What's the prevailing opinion about alternate history?

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

I've enjoyed several alternate history novels. A good author's note at the end is a good idea...as is also true for (comparatively) true historical novels.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

Tell me a good story and don't insult my general historical knowledge and I'm good. Mind you, I expect any indepth historical knowledge to be insulted, so that doesn't phase me much--but general knowledge (ie--if Hollywood gets it basically right, you'd better too), the book is a wallbanger.

By alternate history, do you mean,"what if…"? As in, "What if Napoleon had won at Waterloo?" or "What if Henry VIII never divorced Catherine of Aragon and the Protestant Reformation never made it to England?" Fine, but a lot of work is needed on your part.

If you mean "Can you have people behaving as if there were no hard feelings after the French Revolution?" probably not.

I've always enjoyed the "what-if" story. One of the first e-books I read was "The Southern Cross," about the Confederacy developing a powered dirigible during the US Civil War.

What's the forum?

Sorry, Eddy, I didn't mean to sound snotty. I think alternate history is fascinating, but I also think it's really hard to make it convincing. You have to keep fighting against what people "know" happened, especially if you set your story on a broad stage. It's easier to write variants that don't actually change the course of history, like having Edward II escape and living out his life as a hermit in Italy.

Lil said:

Sorry, Eddy, I didn't mean to sound snotty. I think alternate history is fascinating, but I also think it's really hard to make it convincing. You have to keep fighting against what people "know" happened, especially if you set your story on a broad stage. It's easier to write variants that don't actually change the course of history, like having Edward II escape and living out his life as a hermit in Italy.

Click to expand...

I think that it should be acknowledged that alternate history is equally related to SFF and historical fiction, it is after all a recognised subgenre of Scifi. And there are of course different types of alt history. The premise can be simple a simple what if question, what if same-sex marriage had been made legal 400 years ago instead of recently? Or something like, with same-sex marriage legal for the last 300 years, how are reproductive sciences different than this timeline and how are these engineered members of society treated?

One posits a social change, and the other a huge leap in science based on the 16th century proccupation with legitimate heirs. The social change prompts the scientific one, and in turn that prompts another social question..

Lillith1991 said:

I think that it should be acknowledged that alternate history is equally related to SFF and historical fiction,, it is after all a recognised subgenre of Scifi. And there are of course different types of alt history.

The premise can be simple a simple what if question, what if same-sex marriage had been made legal 400 years ago instead of recently? Or something like, with same-sex marriage legal for the last 300 years, how are reproductive sciences different than this timeline? How are these engineered members of society treated?

One posits a social change, and the other a huge leap in science based on the 16th century proccupation with legitimate heirs. The social change prompts the scientific one, and in turn that prompts another social question.

Click to expand...

Well to me alternate history is one of the strands of science fiction, it that both offer imagined events so we can examine our current state of being.

whereas historical fiction, does not tend to offer a history which is fictional, but rather an imagined story describing the imagined impact actual events had on different peoples.

Hanson said:

Well to me alternate history is one of the strands of science fiction, it that both offer imagined events so we can examine our current state of being.

whereas historical fiction, does not tend to offer a history which is fictional, but rather an imagined story describing the imagined impact actual events had on different peoples.

Click to expand...

I agree. Without the introduced vering off course from the main flow of history, then it becomes historical fiction instead of speculative fiction. Now, that does make it more difficult for say someone who's main reading fair are historicals than someone who reads more fantasy and scifi to suspend disbelief, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. There's a reason these novels are mainly sold with SFF though, and that is the changes are often science related in some way.

I read more SFF than HF, but I love both. For an Alt. History novel I expect most of the information to be accurate, and SFF inspired bits to seem plausible for the story. For a straight up HF novel I expect everything to be accurate.

gothicangel said:

I just read CJ Sansom's Dominion, and I enjoyed it well enough. The basic plot is 'what would have happened if Britain surrendered after Dunkirk. Not sure if I agree with some of his ideas (that the USSR collapsed in the 60s/Cuban Crisis never happened etc.)

Click to expand...

I just read this one too and it's the first alternate history I've read. I think what caught my attention was the phrase 'what if Hitler had won?' I was curious to see what the writer would do with the material. I wasn't sure I'd like it or that it would be believable but despite my reservations I thought it was fairly well done so I'll probably read more alternate history.

I want both the broad brush strokes and the tiny details to support the alternative timeline. I want the Point of Departure (from real history) to be plausible.

Sometimes that's easy. There are sooooo many different ways the Norman Invasion, frex, could have failed. Sometimes it's hard. Not having the Industrial Revolution happen. That would take a lot of suspension of my disbelief and superb writing to pull off.

Alternatehistory.com timelines seem to cluster around a few well-trod events and the more outlying PODs and timelines aren't pursued as much. It got boring for me after a while and I haven't been back in ages. But good alternate history, like good writing anywhere, is very interesting.

For a horrifyingly plausible WWII alternate timeline, try the Small Change books by Jo Walton.

ishtar'sgate said:

I just read this one too and it's the first alternate history I've read. I think what caught my attention was the phrase 'what if Hitler had won?' I was curious to see what the writer would do with the material. I wasn't sure I'd like it or that it would be believable but despite my reservations I thought it was fairly well done so I'll probably read more alternate history.

Click to expand...

Same here, this was my first alt-hisfic. My Mam loves his Shardlake books (think it might be a while before I read another one of his books. .)

IMO, alternate history can be an interesting and illuminating exercise if whoever is doing it has a good understanding of the real history & historical processes. Alt history can also be used as the background for good fiction. But to be good, whether or not it foregrounds its alt-historical nature & the point-of-departure (which is optional), alt-historical fiction has to meet the same standards as other fiction, namely a good story that engages me as a story, not as a textbook-with-dialog.

I don't think I've got around to reading any, but Stephen King's JFK book is on my tbr list. I mean I even bought it for my husband who I think has read it twice now, and for my Dad, but my tbr list is crazy.
(Sorry I realize that's not the sort of post a buff really wants to read here, but it's the truth. lol I loved history in school and love fantasy so a bit funny I realize I've never read any.

Eddy Rod-Kubry said:

I'm curious to know what you guys think about it, and what your experiences with it have been, if any. I am a member of an alternate history forum, and the writing there is more textbook-like in what we call time lines. I, like most others there, do it for fun, which allows us some flexibility.

Anyway, thoughts?

Click to expand...

They can be a good read if they're written well, they have an interesting premise, and they aren't too gimmicky.

I wouldn't try my hand at writing one myself, because I find actual history pretty interesting as it is, but I'd certainly read it.

Eddy Rod-Kubry said:

I'm curious to know what you guys think about it, and what your experiences with it have been, if any. I am a member of an alternate history forum, and the writing there is more textbook-like in what we call time lines. I, like most others there, do it for fun, which allows us some flexibility.

Anyway, thoughts?

Click to expand...

I personally prefer alternate history where someone goes back in time and screws with the timeline. Like 1632, or Island In The Sea Of Time. For stories where something just happens differently and you extrapolate from there, it has to be a significant and interesting change, or it's just historical fiction with errors.

Angry Guy said:

I personally prefer alternate history where someone goes back in time and screws with the timeline. Like 1632, or Island In The Sea Of Time. For stories where something just happens differently and you extrapolate from there, it has to be a significant and interesting change, or it's just historical fiction with errors.

Click to expand...

I tried to read one called Romanista, which I didn't like. The plot was the idea what if Rome hadn't fallen, but that was all that had changed. The author hadn't accounted for the Reformation (which I think would have still happened), and that a Roman society would have still had an Enlightenment, that the could have turned away from blood sports and the death penalty.

I read a couple of books by John Maddox Roberts where the premise was that Hannibal had won, and the Romans went into exile. Then they came back.

It worked, I think, very well. Partly because it wasn't covering centuries of time. The victory of Carthage wasn't affecting modern Europe. In only a generation, the Carthaginian victory was going to be reversed. And partly because the author knew his stuff. That last bit is every bit as important for alternate history as it is for historical fiction.

I know I'm preaching to the choir, but too often I've encountered writers who say, "Oh, I don't have to bother with the research. It's Alternate History."