What do you think?
Rate this book
The Breaker
There was a Breaker Morant—he was executed at Pietersburg on 27 February 1902. His crime? Wilful murder of civilians. Yet to this day his guilt remains in doubt. Kit Denton's novel, The Breaker , does more than recount the facts and mystery surrounding Morant's death sentence. Full of action and set in three continents, it covers the entire range of the Breaker's activities. We see him as a champion horseman, a likeable larrikin, a popular balladist. We see him in love and in war. Then we see him face the firing squad that will end his life. Was he a cold-blooded killer or a scapegoat?
268 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1973
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
May 25, 2021
This book inspired a film which I’ve often thought to be one of the better Australian films. It is based on a true story, it is about the English doing terrible things, it is about the horrors of capital punishment – you know, it should have had everything going for it… So, why didn’t I like it nearly as much as I ought to have?
I think it was because I really couldn’t like Harry, the main character – despite the fact that the writer (father of Andrew Denton, an Australian television personality) clearly was very taken by this quintessential ‘man’s man’. Of course, to be a man’s man in Australia requires drinking, shooting, fighting, riding horses and shagging lots of sheilas; all that goes without saying. As the book makes clear, no sooner would Morant look at a sheila and her knickers would literally fly off. This problem became so great that he found he had to enlist and go off to South Africa so as to be mostly around men and thus not be bothered by this problem. My least favourite part of this book is the scene in which Morant kicks a prostitute out of his bedroom once she had been paid for her services so he can talk to his mate about his poetry. Ah, to have the heart of a poet…
Of course, poetry isn’t exactly appropriate for Australian blokes and war heroes, that’s obvious. So Mr Denton makes sure that each time Harry’s poetry is mentioned it is clear Morant was somewhat shy and embarrassed about it. He doesn’t even send his own poetry off to The Bulletin to be published.
There is poetry by Morant quoted in this book, in fact, the last bit of this book is a selection of his poetry and I have to admit I couldn’t quite bring myself to read on after the first few rhymes of the first poem – it would possibly be unkind to say that after reading Morant’s poetry it is clear he was mischarged and executed for the wrong crimes he committed against humanity…
The two-thirds or so of this book that don’t deal with South Africa and the court case against Morant for war crimes are cut from the film – and it is easy to see why. They are so sycophantic that it becomes a little painful going on.
The book starts with Morant getting himself into two fights with the same man. The first time he tries to fight according to the ‘rules’ and gets a kick in the balls (is that a cliché in such situations or is it just me?) and is then badly beaten (even though he never complains). But he learns from his mistake and next time fights on the same terms as his opponent and wins. It is not too hard to see that this is a metaphor for what he later tries to do in South Africa while fighting one of the world’s first guerrilla wars.
It is much more clear in the book than the film that Morant probably was guilty of war crimes following the death of Hunt. It may be true that Kitchener had ordered troops to ‘take no prisoners’, however, it is also clear that other commanders ignored this instruction and it is also clear Morant did advise this on at least one occasion. He makes an odd hero and is possibly more interesting in what he says about the Australian movement towards a longed for republic in the 1970s.
I didn’t like this one nearly as much as I hoped I would.
I think it was because I really couldn’t like Harry, the main character – despite the fact that the writer (father of Andrew Denton, an Australian television personality) clearly was very taken by this quintessential ‘man’s man’. Of course, to be a man’s man in Australia requires drinking, shooting, fighting, riding horses and shagging lots of sheilas; all that goes without saying. As the book makes clear, no sooner would Morant look at a sheila and her knickers would literally fly off. This problem became so great that he found he had to enlist and go off to South Africa so as to be mostly around men and thus not be bothered by this problem. My least favourite part of this book is the scene in which Morant kicks a prostitute out of his bedroom once she had been paid for her services so he can talk to his mate about his poetry. Ah, to have the heart of a poet…
Of course, poetry isn’t exactly appropriate for Australian blokes and war heroes, that’s obvious. So Mr Denton makes sure that each time Harry’s poetry is mentioned it is clear Morant was somewhat shy and embarrassed about it. He doesn’t even send his own poetry off to The Bulletin to be published.
There is poetry by Morant quoted in this book, in fact, the last bit of this book is a selection of his poetry and I have to admit I couldn’t quite bring myself to read on after the first few rhymes of the first poem – it would possibly be unkind to say that after reading Morant’s poetry it is clear he was mischarged and executed for the wrong crimes he committed against humanity…
The two-thirds or so of this book that don’t deal with South Africa and the court case against Morant for war crimes are cut from the film – and it is easy to see why. They are so sycophantic that it becomes a little painful going on.
The book starts with Morant getting himself into two fights with the same man. The first time he tries to fight according to the ‘rules’ and gets a kick in the balls (is that a cliché in such situations or is it just me?) and is then badly beaten (even though he never complains). But he learns from his mistake and next time fights on the same terms as his opponent and wins. It is not too hard to see that this is a metaphor for what he later tries to do in South Africa while fighting one of the world’s first guerrilla wars.
It is much more clear in the book than the film that Morant probably was guilty of war crimes following the death of Hunt. It may be true that Kitchener had ordered troops to ‘take no prisoners’, however, it is also clear that other commanders ignored this instruction and it is also clear Morant did advise this on at least one occasion. He makes an odd hero and is possibly more interesting in what he says about the Australian movement towards a longed for republic in the 1970s.
I didn’t like this one nearly as much as I hoped I would.
June 30, 2016
It’s just a little bit of synchronicity that I picked up this book to read in the same week that I’d read Nathan Hobby’s thoughts about the art of biography when crucial information about the subject is missing. I was looking for something interesting but undemanding to read, and this skinny little paperback that I’d found at the Op Shop seemed to fit the bill. I knew the story, after all, I’d seen the Bruce Beresford film back in the 1980s. It’s the story of three Australian officers executed for war crimes during the Boer War. It’s a cause célèbre in Australia because there’s a belief that they were scapegoats for the Brits. ‘Breaker’ Morant in particular has become a bit of a folk hero, and once upon a time this book – though not this edition – was a bestseller.
So I read the book and had a few preliminary thoughts about the Boys’ Own Adventure style of it, not to mention the author’s acknowledgement in the foreword that some of it is conjecture:
I thought I might have a few words to say about the difficulty imposed by the author not signalling which bits were ‘a departure from history’, and about his obvious partisanship in favour of Morant, and I thought I might tease out whether my reservations about the style of it had anything to do with my gender. (There is a tolerance for womanising that borders on tacky admiration). I was considering how I might discuss the narrator’s unnecessary use of racist labels for indigenous people in Australia and in South Africa, when the book was written in 1973 and most of us knew better by then, and the editors at Angus & Robertson should have. And then I scuttled off to Wikipedia to see if I could find out exactly how ‘Australian’ Morant actually was. I was hoping to find out how many years he’d lived in Australia, for Australians to be claiming him as one of their own, when the book starts out, after all, with Morant getting beaten up in a pub because someone took a dislike to his posh Pommy accent.
Well, imagine my surprise when I read the Wikipedia entry, only to discover that the ‘facts’ as laid out there bear almost no relationship to the story in this book! So much so that I hesitate to offer anything in the way of a summary because apart from a general agreement that the nickname ‘Breaker’ was applied because the man was brilliant at ‘breaking in’ difficult horses, almost all the facts seem to be in dispute.
To read the rest of my review please visit http://anzlitlovers.com/2016/01/04/th...
So I read the book and had a few preliminary thoughts about the Boys’ Own Adventure style of it, not to mention the author’s acknowledgement in the foreword that some of it is conjecture:
I had hoped to write a true history of the events and the people concerned, but the obduracy of the British Government in refusing to release a number of essential documents has made this impossible. Nonetheless, this book has in it many of the historical facts and I’ve departed from history only when the facts weren’t discoverable or when I felt it was necessary in the interest of a good story. Morant, lived, wrote, fought and died pretty much the way I’ve pictured it.
I thought I might have a few words to say about the difficulty imposed by the author not signalling which bits were ‘a departure from history’, and about his obvious partisanship in favour of Morant, and I thought I might tease out whether my reservations about the style of it had anything to do with my gender. (There is a tolerance for womanising that borders on tacky admiration). I was considering how I might discuss the narrator’s unnecessary use of racist labels for indigenous people in Australia and in South Africa, when the book was written in 1973 and most of us knew better by then, and the editors at Angus & Robertson should have. And then I scuttled off to Wikipedia to see if I could find out exactly how ‘Australian’ Morant actually was. I was hoping to find out how many years he’d lived in Australia, for Australians to be claiming him as one of their own, when the book starts out, after all, with Morant getting beaten up in a pub because someone took a dislike to his posh Pommy accent.
Well, imagine my surprise when I read the Wikipedia entry, only to discover that the ‘facts’ as laid out there bear almost no relationship to the story in this book! So much so that I hesitate to offer anything in the way of a summary because apart from a general agreement that the nickname ‘Breaker’ was applied because the man was brilliant at ‘breaking in’ difficult horses, almost all the facts seem to be in dispute.
To read the rest of my review please visit http://anzlitlovers.com/2016/01/04/th...
Read
July 15, 2025This was a novel that I was meant to read in year 12 (or 11) for an asignment at school. At that time I think I read about ten pages. Its no major revelation but just a funny little memory now that I have read all two-hundred and sixty-eight pages so quickly. This falls into line with all the novels from my university subjects sitting in the "too read" pile.
The major talking point, to me anyway, is the "true story" note at the start. A lot of films start with the "based on a true story" note, only for investigation to reveal how loose that is. Claims that this novel makes turn out to be just plain incorerct. The oddest is the results of the court marshal being wrong. Like in cinema, its really not a big deal, except for the intro of the book stressing this attempt at accuracy.
The truth of it is that the factual inaccuracies don't matter. The story is about how these two Australia soldiers were pawns for the British to avoid the global political repurcessions of their actions. The novel does try to establish their innocence in the legal matters of this, but that really shouldn't be emphasised. Investigations reveal that Breaker was most likely guilty, but what he was guilty of was the classic "following orders" of any military person on trial.
The event, this novel, the film, and other writings about the event are really less about a miscarriage of justice and more that the Australian was disposable to the British. A core part of any Australian's identity is rebellion of our disposability to the crown.
The major talking point, to me anyway, is the "true story" note at the start. A lot of films start with the "based on a true story" note, only for investigation to reveal how loose that is. Claims that this novel makes turn out to be just plain incorerct. The oddest is the results of the court marshal being wrong. Like in cinema, its really not a big deal, except for the intro of the book stressing this attempt at accuracy.
The truth of it is that the factual inaccuracies don't matter. The story is about how these two Australia soldiers were pawns for the British to avoid the global political repurcessions of their actions. The novel does try to establish their innocence in the legal matters of this, but that really shouldn't be emphasised. Investigations reveal that Breaker was most likely guilty, but what he was guilty of was the classic "following orders" of any military person on trial.
The event, this novel, the film, and other writings about the event are really less about a miscarriage of justice and more that the Australian was disposable to the British. A core part of any Australian's identity is rebellion of our disposability to the crown.
April 27, 2019
A very interesting and emotional read.
May 10, 2020
Such a sad story in the end but a beautiful description of life in the bush in Australia in the late 1800s
February 7, 2023
I did not note that this was faction rather than biography when I picked it up. It was an OK read but just not what I expected or wanted.
January 23, 2025
A great Aussie cowboy story. It paints the landscapes and time period so vividly. One of my favourite stories
Did Not Finish
August 11, 2011My school English teacher at the time had this thing for war stuff so kept throwing his creepy obsession at us as part of the class curriculum. Fortunately I swapped English classes mid-year so only had to suffer a few chapters of this book. Maybe if I had chosen to read it freely or if my teacher didn't keep forcing war crap down our throats I'd appreciate reading it further. But as it currently stands I'm not interested. I watched the movie instead, which is pretty good.
July 16, 2014
Thought that since Aust. is home for a while, I should start enjoying some Aussie classics.cThe place we are staying has a good supply in the bookshelf in the lounge room. Started with this one, knew a bit of the story, but was surprised by many details. Balled a fair bit through the last chapter.
Read
August 23, 2008isbn,original
April 5, 2017
Interesting read on one of Australia's folk heroes, made famous by the movie, Breaker Morant.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews