PLEASE Forgive This Shameless Self-Promotion!

[DavidM]

In case anybody’s wondered what I’ve been doing since I ended my Penn State activism and my failed campaign to win a seat on the BOT, here’s an explanation for much of my life over the last fourteen months or so. I’ve just published on Amazon (I’m sure it’s available on UK Amazon as well) an historical novel called Eadric and the Wolves: A Novel of the Danish Conquest of England. It’s centered on a real English leader who was prominent in Anglo-Saxon England, and who inexplicably allied himself with the Viking invader Cnut. Like the smash musical hit Hamilton, the story is a mixture of genuine history and creative fiction, and it attempts to show what English life was like around the year 1000 A.D.

This is the blurb on the back cover:
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…
England in the year 1000, at the turn of the millennium, was a society divided. The majority of its residents were people of one culture, but a sizeable minority tended to see the world in a very different way. Hate crimes were common, and some religious figures talked about the end of the world. Finally, there were groups of foreigners who intended to wreak havoc on the general population, and some residents were blamed for the violence of those outsiders.

The terrorists were Vikings, and the attacks had been ongoing for two hundred years. The long-established residents were Anglo-Saxon, but many thousands of people with Scandinavian roots had established lives there, some families having had homes in England for over a century.

A young man named Eadric, coming from an insignificant family in the woodlands of Mercia, became a powerful political figure in English society. King Aethelred II named him ealdorman or earl, and he married the king’s daughter. However, he ultimately turned against the king and the royal family in favor of a Danish Viking.

This story provides a plausible explanation for an infamous betrayal.
The novel is available in paperback or on Kindle through Amazon. Please consider buying a few dozen or more copies for yourself and your friends--it is a great present for birthdays and holidays.



Amazon product ASIN 1544126530
And if anybody has any questions or comments about the book or the publishing situation or process, fire away! I did mention Penn State in the short bio on the back of the book, so there's that!

 

[artsandletters]

It's a historical novel, not an historical novel.

Heehee

 

[demlion]

In case anybody’s wondered what I’ve been doing since I ended my Penn State activism and my failed campaign to win a seat on the BOT, here’s an explanation for much of my life over the last fourteen months or so. I’ve just published on Amazon (I’m sure it’s available on UK Amazon as well) an historical novel called Eadric and the Wolves: A Novel of the Danish Conquest of England. It’s centered on a real English leader who was prominent in Anglo-Saxon England, and who inexplicably allied himself with the Viking invader Cnut. Like the smash musical hit Hamilton, the story is a mixture of genuine history and creative fiction, and it attempts to show what English life was like around the year 1000 A.D.

This is the blurb on the back cover:
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…
England in the year 1000, at the turn of the millennium, was a society divided. The majority of its residents were people of one culture, but a sizeable minority tended to see the world in a very different way. Hate crimes were common, and some religious figures talked about the end of the world. Finally, there were groups of foreigners who intended to wreak havoc on the general population, and some residents were blamed for the violence of those outsiders.

The terrorists were Vikings, and the attacks had been ongoing for two hundred years. The long-established residents were Anglo-Saxon, but many thousands of people with Scandinavian roots had established lives there, some families having had homes in England for over a century.

A young man named Eadric, coming from an insignificant family in the woodlands of Mercia, became a powerful political figure in English society. King Aethelred II named him ealdorman or earl, and he married the king’s daughter. However, he ultimately turned against the king and the royal family in favor of a Danish Viking.

This story provides a plausible explanation for an infamous betrayal.
The novel is available in paperback or on Kindle through Amazon. Please consider buying a few dozen or more copies for yourself and your friends--it is a great present for birthdays and holidays.



Amazon product ASIN 1544126530
And if anybody has any questions or comments about the book or the publishing situation or process, fire away! I did mention Penn State in the short bio on the back of the book, so there's that!

Way to go, DavidM! If you have to write a novel after an unsuccessful run, I better get the hell to work!

 

[fairgambit]

In case anybody’s wondered what I’ve been doing since I ended my Penn State activism and my failed campaign to win a seat on the BOT, here’s an explanation for much of my life over the last fourteen months or so. I’ve just published on Amazon (I’m sure it’s available on UK Amazon as well) an historical novel called Eadric and the Wolves: A Novel of the Danish Conquest of England. It’s centered on a real English leader who was prominent in Anglo-Saxon England, and who inexplicably allied himself with the Viking invader Cnut. Like the smash musical hit Hamilton, the story is a mixture of genuine history and creative fiction, and it attempts to show what English life was like around the year 1000 A.D.

This is the blurb on the back cover:
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…
England in the year 1000, at the turn of the millennium, was a society divided. The majority of its residents were people of one culture, but a sizeable minority tended to see the world in a very different way. Hate crimes were common, and some religious figures talked about the end of the world. Finally, there were groups of foreigners who intended to wreak havoc on the general population, and some residents were blamed for the violence of those outsiders.

The terrorists were Vikings, and the attacks had been ongoing for two hundred years. The long-established residents were Anglo-Saxon, but many thousands of people with Scandinavian roots had established lives there, some families having had homes in England for over a century.

A young man named Eadric, coming from an insignificant family in the woodlands of Mercia, became a powerful political figure in English society. King Aethelred II named him ealdorman or earl, and he married the king’s daughter. However, he ultimately turned against the king and the royal family in favor of a Danish Viking.

This story provides a plausible explanation for an infamous betrayal.
The novel is available in paperback or on Kindle through Amazon. Please consider buying a few dozen or more copies for yourself and your friends--it is a great present for birthdays and holidays.



Amazon product ASIN 1544126530
And if anybody has any questions or comments about the book or the publishing situation or process, fire away! I did mention Penn State in the short bio on the back of the book, so there's that!

I also have written a book. It's called "Rutgers Football...The Glory Years."
I am having trouble getting it published though, since it's only 7 pages long.

Seriously, that is terrific news. I am doing a lot of reading these days and, while I seldom read novels, I will make an exception for you. I wish you good sales and a movie deal.

 

[DavidM]

Actually, artsandletters, both "a historical" and "an historical" are considered appropriate, and I guess, given the fact that the setting of the novel is England, where "an historical" is the more accepted version, I went with that.

 

[FHSPSU67]

Actually, I believe that "an historical" is correct because the "h" is considered silent here.

 

[LionJim]

Can we dispense with the grammar lessons and just give an "Attaboy" to David M?

David M is now in the ranks of Hemingway, Joyce, and Proust. You gotta give him his props.

 

[DavidM]

LionJim, GOD I love hyperbole! Seriously, thanks for the kind, if supremely unrealistic, words. If anybody has any questions about publishing and what's involved in getting something published on Amazon, please ask. As I used to tell my students, the only stupid question is the one you don't ask.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Way to go, DavidM! If you have to write a novel after an unsuccessful run, I better get the hell to work!

oh my, the continuing adventures of dem and his boat. Set in West Virginia ... hmm, what are the possibilities? I'm envisioning a story about Dem sitting in the boat (reasons for doing so are unclear) while his wife or daughter are driving over the New River gorge. As is the norm, the boat gets free from the trailer, and the boat and dem go sliding off the bridge. Somehow, the boat lands perfectly in the New River with not a scratch on it, and dem gets saved as he grabs onto the ankles of a lovely PSU coed that is bungee jumping off the New River bridge. Boat, trailer, and dem are reunited. An anonymous person reads about the adventures in the Wheeling Intelligencer, and is so moved that they have 10 cords of split and aged hardwood delivered to dem's home.

look at all the time and effort I saved you, dem.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

In case anybody’s wondered what I’ve been doing since I ended my Penn State activism and my failed campaign to win a seat on the BOT, here’s an explanation for much of my life over the last fourteen months or so. I’ve just published on Amazon (I’m sure it’s available on UK Amazon as well) an historical novel called Eadric and the Wolves: A Novel of the Danish Conquest of England. It’s centered on a real English leader who was prominent in Anglo-Saxon England, and who inexplicably allied himself with the Viking invader Cnut. Like the smash musical hit Hamilton, the story is a mixture of genuine history and creative fiction, and it attempts to show what English life was like around the year 1000 A.D.

This is the blurb on the back cover:
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…
England in the year 1000, at the turn of the millennium, was a society divided. The majority of its residents were people of one culture, but a sizeable minority tended to see the world in a very different way. Hate crimes were common, and some religious figures talked about the end of the world. Finally, there were groups of foreigners who intended to wreak havoc on the general population, and some residents were blamed for the violence of those outsiders.

The terrorists were Vikings, and the attacks had been ongoing for two hundred years. The long-established residents were Anglo-Saxon, but many thousands of people with Scandinavian roots had established lives there, some families having had homes in England for over a century.

A young man named Eadric, coming from an insignificant family in the woodlands of Mercia, became a powerful political figure in English society. King Aethelred II named him ealdorman or earl, and he married the king’s daughter. However, he ultimately turned against the king and the royal family in favor of a Danish Viking.

This story provides a plausible explanation for an infamous betrayal.
The novel is available in paperback or on Kindle through Amazon. Please consider buying a few dozen or more copies for yourself and your friends--it is a great present for birthdays and holidays.



Amazon product ASIN 1544126530
And if anybody has any questions or comments about the book or the publishing situation or process, fire away! I did mention Penn State in the short bio on the back of the book, so there's that!

Oh, like Hamilton, eh? I see what you did there - congrats!

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Can we dispense with the grammar lessons and just give an "Attaboy" to David M?

David M is now in the ranks of Hemingway, Joyce, and Proust. You gotta give him his props.

Is David M drunk enough to join those ranks?

 

[hagberg]

LionJim, GOD I love hyperbole! Seriously, thanks for the kind, if supremely unrealistic, words. If anybody has any questions about publishing and what's involved in getting something published on Amazon, please ask. As I used to tell my students, the only stupid question is the one you don't ask.

I used to tell my students almost the same thing, except my words of wisdom were, "There's no such thing as a stupid question; there are only stupid people asking questions!"

 

[demlion]

Is David M drunk enough to join those ranks?

Not yet, but trust me...he will be soon.

 

[retsio]

Wonderful news and good tidings for a/an historical movie deal on Starz or Showtime -- Outlander, here comes DavidM.

 

[PSU87]

I also have written a book. It's called "Rutgers Football...The Glory Years."
I am having trouble getting it published though, since it's only 7 pages long.

Seriously, that is terrific news. I am doing a lot of reading these days and, while I seldom read novels, I will make an exception for you. I wish you good sales and a movie deal.

Six whole pages of dedication? I hope we all at least get some form of mention.
How did you stretch "we were once in a four team tie for first in an 8 team conference made up of basketball schools and we played the very first football game, like, ever" to a full page? Nice work!

 

[WDLion]

I also have written a book. It's called "Rutgers Football...The Glory Years."
I am having trouble getting it published though, since it's only 7 pages long.

Seriously, that is terrific news. I am doing a lot of reading these days and, while I seldom read novels, I will make an exception for you. I wish you good sales and a movie deal.

Must be a lot of repetition to get seven pages.

 

[fairgambit]

Must be a lot of repetition to get seven pages.

I included pictures of cheerleaders to help sell the book. Lots! 5 pages worth. Then, one page for the 1869 team (1st game ever played) and one page for all the remaining years of glory. I may self publish. I know there is a market for this. The 150th season of Rutgers football is looming. My business model would be my highly successful "expensive/poor quality T shirt" venture. I'm thinking of charging $150 a book. That's just $1.00 dollar for each year of Rutgers football. For members of this board I will increase the price, just so you can brag that you got the worst possible deal. More details coming.

 

[DavidM]

In case anybody was wondering, Ragnar Lodbrok, main character in The Vikings, lived about 150 years before my story takes place. He probably died around 850 A.D., Rollo--who was presented in the Viking series as Ragnar's brother--was raising hell around 900 A.D., and Eadric lived around 1000 A.D. It's easy today to imagine them having a feast with mead together, but their lives did not overlap.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

In case anybody was wondering, Ragnar Lodbrok, main character in The Vikings, lived about 150 years before my story takes place. He probably died around 850 A.D., Rollo--who was presented in the Viking series as Ragnar's brother--was raising hell around 900 A.D., and Eadric lived around 1000 A.D. It's easy today to imagine them having a feast with mead together, but their lives did not overlap.

What I like is how these vicious Nordic killers got on the right path and put their skills to use for something good.

 

[Phil's Rug]

Must be a lot of repetition to get seven pages.

At least 5 pages are about their punter last year

 

[DavidM]

Folks, please permit me a final word today. I just finished reading a commentary about self-published books, and the writer asserted that most examples are just bad. Sloppy writing, vapid content, fundamentally worthless. Since basically anybody can self-publish if they want to spend a little money, and take some time to throw something together, results are typically rancid.

I would like to believe that what I've written is better than that, and I invite some of you to look for yourselves.

 

[TheGLOV]

oh my, the continuing adventures of dem and his boat. Set in West Virginia ... hmm, what are the possibilities? I'm envisioning a story about Dem sitting in the boat (reasons for doing so are unclear) while his wife or daughter are driving over the New River gorge. As is the norm, the boat gets free from the trailer, and the boat and dem go sliding off the bridge. Somehow, the boat lands perfectly in the New River with not a scratch on it, and dem gets saved as he grabs onto the ankles of a lovely PSU coed that is bungee jumping off the New River bridge. Boat, trailer, and dem are reunited. An anonymous person reads about the adventures in the Wheeling Intelligencer, and is so moved that they have 10 cords of split and aged hardwood delivered to dem's home.

look at all the time and effort I saved you, dem.

I got a photo of that Tom right here! Please note the very tight grip he has on her ankles!!

 

[artsandletters]

Actually, artsandletters, both "a historical" and "an historical" are considered appropriate, and I guess, given the fact that the setting of the novel is England, where "an historical" is the more accepted version, I went with that.

Well, I choose to disagree. There is no vowel sound in 'h' of historical. Now if the word were 'hour' then 'an hour' is correct. Maybe they changed the rules. They're always changing rules to accommodate common mistakes. Nothing matters anymore. Why even bother breathing when 'an historical' is correct?

An 'historical' novel would be correct, supposing you were raised in Cockney and pronounced it 'istorical'.

If 'an historical' is correct then so is 'an hysterectomy' or 'an hotel' or 'an horrible thing' or 'an horse' or 'an heathen' or 'an heater' or 'an hitter' or 'an hypocrite' and so on.

Congratulations on the novel. I hope it does well.

 

[DavidM]

After you posted your correction, I actually checked some "authorities" on line, and there seemed to be general (not complete) agreement that both were acceptable. Perhaps "an historical" being accepted is a reflection of the natural eliding over the "h" sound from a Cockney (and other English folks) AND from most Americans. My choice is certainly not a new construction.

Thanks for the kind words.

 

[artsandletters]

After you posted your correction, I actually checked some "authorities" on line, and there seemed to be general (not complete) agreement that both were acceptable. Perhaps "an historical" being accepted is a reflection of the natural eliding over the "h" sound from a Cockney (and other English folks) AND from most Americans. My choice is certainly not a new construction.

Thanks for the kind words.

They can say what they want, 'authorities' or otherwise. I'm tired of 'authorities' giving in to common error. WTF is the use? 'Peruse' used to mean only one thing but because so many people thought it meant the OPPOSITE, now the OPPOSITE is acceptable because some 'authorities' decided it was okay. Those 'authorities' can go to hell and take their 'general' agreement with them.

'An historical' is incorrect unless the 'authorities' decided that that word is somehow different than every other word that begins with a 'H' and has no vowel sound. I gave you several examples. If you choose to go along with the 'authorities' because it makes you right then maybe it's best that you didn't win a BoT seat.

Feels good sounding like Barry.

 

[DavidM]

"If you choose to go along with the 'authorities' because it makes you right then maybe it's best that you didn't win a BoT seat."

Now yer jes bein' silly, Barry.

Look, I'm very old school--and I taught all levels of high school English for three decades, and a few classes at Northwestern as well. And I know that I was told early on, and repeatedly, that "an historical" was the way to go. So we're not talking the recent language dumbing down like I think you were alluding to.

I surrender. You win.

 

[artsandletters]

"If you choose to go along with the 'authorities' because it makes you right then maybe it's best that you didn't win a BoT seat."

Now yer jes bein' silly, Barry.

Look, I'm very old school--and I taught all levels of high school English for three decades, and a few classes at Northwestern as well. And I know that I was told early on, and repeatedly, that "an historical" was the way to go. So we're not talking the recent language dumbing down like I think you were alluding to.

I surrender. You win.

Wise move.

I'd hate to have 'an' history of animus between us.

 

[demlion]

Gentlemen: Use of "a" instead of "an" in this context might result in confusion during spoken communication, since "ahistorical" is a separate term.

David would never want anyone to think his historical novel was "ahistorical."

An ahistorical historical novel is science fiction or fantasy, right?

Thank you for indulging my momentary slip into pedantry; usually I eschew such frivolities.

 

[DavidM]

A very neat blog called English Historical Fiction Authors has posted a commentary from me about my main character, and of course does a nice promo for the novel as well. Right now it's on the front page, and I would encourage you to visit the site. The piece is entitled "Eadric of Mercia: History or Calumny" and the people who run the site are class acts!

http://englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.co.uk/

 

[artsandletters]

Gentlemen: Use of "a" instead of "an" in this context might result in confusion during spoken communication, since "ahistorical" is a separate term.

David would never want anyone to think his historical novel was "ahistorical."

An ahistorical historical novel is science fiction or fantasy, right?

Thank you for indulging my momentary slip into pedantry; usually I eschew such frivolities.

His novel is in part ahistorical though that has nothing to do with using 'a' or 'an'.

The next time someone uses the word 'ahistorical' in a conversation with me will be the first time. Also, there's nothing wrong with occasional pedantry. I was really just kidding around but David made a case of it and the disagreement ensued. That's about it. I was done with it until you decided to insert this 'ahistorical' nonsense ( though your intent was probably tongue in cheek. )

 

[DavidM]

Dunno--I like mudwrestling--but only as a spectator.

 

[demlion]

His novel is in part ahistorical though that has nothing to do with using 'a' or 'an'.

The next time someone uses the word 'ahistorical' in a conversation with me will be the first time. Also, there's nothing wrong with occasional pedantry. I was really just kidding around but David made a case of it and the disagreement ensued. That's about it. I was done with it until you decided to insert this 'ahistorical' nonsense ( though your intent was probably tongue in cheek. )

But this is the one context in which "a" historical could be confused with "ahistorical."

The next time someone uses the term ahistorical in a discussion with me will likely be the first as well. Indeed the next time someone uses "historical" with me and we are not talking about an historical novel will also be the first.

The entire notion of pedantry is implicit in just such singularity.

Such pedantry is often nonsense. People still do it though. Pretty sure we agree there.

 

[artsandletters]

But this is the one context in which "a" historical could be confused with "ahistorical."

The next time someone uses the term ahistorical in a discussion with me will likely be the first as well. Indeed the next time someone uses "historical" with me and we are not talking about an historical novel will also be the first.

The entire notion of pedantry is implicit in just such singularity.

Such pedantry is often nonsense. People still do it though. Pretty sure we agree there.

But if it was ahistorical it would be 'an' ahistorical' novel. Then we 360 back to 'a' historical novel, NOT 'an' historical novel.

Enough.

 

[demlion]

But if it was ahistorical it would be 'an' ahistorical' novel. Then we 360 back to 'a' historical novel, NOT 'an' historical novel.

Enough.

That's what causes the confusion, and why "an historical novel" is not only acceptable, but preferred. It's never enough.

 

[artsandletters]

Dunno--I like mudwrestling--but only as a spectator.

Speaking of mud, Nordstrom's is up to dirty tricks, selling fake-mud-stained jeans for only $425.00. Gimme two, one pair for dress, one for work.

 

[artsandletters]

That's what causes the confusion, and why "an historical novel" is not only acceptable, but preferred. It's never enough.

It is wrong and unacceptable. There is no confusion. You're wrong. David is wrong. The 'authorities' are wrong. If it's 'an historical' the it's 'an history' and it is NOT. Period. End.

Now shut up a little bit about it.

 

[demlion]

It is wrong and unacceptable. There is no confusion. You're wrong. David is wrong. The 'authorities' are wrong. If it's 'an historical' the it's 'an history' and it is NOT. Period. End.

Now shut up a little bit about it.

NO. Both are correct.

 

[artsandletters]

NO. Both are correct.

No. Wrong. ABSOLUTELY WRONG. This is a perfect example of what WV can do to an otherwise useful brain.

You're WRONG. I got you last and I'm going home. I win.

 

[demlion]

No. Wrong. ABSOLUTELY WRONG. This is a perfect example of what WV can do to an otherwise useful brain.

You're WRONG. I got you last and I'm going home. I win.

Pathetic.

 

[DavidM]

I dream of the possibility of world peace...