Previous Entry | Next Entry

why I don't write alternate history

  • Nov. 27th, 2006 at 12:14 PM
drive train _ netcurmudgeon
Because I can't help but think that it's way too much work.

For example, if I were actually concerned about a plausible alternate history here, I couldn't call this thing a zeppelin, nor could I name it the Andrea Dorea, because there would be no Andrea Doria, nor would there be a Ferdinand von Zeppelin. Nor could I have the Shakespeare and/or Marlowe quotes I've used in a couple of these. Nor would there be any reason at all to have a Victoria or a Napoleon cognate, all of which figure in my setting. As does a French revolution, and a city of Boston, and all sorts of other things that wouldn't actually exist, or if they did, would exist in unrecognizable shapes and sizes.

Also, the names of everything would be different, the languages would be different, just unimaginably different. And that conceit where familiar historical persons show up slightly recast? Never happen: they'd never get born.

But since what I'm actually writing is fantasy, not any academic exploration of how the history of the world would be different if magic worked in certain limited ways, I don't have to worry about that stuff. Because I realize just how ridiculous it would be.

See, and once I start thinking about all the things I can't do because the world would be different, I never get anywhere.

.
  • Mood: optimistic
  • Music:Paul Simon - The Rhythm of the Saints

Comments

( Leave a comment )
[info]mishamish wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 05:25 pm (UTC)
I'm having a similar problem with a world I'm currently trying to nail down in my head (the one I glancingly mentioned earlier this morning). Only my problem is A) how to make it enough like our current world to make it recognizable, and B) how to make it different enough that I can play in it. Oh, and of course, C) How to make thread the needle between unique-but-resonate place names while not making them TOO obviously referential to existing places *AND* steer clear of other fictional names that are similarly referential (in this case, the RPG 7th Sea... because it has already done what I want to do SO FREAKIN' WELL!!)
| Reply | Thread
[info]dsgood wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 05:28 pm (UTC)
However: Given an extremely large (or perhaps infinite) number of alternate worlds, there would be some which will be improbable enough to be so close to ours in certain ways.
| Reply | Thread
[info]skidspoppe wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 05:31 pm (UTC)
Screw it...I say do it and then create a whole fictional history for this universe's Andrea Doria (which, of course, involves drug running, mandolin playing and crossbow firing)
| Reply | Thread
[info]desperance wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 05:49 pm (UTC)
Oh, hell - let's just live in a universe where all possible universes also exist, so that you can too have a world with both Andrea Dorea and magic, why not? And call it alternate history if you want to, and don't otherwise. It's a richer world if we have these things, and a poorer one without.

We all set our comfort-monitor where we feel comfortable. Me, I wrote a whole series about the Crusades without actually using the word crusade (L crux, a cross, not an appropriate symbol for an otherworld religion) - but I have also read stories set in the Crusades which invoked a degree of magic that would certainly have cancelled out Christianity if you wanted to carry it back in time, but hey. Good story. Here is my disbelief, and see how I suspend it...
| Reply | Thread
[info]carolhelga wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 06:09 pm (UTC)
Wouldn't that depend on where the tangent takes off from? If you have it after our WWII, you could indeed have Andrea Doria as a zeppelin, couldn't you?

Of course, any alternative history type thing is all in the imagination, anyway. :D
| Reply | Thread
[info]dancinghorse wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 06:24 pm (UTC)
Harry Turtledove (who ought to know) told me the secret to successful alternate history as a literary genre is Keep It Simple, Stupid. One big change and a selection of small changes. Don't go too far and don't push readers' historical knowledge too hard. He'd approve of the zeppelin Andrea Doria. That would fit his view of how alternate history, the genre, should work.

I'm not sure I agree completely, but his sales figures indicate that a large number of readers believe he's right.
| Reply | Thread
[info]matociquala wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 06:29 pm (UTC)
*nod* Harry is good at his job. And a gentleman, to boot.

This is why I don't write rigorous alternate history. Because if I tried, I would start questioning everything, and you'd never get the book written.

And yanno, Andrea Doria was a pretty interesting guy. He deserves a zeppelin.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]princejvstin wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 11:46 pm (UTC)
It would be totally in the Turtledovian Tradition of AH to do that.

Yes, I know Turtledove whet his sword on De Camp's sharpening stone, but Dr. T is IMO the best, or at least the most prolifically successful AH writer *today*.

I'd love to meet him someday.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]stwish wrote:
Nov. 27th, 2006 06:39 pm (UTC)
In his first book,. (i think) The case of the "Toxic Spell Dump" the towns in California were like, St Joseph, Angeles City.. and so on..( i said Like, so dont yell at me) It's a funny conceit.

I also have a New Amsterdam, only its Nieuw Nederlandts (Nederlandten?) It gets tricky real quick.. Best to Keep It Simple Stupid.. But, as they say, when in doubt, have a sword fight.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]hamadryad11 wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 02:54 am (UTC)
Why?

I mean, why would all those people and things not have existed?
| Reply | Thread
[info]matociquala wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 02:58 am (UTC)
Okay, say in 1776 there's no American revolution. Everything changes at that point. People who would have married don't marry. Children who would have been born never get born. People who would have died have children. Borders are different. Place names are different. Within fifty years, the world as we know it is a very very different place.

google "chaos theory" and "butterfly effect" for some explanation of how this works.

| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]hamadryad11 wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 03:01 am (UTC)
Ah. OK, pretty big change, that. I wasn't sure just how big a change you were getting at. If you're writing a story set in what is now the U.S., and there was never a revolution, it would have a really profound impact that would be hard to wrap one's mind around. On the other hand, if it were set someplace else, it might not be a problem.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]matociquala wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 03:04 am (UTC)
French revolution, British Empire, Canada, Quebec, Spanish colonies in America, slave trade, King Cotton, etc etc etc. Everything changes. *g*
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]hamadryad11 wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 03:13 am (UTC)
Hmm. I don't see why the French revolution, expansion of the British Empire, Canada, or the slave trade wouldn't have occurred without the American revolution. I don't think everything would necessarily change.

But there probably wouldn't be Laura Secord chocolate and that makes me sad. :(
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]matociquala wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 03:17 am (UTC)
*g* Thomas Jefferson was one of the behind the scenes instigators of the French Revolution.

I didn;t say they wouldn't have occurred. I said they would be *different.*
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]hamadryad11 wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 04:07 am (UTC)
Oh right. You did say different. I should have paid more attention. Still, I think a writer could plausibly make them very similar. I think that's the fun part about alternate history - figuring out how to fit in the parts you want to keep with the parts that have to change in a believable way. Yeah, OK, I might have a strange idea of what's fun.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]pentane wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 02:03 pm (UTC)
Chaos Theory also tells us that "stable" systems can deal with small perturbations and will push themselves toward the stable state. Imagine if your heartbeat was as unstable as you make history out to be ;)

Seriously, though, my family was dirt farmers in that era. If there was no Revolution, men would've still met (probably the same) women and had (more or less) the same children. They'd just be paying taxes to and following the laws of a different country.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]matociquala wrote:
Nov. 28th, 2006 02:16 pm (UTC)
The "more or less the same children" thing is where your postulate breaks down. Also, the assumption that the same people would have married, which you can't, especially not when you're talking about wars.

(Or you've never spoken to a woman whose fiance or husband was killed in WWII or Vietnam, and whose life changed dramatically because of it?)

Wander through history, and see how many persons who had some significant impact (cultural, scientific, militarily) were born nobody in particular.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]dershem wrote:
Nov. 29th, 2006 02:43 am (UTC)
Well, if you look at it honestly, all fiction is alternate history. It's only the really self-conscious kind that wears the label.
| Reply | Thread
( Leave a comment )

Profile

me and a troll
[info]matociquala
it's a great life, if you don't weaken
Elizabeth Bear Dot Com

Latest Month

July 2009
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

View All Archives

Links

Tags

View my Tags page

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lizzy Enger