• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

The sliding scale of alternate history hardness

Hendryk

Taken back control yet?
Published by SLP
Location
France
This is something I wrote years ago back when I was into TV Tropes:

Like other forms of Speculative Fiction, Alternate History varies in its inherent “hardness” with AH Fandom generally grading it by how “plausible” the AH is based on historical realism and verisimilitude. At the “hard” end of plausibility are well-researched pieces that take into account historical sources and trends, logical changes due to the Butterfly Effect, and try to produce allohistorical events that flow logically from the Point of Departure/Divergence PoD. At the “soft” end are works of pure Fantasy and Rule Of Cool, generally a result of Alien Space Bats.

While the line between “plausible” and not is subjective, the following five levels tend to encompass the general consensus in the online AH Fandom:

Type I - Hard Alternate History: These are works that adhere to very strict, even scientific standards in their plausibility. Research is often detailed and intensive, Butterflies are followed logically, and with attention to details, such as the economic or logistical feasibility of an invasion. At their best they set aside the personal “wants” and “if only's” of the author and try to accurately determine the most likely What If result of a PoD. In some cases they are arguably more “plausible” than actual history ! A majority of historical counter-factuals fall into this category. Alternate History Wanks very rarely fall into this category. Type I Alternate Histories are often “unsteered”, meaning that they have no predetermined outcome and simply follow the logical changes (“what if Lee won at Gettysburg?”).

Type II - Hard/Soft Alternate History: These are works that incorporate both Hard and Soft elements. Perhaps it is well researched and incorporates historical methodology, but leaves room for adventurous outcomes or Rule of Drama/Cool/Comedy. The author may take some liberties in following butterflies, such as allowing some post-PoD births or a measure of parallelism. Perhaps they've accelerated a certain technology in a way that's rather “convenient”, but doesn't strain the Willing Suspension Of Disbelief too much. Or perhaps the butterflies and methodology are sound, but obviously “steered” with a predetermined outcome (“I need a setting where an independent Confederate States faces off against the Union in a Great War analog, what PoD can I choose to get there realistically?”). Some counter-factuals may fall into this Type, such as those by historians with an obvious political bias or pet theory or ones that allow an improbable outcome to look at the ramifications in order to study a tangential area (for example allow for an “improbable” Japanese WWII victory scenario in order to study the cultural implications of such an event). A well-done Alternate History Wank can qualify here.

Type III - Soft Alternate History: These are works where the plausibility of the setting's alt-history is less important than setting up a world that fits the creator's artistic objectives. Research is often minimal to moderate and used simply to give some verisimilitude to the setting. Butterflies may be utterly ignored, politically correct history may make an appearance, and plausibility will take a back seat to Rule of Drama/Cool/Comedy. Perhaps parallelism has run to ridiculous levels or the author uses historical domain characters born way after the PoD (“I don't care if he was born centuries after the historical Fall of Rome, I want General Patton fighting the Modern Romans in Gaul!”). Perhaps the rate of technological growth is just too high. Perhaps the author's politics and desires so totally tint the work that it breaks any Willing Suspension Of Disbelief and turns it into an AH-themed Author Tract. Many Alternate History Wanks fall into this Type. Type III Alternate Histories are almost always “steered” (“okay, so I need a Confederate George Patton running a blitzkrieg through Stalinist China…”).

Type IV - Utterly Implausible AH: These are works that are so Soft that they ooze into a pool. Works that are so implausible as to be effectively impossible and so Soft as to prove impossible to take seriously. Works where research was so poor or ill-considered, author politics so prevalent, Butterflies so ignored, details (logistics, politics, etc.) so overlooked, often purposefully, that there's no way anyone with even a passing familiarity with the history can take it seriously. Infamously implausible scenarios like Operation Sealion - Nazi Germany's plan to invade Britain during World War II, which has become Memetic Mutation because of this - to be one of the worst military plans ever conceived (it would have been a catastrophic defeat for Germany that would have effectively destroyed the Wehrmacht and allowed the Allies to win up to a year earlier) - are often placed here, as are utterly implausible technology jumps, such as Aztecs developing breech loading rifles in 1420. Over-the-top totally ludicrous Alternate History Wanks are usually put here. Obviously a lot of YMMV here. One good “rule of thumb” is if a PoD necessary to make the outcome plausibly happen is so far in the past that Butterflies would totally negate the very events that created the setting (such as a PoD to give Hitler the fleet he needed to invade the UK would need to be before WWI, probably negating the rise of Nazism), then it may be a Type IV. Note: These works are often defined as Alien Space Bats; in fact the original term “Alien Space Bats” was coined to refer to these type of implausible works !

Type X - Alien Space Bats and Fantastical AH: In contrast with Type IV, these works are 'deliberately' designed as pure fantasy, typically following the Rule Of Cool. Some sort of Applied Phlebotinum or Sufficiently Advanced Aliens or Negative Space Wedgie or blatant magic causes a PoD that completely changes everything. What if aliens invade Earth during World War II? What if time traveling modern Cherokee give assault rifles to their distant ancestors in 1820? What if the modern island of Manhattan was time-ported to the Mediterranean in Roman times? A sub-type of this rewrites actual history in fantastic terms: what if George Washington's army used nature magic to fight necromantic redcoats? Ironically, many Type X works can become very “Hard” following an initial fantastical PoD, diligently using historical research and Butterflies to see what would logically happen if the Cherokees really did have Kalashnikov assault rifles in 1820. Type X works can be “steered” or “unsteered”.
 
Last edited:
Sounds good for broad strokes, but I find there's a lot of cross-pollination and it's hard to classify. I think the water is muddied by depending on how plausible the author thinks they are". I think my biggest specific sticking point is Sealion in Type IV. Let me explain why.

Like my "Favorite" subject, WW3. A very "Icelandic" story that seems like a type II (which I think AANW qualifies as-it's well researched, but Calbear admitted he made the USSR fall through plot fiat to show the horrors of Generalplan Ost). Is this kind of story a Type II because it combines "soft" contrivances like how the war starts with supervillain Soviets and stays conventional with "hard" factors like ridiculously meticulous accounting of every division and regiment from Lisbon to the Bering Strait? Or is it a Type IV because the contrivances are themselves implausible to victorious Sealion extents? (In fact, you could make a victorious Sealion story with ridiculous rivet-counting detail that's nominally accurate-is that a Type II or IV)?

Or a Type I story that I'd call "divergence-first" and has a lot of meticulous research towards its main subject matter, but stretches outside with a butterfly that's implausible with either its cause or absence and where it's clear the author was just winging it? Is that still accurate enough to reach the "top" of the scale.

Stuff like this, along with legitimate plausibility arguments, is why I prefer stylistic categories to "technical hard" ones.
 
Great idea! I think if people would start a TL by making clear what they objective is in terms of 'hardness' (frasing) there would be a lot less conflicts in threads (talking about ah.com). I think this scale would be better though if there would be no mention of the level of research as it sounds a bit biased :)
 
I would argue that "level of research" is perpendicular to both a) the plausibility of the timeline and b) the amount of detail actually shown. The author may well know the location and TOC of every regiment, but that doesnt need to be spelled out in story. And Azure, for example, would appear to be very well researched, but the plausibility of an ASB sending the UK ISOT is... low. I think I prefer Collier's categorization, if I was forced to chose one.
 
Type I - Hard Alternate History: These are works that adhere to very strict, even scientific standards in their plausibility. Research is often detailed and intensive, Butterflies are followed logically, and with attention to details, such as the economic or logistical feasibility of an invasion.

At their best they set aside the personal “wants” and “if only's” of the author and try to accurately determine the most likely What If result of a PoD.

In some cases they are arguably more “plausible” than actual history ! A majority of historical counter-factuals fall into this category. Alternate History Wanks very rarely fall into this category.

Type I Alternate Histories are often “unsteered”, meaning that they have no predetermined outcome and simply follow the logical changes (“what if Lee won at Gettysburg?”).

Type II - Hard/Soft Alternate History: These are works that incorporate both Hard and Soft elements. Perhaps it is well researched and incorporates historical methodology, but leaves room for adventurous outcomes or Rule of Drama/Cool/Comedy.

The author may take some liberties in following butterflies, such as allowing some post-PoD births or a measure of parallelism. Perhaps they've accelerated a certain technology in a way that's rather “convenient”, but doesn't strain the Willing Suspension Of Disbelief too much. Or perhaps the butterflies and methodology are sound, but obviously “steered” with a predetermined outcome (“I need a setting where an independent Confederate States faces off against the Union in a Great War analog, what PoD can I choose to get there realistically?”).

Some counter-factuals may fall into this Type, such as those by historians with an obvious political bias or pet theory or ones that allow an improbable outcome to look at the ramifications in order to study a tangential area (for example allow for an “improbable” Japanese WWII victory scenario in order to study the cultural implications of such an event). A well-done Alternate History Wank can qualify here.

I think a lot of space TLs on AH.com are somewhere between these two.
 
I think this would make a good article for the Blog site. Obviously, I can't speak for Meadow, but would you be interested in submitting it as an article?
 
Back
Top