The Borders of Genre: The Glorification of Fascism Within Alternate History

[Hendryk]

Fundamentally, I'm arguing that the difference between the major Allied powers and the Axis powers was one of degree, not of kind, and that both you and the those who fought for the Axis share common humanity, and that this notion is deeply distressing to a lot of people here, and it permeates the discourse. As someone with family from a country were the Americans gleefully slaughtered civilians, it's a double standard that is deeply unpleasant to me.

It's a good point, and it behooves us as writers of historical fiction to make sure we don't whitewash the Allies just because the Axis was worse. In the case of France, it's infuriating how many of the same people who fought to liberate their homeland from foreign occupation then went on without a second thought to fight for keeping other countries under foreign occupation. If OTL was fictional, having Setif take place on the very same day as VE would be seen as too on the nose.

The YouTube series World War Two by Indy Neidell and Spartacus Olsson takes pain to emphasize that the Allies committed a fair number of atrocities themselves, and since they follow the timeline of the war week by week, these days they talk about the 1943 famine in Bengal.

 

[Warthog]

This is a very interesting discussion, and appreciating the honesty, clarity of thought and writing here

 

[Warthog]

There is, I guess, a qualitative difference in evil between an empire seeking to subjugate peoples, and an empire seeking to extermination peoples. The Nazis, of course, sought to do both.

The Allies were predominantly empires of the subjugation type, but this doesn't mean they were innocent of genocide-by-murder in imperial expansion, of which there were also numerous cases. It could also be argued that the United States and Britian (notably in Australia) committed genocide-by-murder until the native nations were sufficiently subjugated to be readily oppressed (which is more or less what "pacified" means). The same I think is true for Britain, France and Spain in the Caribbean

 

[Jared]

I mean, in the end, it's "I don't want to think of my granddad as a racist murderer."

Speaking only on a personal level, I've never had any problem knowing that my grandparents were racist (though not, as far as I know, murderers).

I know what both of my grandfathers used to say about Japanese and German people - both of them served in WW2, though in noncombatant roles - and they never changed that view throughout their lives. Fortunately I never needed to find out what they thought about having a half-Japanese granddaughter-in-law.

 

[Warthog]

In the context of this thread, Nazi or CSA victories are, of course, AH, and that's why we're discussing that many timelines celebrate them, which is a problem, where inadvertent or deliberate.

British, French or US imperial victories are OTL. And of course it's a major topic in history and education and culture how this oppression is presented.

 

[Charles EP M.]

"The empires/America did appalling things" is a mainstream approach in historical fiction, isn't it?

 

[David Flin]

After a while, if the terms are broadly enough defined, one ends up with: "Every regime and every person does and did and will do appalling things."

Which perhaps loses a bit of nuance.

 

[Warthog]

"The empires/America did appalling things" is a mainstream approach in historical fiction, isn't it?

Sure. I'm most familiar with Ousmane, Achebe and Ngugi but there's obviously equivalents in other parts of the world.

 

[Charles EP M.]

Though I guess historical fiction does repeatedly have the same 'our hero isn't one of the bad ones and is honourable' thing we've been dunking on, though to a lesser extent than Nice Guy Rommel. Even without imperialism - a story about a union leader in the 50s probably won't have the lead support a 'colour bar' like really happened in Bristol, unless the story is specifically about the bus boycotts and he's the antihero. He'll likely be handily not racist.

 

[I Saw A Red Sky]

Though I guess historical fiction does repeatedly have the same 'our hero isn't one of the bad ones and is honourable' thing we've been dunking on, though to a lesser extent than Nice Guy Rommel. Even without imperialism - a story about a union leader in the 50s probably won't have the lead support a 'colour bar' like really happened in Bristol, unless the story is specifically about the bus boycotts and he's the antihero. He'll likely be handily not racist.

Bold imagination thinking up a story where a union leader's a protagonist for once.

 

[Coiler]

Though I guess historical fiction does repeatedly have the same 'our hero isn't one of the bad ones and is honourable' thing we've been dunking on,

1: The "there are people who are noticeably better than the rest" is a thing in historical settings (for an extreme example, see Hugh Thompson at My Lai)
2: In literature, having a sympathetic protagonist is a huge sell. The number of people who will read/watch/play a story of a good person (by their standards) in a bad environment is much higher than the number who'd be attracted to a leftist's professor's diatribe wrapped in a fig leaf narrative.

 

[Warthog]

He'll likely be handily not racist.

Or more often no POC in the story

 

[Charles EP M.]

2: In literature, having a sympathetic protagonist is a huge sell. The number of people who will read/watch/play a story of a good person (by their standards) in a bad environment is much higher than the number who'd be attracted to a leftist's professor's diatribe wrapped in a fig leaf narrative.

I was thinking more contemporary fiction or non-fiction accounts & memoirs. Flame in the Streets would be a hard sell now, if it was a historical tale of race relations in the early 1960s and all the dialogue & views (by characters meant to come around later), were just as written in the early 1960s. Or if Spike Milligan's comedic war memoirs weren't real ones written decades ago a writer would quietly excise certain historical views & jokes because we don't want to have them randomly pop up. You have to dial it back or historical fiction will be grindingly miserable and nobody will read it.

 

[Charles EP M.]

Or more often no POC in the story

I think that's less likely these days, especially with film & TV. You'd probably have black actors cast in roles and then a depressing series of editorials questioning Why Are They There, Is This Woke even if they were doing the most historically accurate job.

 

[David Flin]

I think that's less likely these days, especially with film & TV. You'd probably have black actors cast in roles and then a depressing series of editorials questioning Why Are They There, Is This Woke even if they were doing the most historically accurate job.

I will upset @Gary Oswald and point to YA TV. When there is a group of 3 or 4, at least one will be of South Asian origin and one a different POC. Sarah Jane Adventures, MI High, Raven, etc.

Adult equivalent shows are more patchy in this regard.

 

[I Saw A Red Sky]

1: The "there are people who are noticeably better than the rest" is a thing in historical settings (for an extreme example, see Hugh Thompson at My Lai)
2: In literature, having a sympathetic protagonist is a huge sell. The number of people who will read/watch/play a story of a good person (by their standards) in a bad environment is much higher than the number who'd be attracted to a leftist's professor's diatribe wrapped in a fig leaf narrative.

I dunno, I do enjoy a protagonist who's a bad person in a bad environment who does horrible things but you still root for them. Just better the further back you go cause the closer it cuts to contexts like Nazis or US in Vietnam and such they're just toooooo evil and real to be charming.

 

[Death's Companion]

I think that's less likely these days, especially with film & TV. You'd probably have black actors cast in roles and then a depressing series of editorials questioning Why Are They There, Is This Woke even if they were doing the most historically accurate job.

I remember reading a few years back that these days the stats are that black people are actually over represented on TV compared to their share of the population. Though in terms of leading roles they are still very hard done by.

Asian actors OTOH are both under represented and often limited to certain roles and from certain communities.

Most big budget shows will have some representation among the main cast and a slew of background characters. Low hanging fruit as it were. Same with women speaking to each other about things other than men. The most glaring symptoms are commonly treated in pretty much any well written or produced work...but the ceiling has been raised rather than fully removed.

 

[Gary Oswald]

I will upset @Gary Oswald and point to YA TV. When there is a group of 3 or 4, at least one will be of South Asian origin and one a different POC. Sarah Jane Adventures, MI High, Raven, etc.

Adult equivalent shows are more patchy in this regard.

For the record I'm a big fan of YA TV, and the Sarah Jane Adventures in particular. I watch more media with my nephews than by myself, and a lot of it is brilliant.

I just think sturgeons law and the commerical pressures of producing quantity over quality still applies and so a lot of it is instead awful.

In the larger argument, I'm with @Death's Companion. If you can't draw a line between the Nazis and the British Empire cos the difference is too subtle, then you equally can't draw a line between the British Empire and the Maratha Empire or the Marathas and a pre state tribe. They're all brutal, just on different scales. And yeah, sure but the scale matters.

 

[Death's Companion]

I will upset @Gary Oswald and point to YA TV. When there is a group of 3 or 4, at least one will be of South Asian origin and one a different POC. Sarah Jane Adventures, MI High, Raven, etc.

Adult equivalent shows are more patchy in this regard.

I don't think this is particularly true anymore.
As I said it's pretty much a given in shows from the last few years that the cast will have minorities in it.

BBC's casting between its adult and children's programming does not noticeably differ I don't think.

 

[David Flin]

I don't think this is particularly true anymore.
As I said it's pretty much a given in shows from the last few years that the cast will have minorities in it.

BBC's casting between its adult and children's programming does not noticeably differ I don't think.

You could be right. In which case, it is an interesting example of the adult following the lead of the YA.