Reactionary is a somnambulist walking backwards.
4. A Liberal is a man who uses his legs and his hands at the behest—at the command—of his head.”
FDR considered himself a centrist liberal, obviously. It is apparent that he held a certain amount of disdain for the first three characterizations. President Roosevelt was well educated and a brilliant, tactical orator. He chose his words carefully. There can be no doubt that he thought through these statements and understood the significance of his words. I think characterizations 2 and 4 demand particular consideration.
Roosevelt had been crippled by polio in 1921, eighteen years earlier. He had fought the effects of the disease with every therapy and treatment, conventional and unconventional, that his family fortune could buy. He had fitted himself with braces and contraptions that enabled him to stand and walk, but with excruciating pain. His efforts to combat the disease and its effects can only be characterized as heroic.
I am drawn to the photographs taken aboard the USS Augusta when FDR met Winston Churchill off the coast of Newfoundland in August 1941. There are several shots taken with FDR standing and shaking Churchill’s hand aboard ship. As a sailor I know what it is like to stand on a ship while it is pitching and rolling with the sea. As someone who’s had serious leg-joint issues, I know what it’s like to stand on that same ship with two bad legs. I cannot imagine the internal torture he felt while standing and posing for the camera, yet his smile is bright, confident, at ease. See: https://fdrlibrary.tumblr.com/post/94...
When he describes a “liberal” as one, “who uses his legs . . . at the command . . . of his head,” he understands what that means. The legs don’t want to move. It is painful for them to move, but the head commands, and with every ounce of gumption he can muster, the legs move forward. That is the definition of a liberal to FDR. Sometimes it hurts like hell, but the only course is to move forward.
By contrast, his utter contempt for conservatives is apparent. The concept of “a man with two perfectly good legs,” who refuses to walk forward, must have been abhorrent to FDR. Even though the conservative has the ability, he refuses, stubbornly, to take even one step forward.
I try to keep these blog posts somewhat a-political, but this time I chose otherwise. My head commanded it.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
For more information on FDR’s radio address referenced in this blog and on his illness check out the links below:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pi...
https://fdrlibrary.org/polio
“Extreme Rightists and extreme Leftists ought not to be taken out by us and shot against the wall, for they sharpen the argument, and make us realize the value of the democratic middle course—especially if that middle course, in order to keep up with the times, is, and I quote what I have said before, ‘just a little bit left of center.’ I am reminded of four definitions:
1. A Radical is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air.
2. A Conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
3. A Reactionary is a somnambulist walking backwards.
4. A Liberal is a man who uses his legs and his hands at the behest—at the command—of his head.”
FDR considered himself a centrist liberal, obviously. It is apparent that he held a certain amount of disdain for the first three characterizations. President Roosevelt was well educated and a brilliant, tactical orator. He chose his words carefully. There can be no doubt that he thought through these statements and understood the significance of his words. I think characterizations 2 and 4 demand particular consideration.
Roosevelt had been crippled by polio in 1921, eighteen years earlier. He had fought the effects of the disease with every therapy and treatment, conventional and unconventional, that his family fortune could buy. He had fitted himself with braces and contraptions that enabled him to stand and walk, but with excruciating pain. His efforts to combat the disease and its effects can only be characterized as heroic.
I am drawn to the photographs taken aboard the USS Augusta when FDR met Winston Churchill off the coast of Newfoundland in August 1941. There are several shots taken with FDR standing and shaking Churchill’s hand aboard ship. As a sailor I know what it is like to stand on a ship while it is pitching and rolling with the sea. As someone who’s had serious leg-joint issues, I know what it’s like to stand on that same ship with two bad legs. I cannot imagine the internal torture he felt while standing and posing for the camera, yet his smile is bright, confident, at ease. See: https://fdrlibrary.tumblr.com/post/94...
When he describes a “liberal” as one, “who uses his legs . . . at the command . . . of his head,” he understands what that means. The legs don’t want to move. It is painful for them to move, but the head commands, and with every ounce of gumption he can muster, the legs move forward. That is the definition of a liberal to FDR. Sometimes it hurts like hell, but the only course is to move forward.
By contrast, his utter contempt for conservatives is apparent. The concept of “a man with two perfectly good legs,” who refuses to walk forward, must have been abhorrent to FDR. Even though the conservative has the ability, he refuses, stubbornly, to take even one step forward.
I try to keep these blog posts somewhat a-political, but this time I chose otherwise. My head commanded it.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
For more information on FDR’s radio address referenced in this blog and on his illness check out the links below:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pi...
https://fdrlibrary.org/polio
June 7, 2017
Just Released: Particularly Dangerous Work, Part 1
It was the spring of 1939. FDR was president of the United States, and the cherry blossoms in Washington, DC, were lovely. In Washington, the Jefferson Memorial and the National Gallery of Art were under construction. The Johnson Wax building in Racine, Wisconsin, had just opened. Baseball fans anxiously followed “Joltin’ Joe” DiMaggio as he wound up for another hitting season, averaging .381 and earning his first of three MVP awards. In the evenings families listened to the Lone Ranger, the Green Hornet, and the Pepsodent Show on prime time radio. Teenagers and young adults listened and danced to the music of Tommy Dorsey and His Orchestra, the Glenn Miller Band, Billie Holiday, and the Andrew Sisters. Clark Gable, Bette Davis, Cary Grant, and Dorothy Lamour had stolen everyone’s hearts. On the weekends people went to the movie theater to see Dark Victory, Wuthering Heights, and Stagecoach. The Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wind, and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington were just months away from their premiers.
Elsewhere in the world General Francisco Franco had just secured authority over all of Spain, ending a brutal three year civil war. His victory came through military assistance from Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. With peace restored in Spain, Hitler then turned his attention to what was left of Czechoslovakia, saving Poland for later in the summer. Mussolini cast his lustful eye towards the Balkans and parts of Africa, while British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain made more empty promises toward ensuring the integrity of Poland. In the east, Japan pressed forward with its two year war against China.
In the midst of all this, the Vizconde Rodrigo Mendoza, a young diplomat representing the government of Francisco Franco was transferred from his post at the Spanish Embassy in Berlin to the Spanish Embassy in Washington, DC. Rodrigo was also gay. He ran afoul of the Abwehr, Nazi Germany’s intelligence agency, and found himself caught up in the seamy world of espionage and international intrigue on the eve of World War II. Particularly Dangerous Work is his story, told in three parts. The story is full of gritty action, inopportune romance, harrowing escapes, and thrilling adventure. Readers will find themselves immersed in the world of the early war years, dancing to Tommy Dorsey hits, sailing aboard the SS Bremen, and witnessing the Nazi invasion of France. Parts 2 & 3 will take readers through the remainder of the war and beyond, where Rodrigo’s adventures grow evermore dangerous.
Particularly Dangerous Work is historical fiction. All of the main characters, including Rodrigo, are fictitious and are not based on any actual or real historical individuals. Where historical events and certain historical persons (Spanish, American, German, and other government officials) are represented, great care has been taken to present them as accurately as possible. Actual dialogue between fictional characters and historical characters, is, of course, purely fictitious.
Part 1 of this trilogy has just been released! You can purchase your copy now, either in print or Kindle edition, by clicking on the link below. Parts 2 & 3 will follow soon.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss...
https://www.bluewatertales.com
Elsewhere in the world General Francisco Franco had just secured authority over all of Spain, ending a brutal three year civil war. His victory came through military assistance from Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. With peace restored in Spain, Hitler then turned his attention to what was left of Czechoslovakia, saving Poland for later in the summer. Mussolini cast his lustful eye towards the Balkans and parts of Africa, while British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain made more empty promises toward ensuring the integrity of Poland. In the east, Japan pressed forward with its two year war against China.
In the midst of all this, the Vizconde Rodrigo Mendoza, a young diplomat representing the government of Francisco Franco was transferred from his post at the Spanish Embassy in Berlin to the Spanish Embassy in Washington, DC. Rodrigo was also gay. He ran afoul of the Abwehr, Nazi Germany’s intelligence agency, and found himself caught up in the seamy world of espionage and international intrigue on the eve of World War II. Particularly Dangerous Work is his story, told in three parts. The story is full of gritty action, inopportune romance, harrowing escapes, and thrilling adventure. Readers will find themselves immersed in the world of the early war years, dancing to Tommy Dorsey hits, sailing aboard the SS Bremen, and witnessing the Nazi invasion of France. Parts 2 & 3 will take readers through the remainder of the war and beyond, where Rodrigo’s adventures grow evermore dangerous.
Particularly Dangerous Work is historical fiction. All of the main characters, including Rodrigo, are fictitious and are not based on any actual or real historical individuals. Where historical events and certain historical persons (Spanish, American, German, and other government officials) are represented, great care has been taken to present them as accurately as possible. Actual dialogue between fictional characters and historical characters, is, of course, purely fictitious.
Part 1 of this trilogy has just been released! You can purchase your copy now, either in print or Kindle edition, by clicking on the link below. Parts 2 & 3 will follow soon.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss...
https://www.bluewatertales.com
May 28, 2017
Dunkirk or Dunkerque?
The place associated with Operation Dynamo, the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) from northern France in 1940, is known in France as Dunkerque, rather la Ville de Dunkerque. It is a small city on the north coast of France near Calais. In English it is known as “Dunkirk,” and when associated with the events of 1940 the English spelling is normally used.
The town’s name is rooted in Middle Dutch. It is a combination of the Dutch words dune and kerke, or “dune” and “church.” It literally means a place where a church is built on a sand dune. It is just ten kilometers, or about 6.5 miles, from the Belgian frontier. Culturally and historically it had both French and Flemish influence.
As a rule I try to use culturally correct spellings for place and people names in my prose. In Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge (PDW1), which is scheduled for release on 7 June, I used (spoiler alert) “Dunkerque” instead of “Dunkirk.” Similarly, I used the Spanish “Zaragoza” rather than the English “Saragossa.” Generally my application of this rule goes so far as to use those culturally correct spellings if it does not interfere with the prose. It would seem awkward in English prose, for example, to use “Deutschland” in place of “Germany.” On the other hand when a character is a Spaniard and is referring to another Spaniard, he is likely to use “Felipe” rather than “Philip,” even if he is speaking in English.
I debated whether to use “Dunkirk” or “Dunkerque” in PDW1. Certainly with regard to the history of the place in its World War II context, “Dunkirk” would have been entirely appropriate. The book is about the beginning of World War II, so I think most readers can assume that Operation Dynamo somehow figures into the story. For reasons of context I chose “Dunkerque.”
It is an exciting coincidence that the upcoming release of Christopher Nolan’s movie Dunkirk is just a month after the release of PDW1. By now it must be obvious (spoiler alert) that the evacuation at Dunkerque is a significant event in PDW1. I hope all of my readers will see the movie. I think (hope) my book and the movie will complement each other.
For people who are not so familiar with the story, the evacuation at Dunkerque was one of the most significant events in the early part of the war. It was one of those epic moments celebrated in newspapers, magazines, and all media forms at the time. It is sometimes referred to as the “Battle of Dunkirk,” though it wasn’t a battle in the traditional sense. The evacuation was code named Operation Dynamo by British military leaders, and they viewed the event as an “operation” not a “battle.” Historic battles are usually fought between two warring sides in the hope that one or the other will prevail. Operation Dynamo was not that kind of battle. The British and French had already lost the “Battle of France” and were attempting to retreat. British military goals there were to enable the bulk of a 400,000 man army to retreat to safety. German goals were to prevent their escape. It ended when some 340,000 of those soldiers had been evacuated to British ships and safely landed on British shores.
The significance of the evacuation was that most of the BEF, which had been made up of Great Britain’s best soldiers, survived to fight another day. These rescued soldiers stood on the British isle to protect it from invasion. They fought in North Africa, in Asia, Italy, and returned to northern France on D-Day four years later. Their rescue was vital to Britain’s survival and the ultimate defeat of Nazi Germany.
Strategists and journalists used the Dunkerque evacuation as a point of comparison to other retreats. When the British evacuated Greece in 1941 it was a similar kind of event, with similar significance. The American evacuation of the Philippines, the British evacuation of Crete, even the German evacuation of North Africa and Sicily all compare strategically to what happened at Dunkerque.
Though the evacuation at Dunkerque was always heralded as a huge success for the British, it was not without staggering cost. First there was the human cost – some 60,000 soldiers killed or captured in the process. The British left behind a huge arsenal of tanks, guns, ammunition, and fuel. They were severely criticized for not destroying abandoned fuel stores, even though they had time. The German army happily recycled all of this war materiel. The fuel went directly into German tanks. British and French tanks went to the smelting furnaces of the Ruhr industrial center to make new German tanks. The guns and ammunition were similarly recycled and added to the German war effort.
So far as the upcoming movie, I only know what I have seen in trailers and web posts. It does not appear that Christopher Nolan’s new film to be released 21 July 2017 is a remake of the 1958 movie of the same name. The 1958 film, directed by Leslie Norman, stands on its own, and I highly recommend it to all my readers. It starred Richard Attenborough, John Mills, and Bernard Lee. This film portrayed Operation Dynamo accurately, respectfully, and with passion. I think anyone attempting to tell a story about an event like this should do so with those three criteria in mind.
I hope that any of my readers, who watch either or both films, also do so with those three criteria in mind. It’s not just an exciting story about an epic military event. It is a story of the horror of war. Though we may honor the 400,000 plus heroes of that event, we must never look upon it with romantic notions of the glory of war. War is never glorious.
http://www.dunkirkmovie.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk...
https://www.bluewatertales.com
The town’s name is rooted in Middle Dutch. It is a combination of the Dutch words dune and kerke, or “dune” and “church.” It literally means a place where a church is built on a sand dune. It is just ten kilometers, or about 6.5 miles, from the Belgian frontier. Culturally and historically it had both French and Flemish influence.
As a rule I try to use culturally correct spellings for place and people names in my prose. In Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge (PDW1), which is scheduled for release on 7 June, I used (spoiler alert) “Dunkerque” instead of “Dunkirk.” Similarly, I used the Spanish “Zaragoza” rather than the English “Saragossa.” Generally my application of this rule goes so far as to use those culturally correct spellings if it does not interfere with the prose. It would seem awkward in English prose, for example, to use “Deutschland” in place of “Germany.” On the other hand when a character is a Spaniard and is referring to another Spaniard, he is likely to use “Felipe” rather than “Philip,” even if he is speaking in English.
I debated whether to use “Dunkirk” or “Dunkerque” in PDW1. Certainly with regard to the history of the place in its World War II context, “Dunkirk” would have been entirely appropriate. The book is about the beginning of World War II, so I think most readers can assume that Operation Dynamo somehow figures into the story. For reasons of context I chose “Dunkerque.”
It is an exciting coincidence that the upcoming release of Christopher Nolan’s movie Dunkirk is just a month after the release of PDW1. By now it must be obvious (spoiler alert) that the evacuation at Dunkerque is a significant event in PDW1. I hope all of my readers will see the movie. I think (hope) my book and the movie will complement each other.
For people who are not so familiar with the story, the evacuation at Dunkerque was one of the most significant events in the early part of the war. It was one of those epic moments celebrated in newspapers, magazines, and all media forms at the time. It is sometimes referred to as the “Battle of Dunkirk,” though it wasn’t a battle in the traditional sense. The evacuation was code named Operation Dynamo by British military leaders, and they viewed the event as an “operation” not a “battle.” Historic battles are usually fought between two warring sides in the hope that one or the other will prevail. Operation Dynamo was not that kind of battle. The British and French had already lost the “Battle of France” and were attempting to retreat. British military goals there were to enable the bulk of a 400,000 man army to retreat to safety. German goals were to prevent their escape. It ended when some 340,000 of those soldiers had been evacuated to British ships and safely landed on British shores.
The significance of the evacuation was that most of the BEF, which had been made up of Great Britain’s best soldiers, survived to fight another day. These rescued soldiers stood on the British isle to protect it from invasion. They fought in North Africa, in Asia, Italy, and returned to northern France on D-Day four years later. Their rescue was vital to Britain’s survival and the ultimate defeat of Nazi Germany.
Strategists and journalists used the Dunkerque evacuation as a point of comparison to other retreats. When the British evacuated Greece in 1941 it was a similar kind of event, with similar significance. The American evacuation of the Philippines, the British evacuation of Crete, even the German evacuation of North Africa and Sicily all compare strategically to what happened at Dunkerque.
Though the evacuation at Dunkerque was always heralded as a huge success for the British, it was not without staggering cost. First there was the human cost – some 60,000 soldiers killed or captured in the process. The British left behind a huge arsenal of tanks, guns, ammunition, and fuel. They were severely criticized for not destroying abandoned fuel stores, even though they had time. The German army happily recycled all of this war materiel. The fuel went directly into German tanks. British and French tanks went to the smelting furnaces of the Ruhr industrial center to make new German tanks. The guns and ammunition were similarly recycled and added to the German war effort.
So far as the upcoming movie, I only know what I have seen in trailers and web posts. It does not appear that Christopher Nolan’s new film to be released 21 July 2017 is a remake of the 1958 movie of the same name. The 1958 film, directed by Leslie Norman, stands on its own, and I highly recommend it to all my readers. It starred Richard Attenborough, John Mills, and Bernard Lee. This film portrayed Operation Dynamo accurately, respectfully, and with passion. I think anyone attempting to tell a story about an event like this should do so with those three criteria in mind.
I hope that any of my readers, who watch either or both films, also do so with those three criteria in mind. It’s not just an exciting story about an epic military event. It is a story of the horror of war. Though we may honor the 400,000 plus heroes of that event, we must never look upon it with romantic notions of the glory of war. War is never glorious.
http://www.dunkirkmovie.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk...
https://www.bluewatertales.com
May 4, 2017
Civil Wars
The upcoming release of my next book, Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge (PDW), is just a month away. The story opens in the spring of 1939, just at the end of the Spanish Civil War. The protagonist is the Vizconde (Viscount) Rodrigo Mendoza, a Spanish diplomat in the service of Franco’s government. I won’t offer any spoilers here, so the only way an interested person can find out more about Rodrigo and what happens to him in 1939 is to read the book when it is released.
However, the thought occurred to me that some readers might be curious about my treatment of the Spanish Civil War, or, rather, lack thereof. I only make reference to the war as is necessary for the story line. I spent scant little effort writing about the war or the issues driving it. I debated with myself vigorously about how much attention to give to the Spanish Civil War era. I finally concluded that PDW was about what happened after Franco’s victory and that any efforts to belabor the war would only serve to divert attention from the story line.
In so doing, I was fully aware of the fact that I was advancing what I consider to be a grave historiographic error – American ignorance on the subject of the Spanish Civil War. Perhaps I can fix that somehow. Maybe after PDW’s trilogy is finished, I’ll do a prequel on Rodrigo and his family during the war – maybe. In the meantime, it might be appropriate for me to discuss aspects of the war here in my blog. I would certainly welcome comments, feedback, questions from any interested readers.
What perplexes me is why Americans seem so uninterested in the Spanish Civil War. It is a subject that should interest us. People of any country that has experienced civil war in the past few centuries ought to be interested in similar events in other countries. Yet we seem to shy away from such topics. I suspect it is a result from the discomfort we feel about our own Civil War, the fact that in some ways we perpetually continue to fight it. I think the United States must be the only country to have survived a civil war that continues to see the widespread use of symbols and flags of the losing side. There are far too many wack jobs that refuse to accept the fact that General Lee did not win, or insist he somehow should have won.
The concept of civil war is a difficult subject to understand. When the conflict is between two or more distinct countries, it is much easier to comprehend the differences between opposing sides. Even when the immediate cause of war is complex and debatable, we can clearly understand the difference between an English army and a French army and accept the fact that they don’t like each other. Civil war is different. The opposing sides are not that easy to distinguish – they speak the same language, siblings might be found on both sides, soldiers who at one time had fought external foes side by side now fight each other, politicians lead rebel governments against the governments they once served.
An even more troubling aspect of civil war is the horror of it. It seems possible to study the bombing of Dresden and maintain a sense of detachment. It was, after all, allied planes bombing a German city, something to be expected in industrial war. When an American army cuts a wide swath of destruction through the heart of Georgia, on the other hand, it hits too close. It is those siblings, comrades, and colleagues who are inflicting the carnage. The same is true when Franco’s army executes thousands of Spaniards in Barcelona. Spaniards killing Spaniards, Americans killing Americans, it doesn’t make sense. We can’t comprehend it, so we ignore it.
We should try to make sense of it.
In upcoming blogs, I will periodically discuss aspects of the Spanish Civil War and other topics peripheral to PDW.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
However, the thought occurred to me that some readers might be curious about my treatment of the Spanish Civil War, or, rather, lack thereof. I only make reference to the war as is necessary for the story line. I spent scant little effort writing about the war or the issues driving it. I debated with myself vigorously about how much attention to give to the Spanish Civil War era. I finally concluded that PDW was about what happened after Franco’s victory and that any efforts to belabor the war would only serve to divert attention from the story line.
In so doing, I was fully aware of the fact that I was advancing what I consider to be a grave historiographic error – American ignorance on the subject of the Spanish Civil War. Perhaps I can fix that somehow. Maybe after PDW’s trilogy is finished, I’ll do a prequel on Rodrigo and his family during the war – maybe. In the meantime, it might be appropriate for me to discuss aspects of the war here in my blog. I would certainly welcome comments, feedback, questions from any interested readers.
What perplexes me is why Americans seem so uninterested in the Spanish Civil War. It is a subject that should interest us. People of any country that has experienced civil war in the past few centuries ought to be interested in similar events in other countries. Yet we seem to shy away from such topics. I suspect it is a result from the discomfort we feel about our own Civil War, the fact that in some ways we perpetually continue to fight it. I think the United States must be the only country to have survived a civil war that continues to see the widespread use of symbols and flags of the losing side. There are far too many wack jobs that refuse to accept the fact that General Lee did not win, or insist he somehow should have won.
The concept of civil war is a difficult subject to understand. When the conflict is between two or more distinct countries, it is much easier to comprehend the differences between opposing sides. Even when the immediate cause of war is complex and debatable, we can clearly understand the difference between an English army and a French army and accept the fact that they don’t like each other. Civil war is different. The opposing sides are not that easy to distinguish – they speak the same language, siblings might be found on both sides, soldiers who at one time had fought external foes side by side now fight each other, politicians lead rebel governments against the governments they once served.
An even more troubling aspect of civil war is the horror of it. It seems possible to study the bombing of Dresden and maintain a sense of detachment. It was, after all, allied planes bombing a German city, something to be expected in industrial war. When an American army cuts a wide swath of destruction through the heart of Georgia, on the other hand, it hits too close. It is those siblings, comrades, and colleagues who are inflicting the carnage. The same is true when Franco’s army executes thousands of Spaniards in Barcelona. Spaniards killing Spaniards, Americans killing Americans, it doesn’t make sense. We can’t comprehend it, so we ignore it.
We should try to make sense of it.
In upcoming blogs, I will periodically discuss aspects of the Spanish Civil War and other topics peripheral to PDW.
https://www.bluewatertales.com
April 25, 2017
Washington, DC, Spring 1939
I hope it is not too unusual for a blogger to share another blog, but this is irresistible. Today, the Unwritten Record Blog, published by the National Archives featured a two part silent film from the spring of 1939. The film features three youths touring Washington, DC. The film was part of a project sponsored by the National Youth Administration (NYA), which was part of the Works Progress Administration (WPA), a New Deal program. This is a delightful film, and I strongly encourage everyone to follow the link below to this blog post.
Those who know me, know that the National Archives has been an important part of my professional life for more than twenty years. At a time when certain political opportunists profit by vilifying federal employees, I take it as a point of honor to call out the things that federal employees do that make our lives richer, safer, and happier. The mission of the National Archives and Records Administration is to protect and preserve our national heritage.
I think most Americans appreciate the fact that the National Archives protects our most sacred documents, like the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, but I fear that few people understand the other documents that are housed at the National Archives. Without going into a lecture on Archives 101, it is important to know that the National Archives holds documents from every administrative agency in the federal government – five football fields worth of documents just at the main facility in downtown Washington, DC.
I think today we are very much aware of how fragile democracy is. It always has been. Documents at the National Archives can teach us about the frailty of our system, while demonstrating how democracy draws strength from its own failures. The Civil War was a time when democracy utterly failed, but Americans built a better democracy from that failure, eliminating the most undemocratic of institutions, human slavery. The Indian wars of the nineteenth century were a time when democracy devolved into genocide, and we are still recovering from that failure.
Thus it has been my job for the past twenty plus years to comb the records of the National Archives to find those documents that can help bring a measure of justice to Native peoples in the Unites States. Without the heroic efforts of the staff at the National Archives, who vigorously protect our documents, I would not be able to do my job. Before proceeding, I want to thank the federal employees at the National Archives for everything they do, and I want to encourage everyone to plead with your representatives in Congress to ensure that the National Archives has the funding it needs to protect our heritage.
All of that said, it was a delightful moment for me to see today’s blog on the 1939 film. The timing was perfect for the upcoming release of my next book, Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge. The book opens in Washington, DC, in the spring of 1939. Many of the places featured in the book are featured in this film. For those anxiously awaiting the June release of my book, I strongly encourage you to look at this film.
https://unwritten-record.blogs.archiv...
https://bluewatertales.com
Those who know me, know that the National Archives has been an important part of my professional life for more than twenty years. At a time when certain political opportunists profit by vilifying federal employees, I take it as a point of honor to call out the things that federal employees do that make our lives richer, safer, and happier. The mission of the National Archives and Records Administration is to protect and preserve our national heritage.
I think most Americans appreciate the fact that the National Archives protects our most sacred documents, like the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, but I fear that few people understand the other documents that are housed at the National Archives. Without going into a lecture on Archives 101, it is important to know that the National Archives holds documents from every administrative agency in the federal government – five football fields worth of documents just at the main facility in downtown Washington, DC.
I think today we are very much aware of how fragile democracy is. It always has been. Documents at the National Archives can teach us about the frailty of our system, while demonstrating how democracy draws strength from its own failures. The Civil War was a time when democracy utterly failed, but Americans built a better democracy from that failure, eliminating the most undemocratic of institutions, human slavery. The Indian wars of the nineteenth century were a time when democracy devolved into genocide, and we are still recovering from that failure.
Thus it has been my job for the past twenty plus years to comb the records of the National Archives to find those documents that can help bring a measure of justice to Native peoples in the Unites States. Without the heroic efforts of the staff at the National Archives, who vigorously protect our documents, I would not be able to do my job. Before proceeding, I want to thank the federal employees at the National Archives for everything they do, and I want to encourage everyone to plead with your representatives in Congress to ensure that the National Archives has the funding it needs to protect our heritage.
All of that said, it was a delightful moment for me to see today’s blog on the 1939 film. The timing was perfect for the upcoming release of my next book, Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge. The book opens in Washington, DC, in the spring of 1939. Many of the places featured in the book are featured in this film. For those anxiously awaiting the June release of my book, I strongly encourage you to look at this film.
https://unwritten-record.blogs.archiv...
https://bluewatertales.com
April 22, 2017
New Release!!!
I am excited to announce the upcoming release of my latest fictional work, Particularly Dangerous Work: Part 1, At Waters’ Edge. The release date is set for 7 June 2017, and Kindle editions are now available for pre-order (see link below). As more details about the release come available I will update here and elsewhere.
Particularly Dangerous Work is the story of the Vizconde Rodrigo Mendoza, a diplomat with the Spanish Foreign Service in 1939. He represented the regime of Francisco Franco, first at the embassy in Berlin before being transferred to the embassy in Washington. Rodrigo, a former Olympic champion, was tall, dashing, and buff, a handsome specimen of European aristocracy in the middle of the twentieth century. He was also gay. He ran afoul of the Abwehr, Nazi Germany’s intelligence agency, and found himself caught up in the seamy world of international espionage. Particularly Dangerous Work is full of gritty action, inopportune romance, harrowing escapes, and thrilling adventure. Readers will find themselves immersed in the world of the early war years, dancing to Tommy Dorsey hits, sailing aboard classic ocean liners, and witnessing the invasion of France. Parts 2 & 3 will take readers through the remainder of the war and beyond, where Rodrigo’s adventures grow evermore dangerous. This book, and its subsequent parts, should appeal to most adult audiences.
Though it may fall into several different genres, LBGTQ literature, Action/Adventure, Romance, I would most like to think of it as Historical Fiction. Part 1, At Waters’ Edge, covers the prelude to and early years of World War II. My goal was to place the fictional characters as closely as possible in the context of the era. Readers will experience certain important cultural events, like the release of Gone With the Wind and Dark Victory. They will be swept onto the dance floor with the music of Tommy Dorsey and Glenn Miller. Popular radio programs like The Pepsodent Show and the Green Hornet will entertain. Readers will travel on ocean liners like the SS Bremen and the SS America. All of this takes place in the context of the developing war, the invasion of Poland, the invasion and defeat of France, the bombing of Britain.
As a work of historical fiction I conducted years of historical research. To get the diplomatic context, I used published government sources, like The Foreign Relations of the United States, as well as original sources from the National Archives at College Park, Maryland. I consulted numerous cultural resources, namely periodicals and newspapers contemporary to the period, like the Washington Post, New York Times, The Saturday Evening Post, Life, and many other publications.
The biggest challenge in writing historical fiction proved to be those moments when fictional characters, by necessity, must interact with real historical characters. For instance, when Rodrigo, who is a purely fictional character, had to converse with his boss, Ambassador Cardenas, who is an historical character, I had to be able to present Cardenas in a manner that fit with his historical persona. Even though the conversation itself was, obviously, fictional, it had to be plausible.
Another challenge with historical fiction is in maintaining an accurate time line. When writing pure fiction, personal events can fit into whatever time line is necessary. I could not very well move the invasion of France to July 1940 in order to fit the story, rather, the story had to fall rigidly, down to the date, and at times, minutes of historical events. I found it both constraining and challenging.
The first part, At Waters’ Edge, covers the early war years. The next two parts will cover the remainder of the War and beyond. As war intensifies, Rodrigo’s challenges intensify. It is my hope that this trilogy will both entertain and educate.
It will be available both in e-book and paperback editions. As noted above the Kindle edition is now available for pre-order (see link below). If you want a hard copy, please contact me directly using the e-mail address below, and I’ll make sure you have a paperback version in your hands on release date.
https://www.amazon.com/Particularly-D...
www.bluewatertales.com
author@bluewatertales.com
Particularly Dangerous Work is the story of the Vizconde Rodrigo Mendoza, a diplomat with the Spanish Foreign Service in 1939. He represented the regime of Francisco Franco, first at the embassy in Berlin before being transferred to the embassy in Washington. Rodrigo, a former Olympic champion, was tall, dashing, and buff, a handsome specimen of European aristocracy in the middle of the twentieth century. He was also gay. He ran afoul of the Abwehr, Nazi Germany’s intelligence agency, and found himself caught up in the seamy world of international espionage. Particularly Dangerous Work is full of gritty action, inopportune romance, harrowing escapes, and thrilling adventure. Readers will find themselves immersed in the world of the early war years, dancing to Tommy Dorsey hits, sailing aboard classic ocean liners, and witnessing the invasion of France. Parts 2 & 3 will take readers through the remainder of the war and beyond, where Rodrigo’s adventures grow evermore dangerous. This book, and its subsequent parts, should appeal to most adult audiences.
Though it may fall into several different genres, LBGTQ literature, Action/Adventure, Romance, I would most like to think of it as Historical Fiction. Part 1, At Waters’ Edge, covers the prelude to and early years of World War II. My goal was to place the fictional characters as closely as possible in the context of the era. Readers will experience certain important cultural events, like the release of Gone With the Wind and Dark Victory. They will be swept onto the dance floor with the music of Tommy Dorsey and Glenn Miller. Popular radio programs like The Pepsodent Show and the Green Hornet will entertain. Readers will travel on ocean liners like the SS Bremen and the SS America. All of this takes place in the context of the developing war, the invasion of Poland, the invasion and defeat of France, the bombing of Britain.
As a work of historical fiction I conducted years of historical research. To get the diplomatic context, I used published government sources, like The Foreign Relations of the United States, as well as original sources from the National Archives at College Park, Maryland. I consulted numerous cultural resources, namely periodicals and newspapers contemporary to the period, like the Washington Post, New York Times, The Saturday Evening Post, Life, and many other publications.
The biggest challenge in writing historical fiction proved to be those moments when fictional characters, by necessity, must interact with real historical characters. For instance, when Rodrigo, who is a purely fictional character, had to converse with his boss, Ambassador Cardenas, who is an historical character, I had to be able to present Cardenas in a manner that fit with his historical persona. Even though the conversation itself was, obviously, fictional, it had to be plausible.
Another challenge with historical fiction is in maintaining an accurate time line. When writing pure fiction, personal events can fit into whatever time line is necessary. I could not very well move the invasion of France to July 1940 in order to fit the story, rather, the story had to fall rigidly, down to the date, and at times, minutes of historical events. I found it both constraining and challenging.
The first part, At Waters’ Edge, covers the early war years. The next two parts will cover the remainder of the War and beyond. As war intensifies, Rodrigo’s challenges intensify. It is my hope that this trilogy will both entertain and educate.
It will be available both in e-book and paperback editions. As noted above the Kindle edition is now available for pre-order (see link below). If you want a hard copy, please contact me directly using the e-mail address below, and I’ll make sure you have a paperback version in your hands on release date.
https://www.amazon.com/Particularly-D...
www.bluewatertales.com
author@bluewatertales.com
April 18, 2017
The Vet
“The Vet,” two words that can make almost any dog crawl as far under the king size bed as far possible. It makes me want to crawl under the bed, and I’m not the one about to have an ice cold thermometer stuck up my butt. Today was vet day, not by choice, well, not by my choice, but by necessity. What triggered the need for the experience was the lovely spring day we had on Saturday. We were in the back yard after a long day of yard work. The next door neighbor came outside with “Jack” the Jack Russell Terrier. Juan Carlos, our eight pound, fourteen year old, Chihuahua had to make sure that Jack remembered who was boss in the neighborhood. As soon as he saw Jack at the DMZ, Carlos took off running as fast as he could.
Carlos, as most fourteen year old dogs and over fifty humans, has some joint problems, which were aggravated by his need to prevent a boundary violation. Never mind that we have an impregnable border wall (picket fence) to prevent such incursions. After two days of limping, I decided it was time to seek professional help. On top of that he seemed to be having a reaction to his anti-anxiety medication. I wasn’t sure if the two problems were somehow connected, but the problem was far beyond my training as an historian. With dread and trepidation I came home from work, hitched Carlos into his harness, and took off for the vet. I was careful not to use the “V” word. He was unusually calm on the way there. I think he was just in too much pain, but as soon as we walked in the door to see a waiting room filled with a Bulldog, another Chihuahua, a mutt, and two cats, all hell broke loose.
Carlos is a bit high strung. Alone with humans he can be the most docile, loving, gentle dog, but put another dog or, God forbid, a cat within his line of sight and he turns into Mr. Hyde. For the next hour and one half, Mr. Hyde wouldn’t shut up. Finally, after an exam, lots of squirming and yapping, and glares from other pet owners, we had a new NSAID prescription and were ready to leave. I would rather have gone to traffic court.
www.bluewatertales.com
Carlos, as most fourteen year old dogs and over fifty humans, has some joint problems, which were aggravated by his need to prevent a boundary violation. Never mind that we have an impregnable border wall (picket fence) to prevent such incursions. After two days of limping, I decided it was time to seek professional help. On top of that he seemed to be having a reaction to his anti-anxiety medication. I wasn’t sure if the two problems were somehow connected, but the problem was far beyond my training as an historian. With dread and trepidation I came home from work, hitched Carlos into his harness, and took off for the vet. I was careful not to use the “V” word. He was unusually calm on the way there. I think he was just in too much pain, but as soon as we walked in the door to see a waiting room filled with a Bulldog, another Chihuahua, a mutt, and two cats, all hell broke loose.
Carlos is a bit high strung. Alone with humans he can be the most docile, loving, gentle dog, but put another dog or, God forbid, a cat within his line of sight and he turns into Mr. Hyde. For the next hour and one half, Mr. Hyde wouldn’t shut up. Finally, after an exam, lots of squirming and yapping, and glares from other pet owners, we had a new NSAID prescription and were ready to leave. I would rather have gone to traffic court.
www.bluewatertales.com
