Alternate History

[Marduk]

The CSA mockumentary was very well done.

I'm finding it hard to suspend my disbelief because the commercial breaks last less than a minute

 

[catsmate]

The CSA mockumentary was very well done.

I'm finding it hard to suspend my disbelief because the commercial breaks last less than a minute

I found CSA amusing but I was annoyed by the silliness of the premise, that the Confederacy could overwhelm the USA.
Now I consider the CSA achieving independence, and probably been steamrollered by the USA when a WW1 analogue comes around, to be reasonably plausible but conquering the USA.

And yep the commercial breaks were rather short, but then maybe the CSA is better in some ways............

 

[catsmate]

OK, how about really bad AH's, the ones that make you cringe. Where the whole idea is just to allow the author to pontificate, usually about the One True Way (economic/political/social) and why everything would be perfect if only the USA embraced Libertarianism or dog fighting was encouraged.

 

[Brainache]

I liked Robert Silverberg's "Roma Eterna" stories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roma_Eterna

But I loved Stephen Baxter's Time's Tapestry books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_(Stephen_Baxter)

 

[DaleCoz]

Some AH books and resources:

Paul Melko has a decent AH book out: The Walls of the Universe. A guy gets tricked into jumping to an alternate universe by an alternate version of himself, and discovers that he can't get back, though he can jump to yet other universes. Good stuff except for the last 20-40 pages, which are nowhere near the same writing quality as the rest for some reason. A sequel is coming out later this year.

I'm not a great fan of Turtledove's recent stuff, but Ruled Britannia (The Spanish Armada succeeded, England is ruled by a Spanish puppet king) is quite good, though it goes on about 40 pages too long after the climax. SM Stirling's Sky People is okay (with a plot a little too small for the world he puts it in) and the sequel, In the Courts of the Crimson Kings, is absolutely great (though he does some weird stuff at the end). Both are set in a world where in the 1950s/60s we discovered that both Venus and Mars are not only inhabited, but inhabited by descendants of earth life, periodically brought over by some unknown intelligence that terraformed the planets. The setup lets Stirling do Edgar Rice Burroughs-style adventures on Mars and Venus with some fig-leaf of scientific plausibility.

Charles Stross's Merchant Princes series starts out strong, but the last two of the five books, and to some extent the third, are not up to the quality of the first two. His Laundry series is more secret history than alternate history, but it will probably appeal to a lot of alternate history fans. It's a strange but workable cross between Lovecraft, James Bond and Dilbert, with Lovecraftian monsters lurking just outside our world, and the right computer algorithm will let them in. The first Laundry novel has an internal AH where the Germans won World War II and lived (briefly) to regret it. Fun stuff.

A good source for the best alternate history of the year: The Sidewise Awards (Sidewise, not Sideways, as the judges will tell you in no uncertain terms). The judges do a pretty good job.

A good source for alternate history news and reviews: Alternate History Weekly Update. I'm new to this board (actually found it through a Google Alert on Alternate History), so I don't know if I can post a link, but a google search should find it.

There are huge alternate history forums at both AlternateHistory.com and .net, though they've been around long enough that most of the common alternate histories (Sealion, almost anything involving World War II on the eastern front) have been done there enough times that the old hands are intensely bored with them, and will tell you so bluntly.

Minor self-promotion alert: For the last 12 to 15 years I've done a sporadic (but usually around 5 times/year) alternate history newsletter (free and available online) with reviews, scenarios, novel excerpts, etc. The newsletters are usually equivalent to 25-40 printed pages. They're casual, labor of love stuff and some of the earlier ones badly need editing, though there is some good stuff in there. You can find them by googling Dale Cozort. I also have an Alternate History novel out, which I won't say anything more about because I suspect that doing so crosses the line into spam.

Amazon does have an alternate history best sellers list (top 100 sellers in alternate history), but frankly I wouldn't classify most of the top twenty or so books currently in it as alternate history. It's probably worth a glance though.

 

[catsmate]

Some AH books and resources:
Paul Melko has a decent AH book out: The Walls of the Universe. A guy gets tricked into jumping to an alternate universe by an alternate version of himself, and discovers that he can't get back, though he can jump to yet other universes. Good stuff except for the last 20-40 pages, which are nowhere near the same writing quality as the rest for some reason. A sequel is coming out later this year.

I must add that to my list, alas my favorite local bookshop closed before xmas and I haven't been ordering as much as I used to.
Plus Uchronia doesn't seen to be as updated as often as in the past.

I'm not a great fan of Turtledove's recent stuff, but Ruled Britannia (The Spanish Armada succeeded, England is ruled by a Spanish puppet king) is quite good, though it goes on about 40 pages too long after the climax.

I like that one, IMO Turtledove is at his best when he's not doing long series of novels. Though The War that Came Early isn't that bad, reminds me of some of your ideas, but the direction he's heading in seems rather iffy to me.

SM Stirling's Sky People is okay (with a plot a little too small for the world he puts it in) and the sequel, In the Courts of the Crimson Kings, is absolutely great (though he does some weird stuff at the end). Both are set in a world where in the 1950s/60s we discovered that both Venus and Mars are not only inhabited, but inhabited by descendants of earth life, periodically brought over by some unknown intelligence that terraformed the planets. The setup lets Stirling do Edgar Rice Burroughs-style adventures on Mars and Venus with some fig-leaf of scientific plausibility.

I went off Steve after he started the seemingly endless Emberverse series.
Conquistador and the Island in the Sea of Time series I did like.
The idea reminds me of Turtledove's A World Of Difference with its inhabited Mars analogue (Minerva) and competing US/Soviet missions.

Charles Stross's Merchant Princes series starts out strong, but the last two of the five books, and to some extent the third, are not up to the quality of the first two. His Laundry series is more secret history than alternate history, but it will probably appeal to a lot of alternate history fans. It's a strange but workable cross between Lovecraft, James Bond and Dilbert, with Lovecraftian monsters lurking just outside our world, and the right computer algorithm will let them in. The first Laundry novel has an internal AH where the Germans won World War II and lived (briefly) to regret it. Fun stuff.

I love the Laundry series, and the RPG, but I've been a CoC fan for ~25 years and and IT geek for as long. Plus I've worked in the civil service......
I agree with you on the Merchant Princes, it was an an excellent concept but it has dragged.
His novellas/short stories, like Colder War and Missile Gap are excellent. The former has the Cold War with Cthulhu-esque technomagic (and NB-36s) and seems to have inspired the Cold City/Hot War RPGs.
The latter is sort of AH, possibly in the far future, but has Yuri Gagarin commanding a huge, nuclear-powered aircraft carrying Ekranoplan exploring an Alderson disc .

Both end rather apocalyptically.

A good source for alternate history news and reviews: Alternate History Weekly Update. I'm new to this board (actually found it through a Google Alert on Alternate History), so I don't know if I can post a link, but a google search should find it.

Fifteen posts before you can post links here.
Alternate History Weekly Update

There are huge alternate history forums at both AlternateHistory.com and .net, though they've been around long enough that most of the common alternate histories (Sealion, almost anything involving World War II on the eastern front) have been done there enough times that the old hands are intensely bored with them, and will tell you so bluntly.

There's some wonderful stuff there, from Cromwell in the Americas to plausible re-writes of Stirling's Peshwar Lancers.

Minor self-promotion alert: For the last 12 to 15 years I've done a sporadic (but usually around 5 times/year) alternate history newsletter (free and available online) with reviews, scenarios, novel excerpts, etc. The newsletters are usually equivalent to 25-40 printed pages. They're casual, labor of love stuff and some of the earlier ones badly need editing, though there is some good stuff in there. You can find them by googling Dale Cozort. I also have an Alternate History novel out, which I won't say anything more about because I suspect that doing so crosses the line into spam.

Let me welcome you, I'm familiar with your scenarios and work, excellent stuff. I particularly like your changed weather at Dunkirk scenario. I also have Exchange.
Let me plug your site and novel.

Amazon does have an alternate history best sellers list (top 100 sellers in alternate history), but frankly I wouldn't classify most of the top twenty or so books currently in it as alternate history. It's probably worth a glance though.

Meh, I don't trust many of Amazon's lists, reviews or automatically generated "you might also like" lists.

 

[SpitfireIX]

OK, how about really bad AH's, the ones that make you cringe. Where the whole idea is just to allow the author to pontificate, usually about the One True Way (economic/political/social) and why everything would be perfect if only the USA embraced Libertarianism or dog fighting was encouraged.

Worst I've ever read is unquestionably Harry Harrison's Stars and Stripes Forever. I love AH, the American Civil War, and Great Britain, so a book where Britain gets involved in the ACW seemed like a natural, especially because I'd read and enjoyed several of the Stainless Steel Rat books when I was in high school and college. What an incredible disappointment. It was so bad that I didn't even read the other two books in the trilogy. The book contains several ridiculous plot twists, such as the North's and South's miraculously working out their differences, including slavery, in order to face the common British enemy (the British rape and pillage Galveston, Texas, mistaking it for a Union fort, thus leading to Britain's being at war with both sides). Also, the characterization and dialogue often don't ring true. From what I've read the other two books aren't any better.

Dishonorable mention goes to Harry Turtledove's Pearl Harbor series, which the author mercifully limited to only two books. The premise is that the Japanese not only attack Pearl Harbor, they also invade and conquer Oahu. The major problem is that the Japanese plan is hopelessly unrealistic; they use only two divisions of troops, which accompany the aircraft carriers. The carriers remain on station and provide all of the close-air support for the landings and subsequent campaign. Further detracting is the author's clear lack of knowledge and research on World War II naval operations; for example, he has the Japanese using Landing Signal Officers for carrier landings, and he refers to LSOs' signal paddles as "wig-wag flags."

The books are partially redeemed, however, by Turtledove's mostly realistic portrayal of what life under Japanese occupation would have been like, and several interesting viewpoint characters. One thing I did find humorous, however, is his inclusion of a non-viewpoint Morman naval aviator, whose characterization is unfailingly positive throughout both books. I can't help but think that this is an attempt to balance the generally negative depiction of Mormons in the Southern Victory series.

 

[catsmate]

Worst I've ever read is unquestionably Harry Harrison's Stars and Stripes Forever. I love AH, the American Civil War, and Great Britain, so a book where Britain gets involved in the ACW seemed like a natural, especially because I'd read and enjoyed several of the Stainless Steel Rat books when I was in high school and college. What an incredible disappointment. It was so bad that I didn't even read the other two books in the trilogy. The book contains several ridiculous plot twists, such as the North's and South's miraculously working out their differences, including slavery, in order to face the common British enemy (the British rape and pillage Galveston, Texas, mistaking it for a Union fort, thus leading to Britain's being at war with both sides). Also, the characterization and dialogue often don't ring true. From what I've read the other two books aren't any better.

Yeah that was fairly bad, good action but terrible dialogue, poor research, no understanding of technology or logistics and the characterisation was often just awful.

Eriksson invents tanks in the third book. Called tanks. For the invasion of Britain

Dishonorable mention goes to Harry Turtledove's Pearl Harbor series, which the author mercifully limited to only two books. The premise is that the Japanese not only attack Pearl Harbor, they also invade and conquer Oahu. The major problem is that the Japanese plan is hopelessly unrealistic; they use only two divisions of troops, which accompany the aircraft carriers. The carriers remain on station and provide all of the close-air support for the landings and subsequent campaign. Further detracting is the author's clear lack of knowledge and research on World War II naval operations; for example, he has the Japanese using Landing Signal Officers for carrier landings, and he refers to LSOs' signal paddles as "wig-wag flags."

The books are partially redeemed, however, by Turtledove's mostly realistic portrayal of what life under Japanese occupation would have been like, and several interesting viewpoint characters. One thing I did find humorous, however, is his inclusion of a non-viewpoint Morman naval aviator, whose characterization is unfailingly positive throughout both books. I can't help but think that this is an attempt to balance the generally negative depiction of Mormons in the Southern Victory series.

Yeah that series (and I'm also surprised he didn't do more books) could have do with more research, and an earlier PoD.

 

[Astrodude]

I found CSA amusing but I was annoyed by the silliness of the premise, that the Confederacy could overwhelm the USA.
Now I consider the CSA achieving independence, and probably been steamrollered by the USA when a WW1 analogue comes around, to be reasonably plausible but conquering the USA.

And yep the commercial breaks were rather short, but then maybe the CSA is better in some ways............

Well, they only need a relatively small amount of commercial breaks in that universe because the slave labor appears to keep costs down in that universe(although the CSA apologist admits that it's not to the CSA's economic advantage to have slavery.) In our universe, slavery has been shown to be an inferior economic system for net production than general freedom. To prove it, I'm pretty sure that the South grew more cotton under the reconstruction governments in 1875 than it did in 1860. I'm not sure on the exact date though.

Had Northern attitudes changed because of their war woes, the CSA could have possibly engulfed the entire country with British assistance and the CSA constitution would have probably been viewed as a giant amendment to the US Constitution, just as our Constitution is sometimes considered an amendment to the Articles of Confederation. Eventually the country would have turned into Haiti, but the mockumentary never got covered that far. I think many in New York City wanted to become part of New Jersey, and then secede from the Union with New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Also, keep in mind the growing Catholic population in the Northeast at the time. The Vatican, and many Catholic aristocrats, were pro-Confederacy and the Confederacy was even relatively pro-Roman Catholic. Jefferson Davis wanted to join the Jesuits as a kid. Several other leaders were open Roman Catholics like P.G.T. Beauregard. Also, many of the so called protestants in the south had gradually transformed their religion to make it a form of Catholicism; just a form that had a different pope officially. The South had largely become what's termed "Anglo-Catholic". This dynamic would have definitely influenced the attitudes of most immigrants in the Northeast. Had it not been for economic and legal necessity, I bet a large number of Union Catholics would have defected and fought for the Confederacy.

 

[jenspen]

Kingsley Amis wrote The Alteration - a history of a world in which the Reformation never happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Alteration

I read it back when it was published and had high hopes of it but can only remember being disappointed. Perhaps all alternative histories are disappointing. I like to make up my own.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Yeah that was fairly bad, good action but terrible dialogue, poor research, no understanding of technology or logistics and the characterisation was often just awful.

Eriksson invents tanks in the third book. Called tanks. For the invasion of Britain

Yeah that series (and I'm also surprised he didn't do more books) could have do with more research, and an earlier PoD.

I'd like to think that he realized that it wasn't very good, and thus decided to wind things up with the second book.

 

[EventHorizon]

Dishonorable mention goes to Harry Turtledove's Pearl Harbor series, which the author mercifully limited to only two books. The premise is that the Japanese not only attack Pearl Harbor, they also invade and conquer Oahu. The major problem is that the Japanese plan is hopelessly unrealistic; they use only two divisions of troops, which accompany the aircraft carriers. The carriers remain on station and provide all of the close-air support for the landings and subsequent campaign. Further detracting is the author's clear lack of knowledge and research on World War II naval operations; for example, he has the Japanese using Landing Signal Officers for carrier landings, and he refers to LSOs' signal paddles as "wig-wag flags."

The books are partially redeemed, however, by Turtledove's mostly realistic portrayal of what life under Japanese occupation would have been like, and several interesting viewpoint characters. One thing I did find humorous, however, is his inclusion of a non-viewpoint Morman naval aviator, whose characterization is unfailingly positive throughout both books. I can't help but think that this is an attempt to balance the generally negative depiction of Mormons in the Southern Victory series.

I really liked the Pearl Harbor series because of the part in bold.


I'm a big fan of the Southern Victory series, though as mentioned earlier the between the war stuff could have taken place in one book and there's absolutely no way the last series should have been 4 books. I actually re-read the series (I always find it interesting to re-read book series to see if I missed any foreshadowing) and I just couldn't get through the last series.

One other issue with Turtledove is that he may be good at the actual story, but he is kind of bad at distinguishing characters. There's generic soldiers, generic sailors, etc... They will often use the same phrases ("As a matter of fact, yes" being a big one). Turtledove himself even got his own characters mixed up once (George Enos Jr. and Sam Carsten I believe). There are other examples of overused metaphors and phrases as well. How many times do characters have spit flood into their mouths? I get it. The food smelled good. Did you have to use that phrase EVERY SINGLE TIME?!

Other than those minor issues I find the series as a whole very interesting. I like that the point of divergence was a very small thing but it changed so much. And because of that small change coupled with the parallels to what actually happened the world seems very believable and it's very scary in that way.

 

[catsmate]

I'd like to think that he realized that it wasn't very good, and thus decided to wind things up with the second book.

Meh, he hasn't done that elsewhere.

I really liked the Pearl Harbor series because of the part in bold.

The human side of the books is good, better than a lot of his other stuff. But I like a little more in my AH.

One other issue with Turtledove is that he may be good at the actual story, but he is kind of bad at distinguishing characters. There's generic soldiers, generic sailors, etc... They will often use the same phrases ("As a matter of fact, yes" being a big one). Turtledove himself even got his own characters mixed up once (George Enos Jr. and Sam Carsten I believe). There are other examples of overused metaphors and phrases as well. How many times do characters have spit flood into their mouths? I get it. The food smelled good. Did you have to use that phrase EVERY SINGLE TIME?!

Yeah this is noticeable, his dialogue frequently sucks.

Other than those minor issues I find the series as a whole very interesting. I like that the point of divergence was a very small thing but it changed so much. And because of that small change coupled with the parallels to what actually happened the world seems very believable and it's very scary in that way.

This is one of the things that most interests me about AH, the influence of tiny factors. OK a World War 1 was probably inevitable, but the battles, tactics, campaigns, technology, even combatants weren't certain. Why did it start in 1914 rather than 1898 or 1906 or 1878 or 1911? But there are plenty of small changes that could trigger a significant alteration; Dale's Dunkirk weather scenario, one of my all time favourites, or Churchill being killed in a road accident in 1931 (as nearly happened) or the non-discovery of the lost copy of Lee's Special Order 191.

 

[dudalb]

OK, how about really bad AH's, the ones that make you cringe. Where the whole idea is just to allow the author to pontificate, usually about the One True Way (economic/political/social) and why everything would be perfect if only the USA embraced Libertarianism or dog fighting was encouraged.

When I read that the writer of The Probablity Breach won an award for his book...but one that he had created himself....my eyes rolled.

 

[dudalb]

I like an awful lot of Harry Harrison's books, but agree he blew it bigtime with "The Star and Stripes Forever" series. I don't mind him portraying Victorian England as being greedy and expansionist, but I do have a problem with him protraying them as such total morons.

 

[Lamuella]

Voyage by Stephen Baxter is one of my favourites. a Right Stuff-esque novel about the Mars mission that could have taken place in the 1980s if circumstances had been different.

 

[catsmate]

I like an awful lot of Harry Harrison's books, but agree he blew it bigtime with "The Star and Stripes Forever" series. I don't mind him portraying Victorian England as being greedy and expansionist, but I do have a problem with him protraying them as such total morons.

Try Tsouras's Britannia's Fist trilogy (assuming book three arrives) it's far batter. Doesn't use the Trent affair as the divergence point (yah!), much better on politics (Russia and France) and logistics (how do you fight a war when you import the nitrates to make gunpowder?) plus better characterisation, less of the Ameriwank and silliness of Harrison.
Alas Solomon Andrews hasn't appeared yet. But the US submersibles have.

Voyage by Stephen Baxter is one of my favourites. a Right Stuff-esque novel about the Mars mission that could have taken place in the 1980s if circumstances had been different.

 

[hgc]

I haven't read much alternate history, but one I can recommend is Philip Roth's The Plot Against America. In it, Charles Lindbergh is elected President of the USA, and interesting things happen. The only problem is a rather silly denouement, but the book up until that point is quite good.

 

[Vortigern99]

TH White's Once and Future King reports that medieval history is a lie and that King Arthur actually lived in the 12th century. White's book tells the real story of what happened in those years, not all that made-up hogwash about Henry II!

 

[catsmate]

TH White's Once and Future King reports that medieval history is a lie and that King Arthur actually lived in the 12th century. White's book tells the real story of what happened in those years, not all that made-up hogwash about Henry II!

Like the original Blackadder.