The following is a pre-ramble as to why I read the book. The review follows. I read this book for a key reason: I participated in a stage play last year of Breaker Morant. It focused specifically on the courts martial of, 'Breaker' Morant, Peter Handcock (my role) and George Witton. I had done a lot of research prior to coming across this book, including finding diary entries of Handcock's online.
Because this was my first role portraying a figure buried in history. I wanted the performance to be as truthful, and original, as possible. Therefore, I didn't watch the 1980 movie to avoid any preconceived character traits.
Now, the review. This book was incredibly detailed and gave me so much insight, on the events leading up to, and including the courts martial. There was one particular piece of text regarding Peter Handcock, which I re-read to confirm. Then held onto for the character's mentality. That being he was committed to the Bushveldt Carbineers and the mateship within the corp. Because of this, he would not waiver from the truth which he knew: ultimately, Morant, Witton and he were scapegoats for corrupt British military practices. And like Morant, would die to serve this fact.
The chapters were lengthy, but please don't let this deter you especially (if like me) you weren't aware of the events in this book. What's more, it read in the same way that Ashlee Vance's book on Elon Musk did. Very analytical. It is history that needs reviewing and renewed legal inquiry.
Utter bilge which perpetuates myths which have been long known to be untrue. Even more bizarre is that the author acknowledges the facts but then proceeds to ignore them. See the chapter on Morant in Zombie Myths of Australian Military History for a more balanced view.
The book is a bit too long for what tries to cover. Often it is very dry and a little disjointed. Good for someone who doesn't know much about "The Breaker" and wants some context.
This is a well researched Book. The Author did an Outstanding job writing this Novel.
One thing I disagree with is that he Laughed at the thought that Breaker Morrant could have been a Serial Murderer. The information he provided showed it was Extremely possible that Morrant could have been the Murderer. His argument against the Possibility was No argument at all. What he said was basically: "How Dare You accuse him..." That is a Ridiculous argument.
He was in my opinion also too Sympathetic to Morrant. I am Not saying that Morrant was actually Guilty of the Crime he was Executed for. I am talking about his other Numerous list of Documented Crimes. A seriously long list.
My Opinion on the Man Breaker Morrant. He was A Lazy Criminal who had an Incredible Ego. He was a Lifelong Drunk who stole from Everyone he could. He was Quick to Fight with his Fists and Frequently Assaulted people because of his Arrogance. He treated Women Horribly.
His Positive accomplishments: A Skilled Horseman, possibly the Greatest Horseman in History. He was an accomplished Author.
I don't think the Positive Accomplishments he Achieved should turn him into a Folk Hero. He was Not someone you could trust. He was a Criminal plain and simple.
The story of Breaker Morant is intriguing on so many levels and has been clouded in mystery and controversy for well over a century.
Was The Breaker a drover and fraudster from small town Australia looking for fame and fortune in South Africa during the Anglo Boer war, or was be the bastard son of an English aristocrat seeking his father’s recognition through loyal service to the Crown?
Were he and fellow officers in the Bushveld Carbineers following orders, or did they become cold-blooded murderers of surrendered Boer combatants, their wives and children?
Bleszynski is clear on what side of the divide he stands, but the weakness of this book is how he tries to massage unfavourable facts and ignores opposing evidence to arrive at his pre-determined conclusion.
The book is a good read, but there are better ones on the subject matter.
Long and rather disjointed but an interesting take on the Breaker Morant story. Don't know that it means to but provides yet another example of the total farce and hypocracy surrouding war and "patriotism".