My idea was to embed fact “essays” into a fictional text. (I’m not the first person to think of this. Henry Fielding’s novel, “Tom Jones” has some excellent essays in it that have nothing to do with the plot of the novel.)

But thanks for asking.

Thanks (from a novice computer user, of sorts, and a novice blog user, of sorts) for your help .

You’re not the first person to be seized by this powerful story. I’ve written a novel based around a fictional ancestor of John D. Lee. (Still looking for a publisher.) The “Southern Utah” tab on the main page links to a chapter I wrote for that book.

Just as a clarification in case someone else is interested, you mention “the brave woman who first told his (John D. Lee) tale in written form.” I’m sure you’re referring to Juanita Brooks’ groundbreaking history, The Mountain Meadows Massacre (ISBN-10: 0806123184).

For a lighter touch, I also recommend her autobiography, Quicksand And Cactus (ISBN-10: 0874211638). The chapters about growing up in Bunkerville, Nevada (near Mesquite) are great.

Washington City commissioned a bronze statue of John D. Lee years ago. The pedestal for it is still there with the others in front of their museum on Telegraph. I believe it’s still in storage somewhere because there was an uproar when they were going to put it in place. Do you know anything about that?

I’ve done a lot of research about it (most of which I don’t recall very well, like how many people died and exactly which year it was.) I haven’t seen the movie, because, well, I’m just not in the habit of driving for three hours to see a film.

I once started a screenplay about the massacre. I ripped it to shreds because the issue was so complicated and so emotionally fraught, even after all these years, that no matter what I tried (and I didn’t know what I was doing, either) it was either maudlin or melodramatic. Descendants of the perpetrators just don’t want to discuss it. Most of them are still so deeply ashamed they can’t look at it. Or, if they are descendants of John D. Lee, they are still madder than hell and can’t look at it.

The Mormon Church doesn’t want to look at it because they rushed into deniability before they even killed the folks. They were passing the buck before they’d even picked it up. They were blaming the Indians. Then they blamed John D. Lee, who was certainly guilty of something, but he swore till they shot him that he never killed a single person.

I’d still like to write a good screenplay. It’s a story with everything in it. Greed, Jealousy. Revenge. Fear and loathing. Betrayal. An army coming across the plains to destroy the Mormons. A zealot or 200. A fear-mongering Mormon saint traversing Utah to spread seeds of hatred and righteous revenge. A wagon train with lots of money, lots of livestock and nothing to eat, riding through territory where people had been forbidden to sell them supplies. A group of young men riding with the train that bragged about having the gun that shot Joseph Smith. A group of devout, God-fearing, struggling humans still having nightmares about the brutality they had endured at the hands of neighbors in Illinois, still believing that blood atonement would save souls.

The Mormons rode into the camp under a flag of truce, took the young children in wagons away from the scene, had the women and older children march behind the wagons. They took the weapons from the men, matched them up with armed Mormons and at the command “Do your duty” from John D Lee, shot them dead. Shot the women and older children dead. Stripped off their clothing (which was hard to come by in southern Utah in those days) and scattered dirt over them. Some of them. Then they huddled in a circle and swore (sweeping their hands across their throats like a blade) they would die before they told a soul. And most of them did - die before they told anyone. Except John Lee, who went to his adoptive Father, Brigham Young, and made a full report. Funny how Brigham got the poor bastard killed in the end, but not before he hid out in the hills of Southern Utah and then Lees Ferry for many years. It took two trials to convict him, and the second probably wouldn’t have, except that the bishopric visited each of the jurors the night before, making it pretty clear that if someone - anyone - paid the price, the case would leave the public eye.

There are dozens of parallel stories - the children, Bishop Klingonsmith, who did his own penance and hiding, John D Lee’s families, survivors of the massacre, the descendants of those massacred, the scarred murderers who never told and died hating themselves, the dying man who had to tell the story before he could die in peace. The brave woman who first told his tale in written form. It would have to be a mini-series, wouldn’t it? (Do they still make mini-series?)

The Mormon faithful will tell you that the LDS Church has said that it’s inaccurate as history but has made no other “official” statement about it. They will say that theater owners and Mormons are free to show it and free to see it. And that’s true.

But this ignores the way “the Church” actually works. The “un-official” rules are more significant in day-to-day life than any official ones. There is a sub-text the circulates throughout the LDS community that rules what actually happens. And, often, the “official” LDS leadership actually isn’t in control of these day-to-day cultural attitudes.

For example, the “official” Church really is in a death struggle with the FLDS (the polygamists). But the “official” Church can’t stamp them out, and some would say the “official” Church is even losing ground.

The most interesting thing about the “shunning” of September Dawn is that it happened. It doesn’t say anything, really, about the “official” LDS. It says something much more significant about the real LDS culture.