Alternate timelines - What can you mess with???

Jammill Khursheed

Smell your own dam finger
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
146
Hi all...


Just a quick question, most of which is in the title of the thread, but, what real world events is it okay to reference in alternate timelines?

I appreciate that a lot of the views on this are going to be coloured by personal experiences and preferences, but what would fellow chroners consider to be taboo?

I know I got slammed in some quarters because of a script excerpt I posted where a militaristic re-formed commonwealth has re-invaded Ireland (mainly to use a garrison in case of a naval invasion from the US, but ostensibly to restore order following the outbreak of the troubles in Northern Ireland in the early 70's.)

I just don't see how that could be considered near-blasphemy when its okay for X-Men and lots of other things to use world war II and the concentration camps for what is basically a comic-book story... To me it seems like more than six million people rounded up and gassed/worked to death would be more troublesome to reference than a few hundred people killed in what is basically a small scale revolutionary conflict...

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated...


Jammill
 
Nothing is taboo. It's the way you use it. If, for example, you airbrushed the Holocaust out of history in order to make the Nazis the good guys, that would be amazingly offensive and bad. And if your alternate timeline is even more colonialist than real history, then that too would be bad.
 
Hey Jammill,

To give the simple answer, I'd say that if handled well then anything is game, so to speak.

However not knowing your circumstances, were you criticised/slammed for the idea specifically or was it really for something else?
 
Hmm. Some exaggeration here if you are referring to the reception to your piece in Critiques here on Chrons. No one "slammed" you -- we merely pointed out that events in NI were too recent for the whole thing to sit comfortably here in the UK, not least as it would be seen to be referencing the Troubles even if that was not your intention. It would necessarily raise a lot of hackles and therefore lead to more difficulties in your selling the work. It's up to you how much value you put on that.

You can re-invent what history you like, but you can't expect people to be happy if they or their families have been caught up in events which you appear to be trivialising. So as far as you're concerned "a few hundred people killed in... a small scale revolutionary conflict" might be nothing worth getting het up about. To those whose husbands/fathers/mothers/children were killed -- and who are still mourning their losses -- this will come over as appalling insensitivity, if not worse.

There is no taboo. If you want to write an alternative history in which a child by the name of McCann is kidnapped from a resort while her parents are dining, or the story of a prophet who comes out of the desert to form a religion which several hundred years later leads to adherents flying planes into skyscrapers, do so. Just don't expect them to be well received by those who are still affected or who have identities bound up with those histories.
 
I'm in agreement with the Judge on this one, although I haven't read your excerpt in the critiques section.

I would advise caution mainly because I have had first hand experience of people discussing and 'making up stories' of things based on what they have seen on TV or read in books and I can tell you it is irksome. For example, I was approached in the street by a student protesting about the war in Iraq. Fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. He then proceeded to tell me graphic details of what was going on which was where I got p'ed off. The reason? I had been there and seen it myself and this guy clearly had not - the things he said were nothing short of sensationalised propeganda that he had seen on TV or read in tabloid newspapers. It was clear that he had no real understanding and had no credible sources or indeed carried out any real research at all. I was deeply offended not just by his own sheer ignorance, but by the fact he was spouting it on the street to anyone who would listen, and many people would believe him and the thought of that physically turned my stomach.


I'm not saying don't do it just please, please be aware that if it is a recent event, you need to get the detail absolutely nailed on and do it justice or else it will offend people who were involved or can remember being there. Just be respectfull, neutral, honest and above all accurate.

Good luck Jammil, you have a lot of hard work ahead of you!
 
If your novel involves religion or politics then you are bound to upset at least someone. If you upset too many people then you have to keep in mind that those people are potential readers you have lost. If you don't care about that then you can write whatever you like. You may decide that you don't want those people as readers. Maybe you wish to make a political statement. Maybe you aren't looking for commercial success. I don't think anyone here can tell you what to write because we can never know your own mind. I'd also agree with Hammerhead and iansales though, if you do wish to go down that road, make sure you research your subject very carefully and completely, otherwise it will just appear crass.
 
Thanks for your advice so far, and Judge, yeah maybe I was being a little melodramatic with my use of the word 'slammed' but I did seem to offend people when that was not my intention and I had no idea it would rankle some people that much (don't worry in a moderator-sense about it though, I didn't take it personally and I'm not gonna start a 'flame war' over it or nothing, I have a bit more class than that :) )

Basically, in the storyline EVERYTHING that happens after world war II is fiction, and while some things can be seen as analogous to real world events in their themes, no actual events or people are referenced at all... Also, every alternate timeline event is there for the sake of the story (it is about god-like forces altering destiny, and the suggestion is that without these influences the real world would have happened instead), and if it doesn't actively involve the major characters, it heavily influences their lives and story-arcs...

Here is an excerpt from the alternate timeline history, its written for me to use as notes so does not need critting or anything, but if people were willing to point out events that they are offended by I would know what to handle more delicately or try to rework entirely...


*******************************************************

June 1944 onwards
(During “I, Addam – Part I: The Conception)

As the allied forces close in on Berlin in the final days of the war, British troops capture a young Dutch scientist who has been working for the Nazis since before the start of the war. The prisoner is wanted so badly by the Americans, who are recruiting for ‘Operation Paperclip’, that they are willing to agree to a prisoner exchange, handing Werner Von Braun to the British to face trial for his role in the blitz (he developed the V2 flying bombs that ravaged England.)

(NOTE – Von Braun is not seen on-screen, and is the one and only ‘real world’ character directly referenced in the entire storyline, EVERY OTHER PERSON is fictional.)

Britain is therefore the first country with access to ICBM technology, making them the first superpower in the world. Due to the distrust of Britain’s growing power amongst the fledgling European Union, they are not invited to join the group of nations and are forced to strengthen their ties with the rest of the Commonwealth to remain competitive against the growing single market. Because they are so ostracised by the rest of the world, this re-formed Commonwealth becomes much more separatist and militaristic than Britain or any of the member nations are in the real world.

Because of the former colonies desire for independence, the Commonwealth is NOT just a continuation of the old British Empire, but a federalist union of independent member-states. Just like in any union of this kind there are however the ‘leading nations’ within the Commonwealth (just like France and Germany are seen as the leading nations in the EU in the real world). These five leading nations are Britain, Australia, Canada, a non-apartheid South Africa and Nigeria (Nigeria primarily because of the vast oil reserves there and the money and influence it has because of this.)

Because of their superiority with rocket technology, the Commonwealth Space Agency (CSA) also lead the space race, with Albion-1 becoming the first broadcast satellite in orbit (instead of Sputnik), and the Excalibur Programme both orbiting and landing on the moon first (instead of the Apollo Programme.) Unwilling to adhere to the UN mandate saying that no one nation can lay claim to the moon, the CSA announce to the world that the moon belongs to the Commonwealth, and they claim it in the name of the King. (Head of the fictional royal family in Britain.)

Also, as the Commonwealth is the major competitor to the US there is no cold-war between America and Russia, the US seeing the increasingly federalism of both the Commonwealth and the EU as a bigger threat to their nation than Communism is (plus, with Canada as one of the leading nations within the Commonwealth, that enemy is right on their doorstep.) America’s relations with Russia, throughout the storyline, are much more similar to their relationship at the moment in the real world (i.e. not enemies, but not exactly the best of friends either.)



September 1974
(During “I, Addam - Part II: The Ascension”)

The British government place nuclear equipped ICBM in various countries around the Commonwealth, to prevent their stockpiles being centralised in one small country. Building missile bases in Australia, India, Nigeria, South Africa and Canada, the Commonwealth are brought into political conflict with their sole ally in the world, America. As a tense nuclear stand off begins between the Commonwealth and the US, referred to as the Ontario Missile Crisis (analogous to the Cuban missile Crisis in the real world), the Commonwealth refuse to stand down in the face of American threats.

Evicting the US air force and military bases across the Commonwealth, they also begin construction of missile bases in the British Virgin Isles and Belize, daring the US to act against them. The Americans, knowing they have no hope of defeating the Commonwealth, stand down and recall their ambassadors from across the Commonwealth. This sets in motion both the cold-war between America and the Commonwealth, and serves to strengthen ties between the US and the European Union. The US troops forcibly removed from the Commonwealth are stationed across the EU (mainly in Germany and the Netherlands, but also in France) in preparation for a potential war against the Commonwealth.

Elsewhere, following the rise in sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, the increasingly militaristic Commonwealth begin an invasion of Ireland, returning the whole country to British control and wiping out the Republican threat with summary executions of all those suspected of involvement throughout both Ireland and Northern Ireland. The entire nation becomes little more than a British military garrison, and its first line of defence against any potential naval invasion from America. The European Union, in spite of the invasion of one of their founding members, is powerless to act in the face of the Commonwealth’s military superiority, and forges even closer ties with the US. (In this timeline, NATO was set up to provide joint—defence against Britain and the Commonwealth, NOT Russia.)



1982 – 1988
(During “Chosen Son – Part I: Herald”)

American interests across the globe (primarily military bases and embassies, but also oil production) come under terrorist attack by a group known as the True World Movement. Believed to be based in Moscow, this group claims to be fighting against an above-government level conspiracy that is manipulating both the political and secret-service of America into starting a third world war against the Commonwealth. As these attacks happen all across the globe, primarily in EU and non-Commonwealth African countries, the US leads a multinational program against these terrorists, alongside the EU, Russia and China.

The Commonwealth however, refuse to become involved (the True World Movement have not targeted them, there are no US interests in their member states following the Ontario Missile Crisis, and the leaders of the Commonwealth are taking the ‘enemy of my enemy’ stance concerning the terrorists.)

Even through they are not officially joining the battle against the True World Movement, negotiations between the Commonwealth and the rest of the world leads to a slight thawing of the Cold-war that has existed since the Ontario Missile Crisis, and an exchange of ambassadors is negotiated by the new US President Robert Greene, and the now leader of the House of Lords in Britain, Lord Michael Vaughan. Within days of his arrival in Britain, the new US Ambassador is assassinated by members of the True World Movement.

*********************************************

Thanks again for all your help so far...


Jammill
 
Aun

The scientist is a genetecist who was previously developing a eugenic virus he called the Addam Virus that would re-write the reproductive cells of those infected, either causing their children to be born pure-Aryan or be too deformed to survive (its not actually the Americans who want him, but the Illuminati-based conspiracy that is controlling both America and the Commonwealth)...

The Illuminati knock back his ideas (they don't want more Aryans, who would be more pure-blooded than they are, they want to kill everyone else), and the Nazis offer him the chance to continue his work but then force him to work on their alleged 'super soldier' programme... After the war, the Illuminati want him to do the same for them, and the Addam Project eventually sees the creation of our three main male protagonists for the series, Simon, David and Nicholas who are rescued from the Illuminati because of the god-like voices (before it is cancelled after accidentally breeding telepathy into the subjects, something the Illuminati are terrified of because of the two god-like voices that talk to telepaths)...

It is one of the god-like presences that lead the characters to him (suggesting that, without their involvement, he would have died, and the world would have been the one we live in instead), as well as being the root of all the alternate political realities within the storyline...


Jammill
 
Well, there are plenty of cases of authors who have written works that have offended many (or certainly could) - Michael Moorcock's "Behold The Man" and Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" come to mind.

All I'd say is consider the consequences in making the decision - you may lose readers, may gain readers, or may have death threats issued against you. If the consequences outweigh the benefits of having that part of the story in there, probably best to take it out.

A simple "it will offend group x" is not a reason to exclude something per se, but you do want to weigh up the consequences of offending group x in deciding whether or not to keep something. Many great ideas will be offensive to some group or other, which is why I say them taking offence is not immediate grounds for removal, otherwise a lot of stuff would simply never be written.
 
I only skimmed above but I would say nothing is really taboo or off limits. Everything all depends on presentation and your skill as a writer. Another thing to consider is what causes of the deviation in the timeline from actual recorded history, please note as a history major i didn't use "true" history, and your arch.

For example Kim Harrison's Hollows books are set in a world were every thing deviated in the 60s due to a genetically altered virus accidentally making its way into genetically altered tomatoes. These tomatoes then make it across the world due to mass transit and and wipe out the larger portion of the human population and only the intervention of the "Inderlanders" or supernatural beings coming out of hiding help save everyone. This sets the stage for the current timeline and explains why Elves, Witches, Weres, Demons and the like exist in todays world and why things are different.

Basically why does the timeline split?
 
MstrTal

The above post is the"official" history in the alternate timeline, with the changes put down to the prisoner transfer at the end of the war (causing ALL the political differences seen), the true reasons why only known to high-ranking members of two rival conspiracies... The story is about them, and the apocalyptic war secret prophecies tell both sides they will win to gain control of the entire human race...

As it is Sci-Fi, it is eventually revealed that the changes to the timeline are because of two rival god-like voices that are manipulating events... One is prescient, using her visions of all the possible futures to try and create a world where she is worshipped and controls it through a religious ruling caste of telepaths, while the other is trying to prevent that and let mankind find its own way without her manipulation...

It is revealed that the female presence, thousands of years earlier, had tried to manipulate an earlier civilisation to create her empire by giving them prophecies through telepaths... Those visions, from the "Lit Path Of Destiny" (as oppose to the "Darkness of possibility" that regular prophecy doesn't see) saw her followers take control of the world and impose her religion across it... But because of the "curse of prophecy", that the future can be changed by our reaction to it, her followers turned against her and tried to alter the future for their own ends...

To stop her reaching anyone else they wiped out all their telepaths, ensuring that the "lit path of destiny" she shared with them remained their secret, their Illuminating knowledge, and basically acts an 'origin story' for the Illuminati...All the changes to the timeline are seen to be"the curse of prophecy" in action, and result from them trying to change the original future, using the prophecies of an apocalyptic war to lead a conspiracy that will create the war, and see them seize control of the world and ethnically cleanse it...

Other changes then occur when high-level telepathy starts to emerge again, and the two rival presences start manipulating a fight-back against the Illuminati, both centred around one man... To the female presence and her new followers, he is referred to as the "bringer of darkness", the messianic figure who can change the destiny of the entire human race, and will lay waste to the world during the wars to stop "The Fallen" (how she refers to the Illuminati since they fell from her grace)...

But, to the Illuminati, he is the source of their own messianic 'phoenix' myth, his apocalypse being the ethnic cleansing they desire...

The story focuses on how both sides, both inspired by different interpretations of the same prophecies, seek to alter destiny to put this man in charge of their armies and use him to wipe out their enemies... The second presence tries his best to free this man from the manipulation of his rival presence, and use him to stop her gaining control through the religious cult she has built up, which now leads the only group capable of stopping the Illuminati from ethnically cleansing the entire world...

All of this is uncovered as 'learned information' (it 's all mapped out to tie in with the origins of all the characters and 'alternate reality' organisations) rather than info-dumps, and all the major changes are coordinated time-wise to be seen on screen during certain episodes so that the "official events" as described in the first post are seen (with the audience knowing that they are the cover for the REAL events that are happening amongst the two conspiring groups)...

All the changes (both official and unofficial) are seen and explained on -screen, and are central to both the theme and the actual plot (for the most part, they ARE the actual plot)... There have been times my room looked Hiro's in the "string future" :)


Jammill
 
I've only just seen this Jammill, my apologies, but as I was the one who started the "slamming" I thought I'd best put my 2c in.

Firstly, I'm not a uber political soul, which is a good thing over here, because it's utterly exhausting to be so. I was born (at the height of the troubles, in Belfast, ironically) and have lived in NI all my life.

I think, regardless of how small the NI troubles were in terms of time scale and numbers dead, they are in peoples' memories, still. I worked in Belfast at the tail end of them and have fairly common memories of having to evacuate in case there was a bomb. I have a lot of friends who have lost family members in them, as have most people over here. I was on the phone after Omagh to check some close friends were okay etc etc.

I personally wouldn't be offended, in the least, but I know others who would be.

My point was that using NI which is still moving towards peace, we have a way to go yet, where memories are so close and offence is very easy to take, you risked any corporation looking at it and saying this could go up in our face and leave us with a very dodgy PR situation. Therefore you were putting a barrier in place to sell it in the UK at this time. That's all.

Edit, just to say that this comment :

few hundred people killed in what is basically a small scale revolutionary conflict


would cause an awful lot of offence. It's not the number of people, it's that it happened at all.
 
Springs

I wasn't taking it personally, and "slammed" was a little melodramatic, but pointing it out was the right thing to do... I didn't realise that some people would be offended by that, and it has changed the way I am thinking about handling those and other events to take that into consideration more...

As for the other comment, I did not mean in any way to try and compare people's personal suffering from one event to another, that can't be done... It was badly worded on my part if people can take it that way, and for that I apologise...


Jammill
 
Of course, to certain groups who operate on certain scales, those very real troubles that affected so many real lives may be "just a few hundred people killed in what is basically a small scale revolutionary conflict" - this would be a great way to demonstrate the mindset of a certain group in the story (a Government, a secret organisation?) and then no offence is directed at the author, but becomes directed at that fictitious group in the story.
 
The idea of Britain re-invading Ireland is based in actual events... Churchill had a contingency plan to invade Ireland if there was any sign of them assisting the Nazis during world war II (which NEVER happened)...

In this timeline the British military launch the invasion because of their cold-war (and near nuclear war) with America... The real motives of those in the storyline are to strip America of its ally, and nothing to do with the actual events that occurred in Northern Ireland...

Thematically, it is all being organised by the 'secret organisation' to make this timeline much more militaristic than the real world is (for example, the USSR is still intact and still holds East Germany, and eventually ends up having a brief war with China during the series)...


Jammill
 

Back
Top