User blog:Lordganon/ASB, Historical Fantasy, and Future History

''The majority of this is a post I made on the main page a few months back. Want it somewhere else for me to remember better where it is, lol.''

I'm well aware that elements of any timeline taken in context, or even as a whole aren't plausible - but as long as there is a way that's not entirely ridiculous leading to it, it's all right. But, any PoD has its butterflies, and people need to remember that, while rooting things in facts. It's something a lot of people fail to do, as you all can no doubt attest. Doesn't mean that they can't be well-written if the author ignores that, or even good, but that it's entirely unrealistic and they should not try passing it off as such. Heck, we've a few good ones like that here, foremost being Oer's Sundered Veil and An Independent in 2000, which have been barred from being featured for that reason - being ASB, or something similar - quite unjustly, in my opinion, for they are well-written and serve as good examples.

Confederate timelines are plausible, if they have a real PoD, and not just "Confederacy wins" or they take Washington in 1864, or something like that that is impossible without changes long beforehand. There are several points early on where they had a chance at taking Washington or Philly, with only a small change in Union or Confederate movements allowing the event to occur, though it needs to be emphasized that even there, Confederate arms cannot carry the day. Outside involvement, or some sort of political collapse in the Union, sure - but not the Confederates on their own. And that's basically the problem with the majority of such timelines - they end up as impossible as Guns of the South, or as simple revenge fantasies, all pretty ignorant of the reality of what the war was about.

I agree with the reasoning Mitro gave in response to Oer on his blog, and what Marc said (in the original post) about it. To quote him: The reason why we decided to disqualify any timeline extending further then the present was to prevent having one where the POD is 2 days ago and then extend 2 centuries into the future making it more sci-fi then alternate history.

Alternate History, for all they may stick it with Science Fiction in stores, is not Science Fiction, and its a touch ignorant for them to put it there without its own label. Nor is it Historical Fiction, for much the same reasons. Rather, it lies somewhere between the two points. That's not to say the lines are blurred at times, but they are there.

Take the Worldwar series, by Turtledove, for instance. It's about an alternate WWII - which is alternate history, and none can argue with that - but then the aliens are added to the picture. That's a good case of blurring the line. Myself, I consider it Alternate History, of the most ASB form, up until the last book, which is no longer, because, it is science fiction based on an AH, and as Mitro said in his response to you, they are attempting to predict future events, even though it is in Turtledove's own Alternate History world. Still, if we had it on this site, it would be marked as ASB, and none would question it until that point.

To go another way, take Oer's Sundered Veil series. It's rooted in fact, and reality, and even with a pretty innocent PoD, until the "Veil" is sundered, in an experiment years later. The PoD, that John of Nottingham is not caught before he kills, has the King and a few other important figures die through assassins, with the appearance of magic, presents a very interesting PoD on its own, and one that I wish someone would look into without going into magic like this - it's a good PoD, lol - and at that point, it's Alternate History and again, none can really argue with that, and is such until the secondary PoD, the sundering of the "veil," 90 years later. (Note that I look forward to seeing the developments in that 90 years, lol.) At this point, it ceases to be Alternate History. Yet, at the same time, it is not ASB, but Historical Fantasy, or "HF."

The two differ in that ASB, given what it stands for, can be said to be "acts of God," or Sci-fi. HF is a rare thing - I can only think of a few books/series with it. Heck, the term I use, to the best of my knowledge, isn't standard, nor that there is one. But, for all purposes, what it is is "Fantasy nested in the past, but with roots in historical fact and an actual PoD from otl." Don't even want to try to call what it would be if it went into the future, but at that point, it wouldn't be historical any longer, but futuristic, and thus what amounts to fantastical science fiction, for lack of a better thing to call it. This is basically why the main page of SV is only in the SV category, and the category itself is in both ASB and Timelines - nowhere to put them, really, so both it is. Perhaps I should change that, but that really should be a community thing to decide. Overall, it's a very good example of "blurred." Note, however, that HF, if you think about it, it not entirely impossible in some respects, either - for instance, the way "magic" is explained in the recent movie "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," in that it's you using all your brain, all the time, and you can.... do things with it, while incredibly unlikely, is not impossible, per se - this is definitely a train of thought that SV uses too.

To quote dictionary.com, History is "the branch of knowledge dealing with past events." Thus, it can easily be deprived from there that "Alternate History" is "the branch of knowledge dealing with alternate versions of past events." The key thing here is the use of the word "past."

If an timeline goes into future events, it is dealing with something other than the past or recent present. With the definition given for history, it is pretty obvious that if something goes into the future, it is no longer history, but a simple speculation of things to come. Again, quoting dictionary.com, the definition of science fiction is "a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc."

Right there, seventh word from the end - "speculation." Given that things going into the future are speculating about things to come, and that the definition for science fiction specifically states that it includes "speculation," it is obvious from there that future history, as "speculation," is science fiction. And thus, not Alternate History, which is why it is not allowed on this wiki, and should never be.

In addition

When it comes to ASB, there's really two different kinds. Where they vary is in what happens after the original, ASB, PoD.

In the first, we simply have the ASB PoD. From there, the Alternate History flows, despite it being ASB in origin, in what we could likely describe as being a plausible path. We've all seen examples of this.

On some level, this is the most common of the two. Turtledove's Worldwar series, among others, such as Flint's 1632 series, fall along this path on some level. Sure, there are some aspects that are debatable, but they don't go out of the ballpark entirely. Given the PoD, the results and the timeline as written are certainly plausible.

Yet, there is the second kind. We all know what this is - an ASB PoD, followed by continued bouts of it. Examples of this include most Science Fiction. Other ones we may be more familiar with would be things such as the various Strangerverse timelines on AH.com. Most "wanks" fall under this one, too.

More locally, we have the Finland Superpower timeline. Not only is the PoD ASB, but the events afterwards can only be described as "out to lunch." By the modern date, Finland controls a third of Europe in this one. A "Finnwank," as I've seen it called. Its events are stupendous, and amazing..... and yet, in many cases don't follow reality.

There are those that fall between the two, somewhere - the "An Independent in 2000" timeline on the wiki falls here. But, that's because it's a question on some level of political opinions how ASB it is. Most that would be here consist of that type of debate.

The point of all this? Mostly, because I've been thinking of it lately, but even more so it is that I've also been thinking about something Oer said that the original part was in response to. Yet, not about what he argued in favor of, in the least.

Currently, we have our rules for featured timelines - this one is more so unofficial, depending on how they are interpreted - which include "No ASB." In my mind, it's a silly rule. A lot of our bigger timelines - mostly the ones I've written about in all of this, but there are others - fail this test.

Yet, outside of the PoD, a lot of these follow a logical path. Of course, there are others, namely "Finland Superpower," which fail it utterly, but that's not the point.

What I'd like to see, on some level, is a slight rule change - so long as we acknowledge if they do end up featured that they are ASB - to allow the ASB timelines with an ASB PoD but a logical, plausible, path thereafter to get nominated.

Thoughts?

(Note, that I'm going to use this blog, by commenting on it separately, as kind of a space for more of this type of thing as I think of it.)