Alternate History and Superheroes

Guest post by Ben Ronning.

Superheroes and alternate history are two subgenres of science fiction that have always appeared to compliment one another but very few writers ever dared to combine and exploit to its fullest. One reason for this is continuity, the holy grail of all comic book geeks. Ever since the debut of Superman in 1938 and the Fantastic Four in 1961, the Big Two of the comic book industry more or less rely on a floating timeline that prevents their characters from aging (though continuity is far murkier for DC after two major reboots and countless smaller retcons.) Superman could be BFFs with Joseph Kennedy in 1963 then be shaking hands with Ronald Reagan twenty years later without aging a single day. Another reason is because both companies, especially Marvel, pride themselves on verisimilitude by making their universe superficially similar to ours so neither company has fully addressed the social and geopolitical implications of the effective demigods in their midst until recent years with Marvel’s Civil War and DC’s 52.

However, one can consider Marvel’s What If? titles and DC’s Elseworlds line alternate history to some extent. These titles largely centered on the individual histories of their characters like “What if Spider-Man Joined the Fantastic Four?” or “What if Sgt. Nick Fury Fought World War II in Space?” rather than historical events from our world. Some scenarios such as “What if Captain America Were Revived Today?” from What If? (vol. 1) #44 possesses some trappings of alternate history. For example, Namor the Sub-Mariner took a different route when the Avengers pursued him in Avengers (vol. 1)  #4 so he never discovered the group of Inuit who worshiped a frozen Steve Rogers and thus never hurled Captain America into the ocean for the Avengers to find. The Avengers eventually disbanded without Captain America, but more disturbingly, a janitor working at a government facility awakened the mentally unstable 1950s Captain America and Bucky from suspended animation and convinced them that the United States was in danger from subversive elements. As such, the impostor Captain America and Bucky became involved with a political movement that transformed the United States into a police state until a crew of American sailors found the true Cap in the Arctic.

Marvel, aside from a dalliance with a robot Stalin, waited almost twenty years to dip their toe into the alternate history ocean with Neil Gaiman’s 1602. While not technically a What If? issue, the mini-series has a point of divergence (a Captain America from a potential future goes back in time to the failed Roanoke colony and aids in their survival) that causes various Marvel characters to appear nearly four hundred years before they should have. Instead of being the director of S.H.I.E.L.D. Nick Fury is Elizabeth I’s chief intelligence officer whose apprentice is Peter Parquagh, an ersatz version of a nameless friendly neighborhood webslinger. However, one of the more intriguing elements of Marvel 1602 is Gaiman weaved themes from X-Men into late Elizabethan history, particularly James I’s persecution of the “witchbreed” or mutants and how Magneto is ostensibly a grand inquisitor for the Spanish Inquisition but hides his illicit activities behind his position.

This fascination with alternate history continued with the fourth volume of What If? in late 2005. Unlike most issues of the title, which were largely self-contained worlds, this volume of the series took place within in a single timeline where Captain America’s genesis occurs in the American Civil War as opposed to World War II and the Fantastic Four were Russian cosmonauts. Being more of an aficionado of American history, I prefer the Captain America one and appreciate how Cap because more of a physical manifestation of the American spirit during one the nation’s most troubled periods rather than symbol. Because of this Cap’s presence shortens the Civil War, prevents Abraham Lincoln’s assassination, and his origins in Native American mysticism sparked a cultural craze that prevented the Indian Wars of the 1870s. Out of the six What If? (Vol. 4) one-shots, only Captain America and Fantastic Four address the broader strokes of alternate history whereas the other four are more character-focused. Unfortunately, Marvel did not revisit this timeline as they did Marvel 1602, but they are well worth the effort of searching through the odd long box for.

Meanwhile, DC, like their marvelous competition, has only dabbled in the realm of alternate history with its Elseworlds line but there are a few notable examples such as Batman: Holy Terror written by Alan Brennert and illustrated by Norm Breyfogle. The point of divergence for this story is that Oliver Cromwell lived ten years longer and the United States became a totalitarian, theocratic state. While I have never read the issue on account that it has been out of print for over twenty years, a cursory glance of the synopsis on Wikipedia was enough to pique my interest and should do the same for other alternate history enthusiasts. DC’s Tangent imprint, introduced in 1997, operates under a similar premise where there are not only vastly different versions of Superman, the Flash, the Atom, and even obscure characters like the Sea Devils but the presence of superpowered beings radically altered history from what we know. The central premise behind the imprint is that an alternate version of the Atom intervened in the Cuban Missile Crisis, which resulted in the destruction of Florida and Cuba. As such, Atlanta became an underwater city populated by merpeople, their technology advanced further than the mainstream DC Universe, and the hippie movement was in its infancy when the nineties rolled around.

Dan Jurgens, the man who killed Superman and the brain behind Tangent, justified this divergence when he told Comic Book Resources:

“While the DCU Earth is essentially the same as our own, no more advanced in terms of technology or communications despite the existence of those qualities within the super-powered community, Earth Tangent is greatly influenced by all of that. Earth Tangent's economic, geographic and political landscapes are defined by the superhero community, whereas in the DCU those aspects exist unaffected by the superhero community.”

Jurgens brings up an excellent point about a medium that birthed the trope, “Reed Richards is Useless.” Take the Flash’s rogues gallery for example, Captain Cold and his cohorts possess technology that can generate temperatures near absolute zero, alter weather patterns, and even transmute the 118 elements. Why did the scientists and business leaders not reverse engineer the technology after the Central City Police Department confiscated it? The Tangent imprint gives something of a look at such a world and is perhaps a blueprint for how ambitious writers should combine the two genres.

Some could argue that Superman: Red Son is an alternate history and I suppose it is to some extent. The premise is simple enough: baby Kal-L lands in Ukraine in 1938 instead of Kansas. However, my impression of the mini-series is that if it is alternate history, it is about squishy as bag full of marshmallows (or a Type X on Sliding Scale of Alternate History Plausibility.) Its writer, Mark Millar, makes reference to even greater civil unrest in the late 1960s under surviving JFK, a war against communists in the South Pacific in 1983, and a second American Civil War in 1986 without too much elaboration. Granted, there are constraints to the medium but it is clear that the focus is more on Superman as a seemingly benevolent leader of the Soviet Union and his rivalry with Lex Luthor than on the butterflies that a Soviet Man of Steel would create. That is not to say Red Son is not worth reading, it is more fantasy than alternate history.

Watchmen, by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, is the mirror image of Red Son in terms of realism and setting. In fact, the world of Watchmen could be a reflection ours until 1938 where the first appearance of Superman in Action Comics #1 inspired a wave of costumed vigilantes, and again in 1959 with the creation of Dr. Manhattan. Alternate history is one portion of Watchmen’s complexity that Moore executes extremely well. Dr. Manhattan essentially gave the United States the strategic advantage in the Cold War and practically won the Vietnam War single-handedly but that also becomes a disadvantage because he is also the lone reason why the Soviet Union stays in check. Hence, Moore makes the consequences of his departure realistic as evidenced by the Soviet invasion of Pakistan and bringing Earth closer to the brink of Nuclear War. However, there are also several other economic and cultural consequences as well. The good doctor’s ability to synthesize lithium allows for the mass production of electric cars, hence reducing the United States’ dependence of foreign petroleum, and the appearance “real” superheroes essentially led to the death of the medium in the late forties so pirate comics like “The Tales of the Black Freighter.” (Though I wonder how Indian fast food became so popular with the American public instead of McDonalds.) Watchmen is practically required reading for all comic book fans, but to read it again from the prism of an alternate historian demonstrates how well the two genres blend.

One of the things I admire about alternate history is that it posed a question Marvel asked when they released a new title in February 1977, “what if?” Personally, I am not as interested in the typical “What if the Axis won World War II?” or “What if the Confederacy won the American Civil War?” as I am interested in smaller events like “What if a more moderate candidate sought the democratic nomination in 1972” or “What if Lucille Ball decided not to sell Desilu Studios to Gulf+Western?” because even the smallest pebble can create many ripples. Marvel 1602, Tangent Comics, and Watchmen demonstrate that alternate history can blend with the fantastic as peanut butter tends to do with chocolate, and they are only the tip of the glacier. In a universe populated by gods, aliens, and immortal cavemen who could alter the flow of history well before the 20th century, the myriad of scenarios to use as story fodder is practically endless. Is there a writer ambitious enough to push this hybrid genre to its creative limits?

Only time will tell.

* * *

Aspiring writer and platypus enthusiast Ben Ronning has lurked the AH.com boards since June 2006. When he is not roaming the multiverse, he can be found at his blog, Thoughts of a Platypus.

Best of 2011

I know I said I would not post anything until 2012, but I thought I should take a moment and list some of the best of 2011.  Now there is nothing scientific about the selection criteria (I do not even limit winners to those works published in 2011) and I probably never will have any official rules if I do this again next year.  The one constant is that AH Weekly Update discussed them at some point.  This is still my opinion, so feel free to disagree (in fact I encourage it). 

Anyway here are the winners of the best alternate history for 2011:

Best Novel: I am going to have to go with When Angels Wept by Eric G. Swedin (certainly this is a greater honor then winning the Sidewise Award).  War Blogger, however, might disagree with me and go with East Wind Returns by William Peter Grasso.  They are both good books and I highly recommend that you read them if you get the chance. 

Best Anthology: While there were only two anthologies reviewed this year, I have to give the nod to Robert Cowley's What if? series.  It is still an excellent series of counterfactuals and a must read for any legitimate alternate historian.

Best Short Story: "Coil Gun" by Matthew Quinn gets the nod, but by default since we did not review any short stories separately this year.  Next year I will try and bring you more reviews of short stories.

Best Showcase: This is a difficult category to rate, especially since an online timeline does not get a showcase unless the reviewer already believes this is an excellent piece of alternate history.  So to make things simpler I am going to give it to the most viewed showcase, which is Dominion of Southern America by Glen from Alternatehistory.com.  Congrats!

Best Comic: Titan by Michael Tymczyszyn and Andy Stanleigh also gets the nod for best comic by default, but let me stress the fact that getting the nod this way does not mean it is a bad book.  It just means that we need to review more comics.

Best Television Show: I was not sure whether I should have changed the title of this category to "Worst" instead of "Best", but I decided to go with "Best" for sake of conformity.  I have to admit this year was a bad year when it came to watching alternate history on television, so as much as I hate to do this, I have to given the nod to Spike TV's Alternate History.  Sure it was overly dependent on bad special facts and loaded with implausible gibberish, it still managed to maintain a shred of dignity by not forcing me to stare at underage crotches!

Best Interview: Well this is a very difficult category to choose from.  I did some great interviews over this year and certainly Matthew Quinn would win if I just did it by the number of page views (by the way everyone should read the end of this interview where Matt gives some good advice about how to deal with arguments on the Internet).  Yet I think I will call it a tie and also give a nod to Dale Cozort, the long time alternate history fan who I just had a great time talking with.

Best Contributor: I cannot make this decision by myself, but if you look to your right you will see a poll where you can help select the best contributor of 2011.  I will announce the winner in two weeks time.

Well everyone I had a great time this year and I am very happy with how far this blog has come.  I look forward to making 2012 an even more remarkable year for Alternate History Weekly Update!

*   *   *

Mitro is founder, editor and contributor of Alternate History Weekly Update. When he is not busy writing about his passion for alternate history, he spends his time working as a licensed attorney in the state of Illinois and dreams of being a published author himself one day.

Review: "Japanese Military Strategy in the Pacific War: Was Defeat Inevitable" by James B. Wood

Grade: B-/C+

I believe this is a first for the AH Weekly Update insofar as this is the first review of a non-fiction alternate history book. Now, you may think: aren't those terms mutually exclusive by sheer definition? Yes, they usually are. However, Wood's book combines both traits as he first briefly analyzes various fields that influenced and guided Japanese strategy and plans during WWII, only to summarize counterfactual approaches which could have helped the Imperial Japanese forces in his final chapter.

It is of import to notice that all the counterfactual possibilities presented by Wood share one commonality, which is that they were choices that were actually recognized and advocated by ranking members of the Japanese military. They are, as such, not products of the author's mind and 20/20 hindsight.

Going chapter by chapter, Wood takes a look at Japan's preparations, at the reasons commonly attributed to the nation losing the war and what could have been changed, going from the preventable losses inflicted on its merchant marine, the mishandling of its potent submarine force, the naval leadership's fetish with wishing for a decisive battle and avoiding it at the same time (the Japanese plan for the Battle of Midway is such an example), the shortcomings of its air force and the mishandling of the war by the Japanese army.

Now, each of the factors Wood addresses are significant enough to warrant at least one book of their own. The internal fractures not only between the Army and Navy High Command, but between leading figures within each branch of the armed forces, already on their own deserve a thorough "What if?" treatment.

For example, did you know that Admiral Yamamoto actually threatened that he and the whole Navy staff would resign if his plan to attack Pearl Harbor was not adopted? Admiral Chuichi Nagumo, his superior, had favored an attack against the Malaya and Indonesia that would potentially have kept the USA out of the war a bit longer. Most other professional militaries would have called the bluff and sacked such an insubordinate subordinate. But Japan's command structure was so fractured, mired in political infighting, and fragile that this type of behavior became endemic.

Wood's book is not without problems, of which many can be directly connected to the book's short length. Each chapter is, at best, 15 pages long.

I will cite from a very good review on Amazon to specify them:

His critique of Japan's war effort fails to distinguish between strategic mistakes and defeat in battle. When the Japanese lose while pressing their initiative, they are guilty of systematic over-extension; when they lose on the defensive, they are guilty of conceding the fight to the enemy's terms. They are criticized simultaneously for failing to stick to their game plan and for failing to adapt to new situations. Apparently the Japanese can neither have their cake nor eat it.

Likewise, readers must go without a precise definition of the defeat in war that Japan is trying to avoid. Is any negotiated settlement that prevents occupation of the home islands better than a "defeat"? Wood seems content to see Japan lose all its conquests and all its continental holdings, avoid invasion, and call it a draw.

This brings me to the two decisive questions: is the book worth your while, and is it worth your money?

On the former point, the answer is a clear and endorsing "Yes". Yes, it is. It provides ample sources for its points and covers lots of ground, albeit in rather brief episodes. If there was nothing else, it would still serve as a good introductory read for all those interested in the problems (and chances!) of the Japanese military in the Pacific Campaign 1941-45.

The latter, sadly, is a "No". "Japanese Military Strategy in the Pacific War: Was Defeat Inevitable", discounting the chapter and final bibliographies, covers barely 115 pages worth of text and sells for more than $25 on Amazon at the moment. That is not a favorable ratio for the content that is provided, especially since Wood could easily have made his chapters twice as long. He certainly had enough material to work with for that.

As such, I can recommend "Japanese Military Strategy in the Pacific War: Was Defeat Inevitable" as a book you ought to get from your local library, or if you find it massively discounted from an online retailer. Spend the full price only if you're desperate.

* * *

War Blogger is the Internet handle of Sebastian P. Breit, author of the alternate history novel Wolf Hunt. You can find news, reviews, and commentary on all matters regarding WW2 on his blog, The War Blog, and follow his writing progress on his personal website.

Showcase: Into This Abyss - The Eurasian War (1915-1919)

Sarantapechaina's Into This Abyss - The Eurasian War (1915-1919) timeline is an incredibly detailed and well-researched example of what I'd like to call a "limited window" approach, i.e. one that doesn't go forth and develop a different timeline spanning centuries. Rather, the author concentrates on his POD and, from there on, develops with a high degree of plausibility and attention to historic detail, a different outcome of events within a limited frame.

Into the Abyss' POD is the Russo-Japanese War. Tsarist Russia decisively wins the Battle of Sandepu, forcing the Japanese back into Korea and confining them to Port Arthur, a development that would ultimately not only change the future of China, but the world.

In China, crumbling under the onslaught of the "Foreign Devils", a civil war between the Qing and Jiang factions erupts; a war which, over the coming years, will draw the attention and eventually interventions of most major powers, shaping the international alliance system anew.

Sarantapechaina spends a lot of time on very different "fronts" all around the globe, be it the Ottoman Empire, France, Russia, or Germany. The amount of intimate political and historical knowledge is staggering, and even better, well-presented. I'd be giving too many spoilers if I said more here and now. However, I'm confident that the scenario the author has developed is no less plausible than the Great War we know from history. Do yourselves a favor and check it out.

* * *

War Blogger is the internet handle of Sebastian P. Breit, author of the alternate history novel Wolf Hunt. You can find news, reviews, and commentary on all matters regarding WW2 on his blog, The War Blog, and follow his writing progress on his personal website.

Review: "Seelöwe Nord" by Andy Johnson

Review - Seelöwe Nord

Yes, I have done it: I have finally read a novelization of the fictional invasion of Great Britain by Germany: Seelöwe Nord.

There is a bit of a controversy about how serious the historical preparations and the desire of the German leadership to actually stage an invasion of the British Isles actually were, however, most historians and military men seem to agree on the fact that no branch of the Wehrmacht, the German armed forces, was exactly keen on giving it a try. The Army had no experience with amphibious landings. The Kriegsmarine was more than aware of its inferiority compared to the Royal Navy, a fact compounded by the complete lack of actual landing gear in the German naval arsenal. And the Luftwaffe went into the Battle of Britain without a plan it stuck to, and without an appreciation for the excellent British air defense network Hugh Dowding presided over.

Review: 'What if?' series by Robert Cowley

Like a couple of the other writers for the site, for my latest article, I decided to take a look back at what got me into alternate history in the first place.

While I don't remember the year exactly, I was just entering my teenage years and had just reached the tail end of spending the summer with my grandparents. My grandmother had taken me to the Terre Haute Books-a-Million so I could pick out a book for the long drive home to Virginia, and I was wandering about in the history section when a certain book caught my eye. Titled 'What if? by Robert Cowley, and boasting the tag line 'The World's Foremost Military Historians Imagine What Might Have Been', it immediately caught my eye being both an inquisitive and historically-obsessed child. I couldn't have found a more perfect fit for me book wise, and convinced my grandmother to buy it and the nearby sequel for me. I'd breezed through both of them by the time we'd reached my parents home in Virginia, provided the base of what would become my love of alternate history, and the rest as they say, is history. So here I am, close to a decade later, taking a look back at the pair of books that provided my first taste of the AH genre, and then reviewing them for your reading pleasure.

The 'What if?' series, which includes 'What if?', 'What if? 2' and 'What ifs? if American History' is a collection of essays collected and edited by Robert Cowley, with contributions coming from authors including David McCullough, Stephen E. Ambrose, James M. McPherson, Caleb Carr and Cecelia Holland. These historians each wrote an essay concerning a historical event, and how things might have turned out had history gone differently. These cover the more conventional PODs concerning the Civil War and WWII, but quite a few cover lesser used or genuinely creative ideas, with examples including the Mongol Invasion of Europe, Jesus Christ not being crucified, the USA and Great Britain going to war in 1896, and even what civilization would have been like without the widespread cultivation potato. As you would expect, the result is a very diverse and intelligent look at worlds that might have been.

The anthology itself various in style and approach from essay to essay but all are of a consistent high quality, and all are genuinely intriguing and enjoyable. Unlike a great deal of existing AH literature out there, What if? takes an intellectual approach to the various examined PODs, and while that analytical and academic approach might turn off folks expecting something a tad more entertainment oriented, I felt it helped to give many of its various essays a more broad appeal, to say nothing of providing an extraordinary resource to those writing AH fiction. The end product consist of a set of well written, well researched and ultimately entirely plausible glimpses into divergent histories.

Overall, the what if series is unlike almost any other set of work in the alternate history genre. Its choice to examine a diverse set of scenarios and to look at them from a scholar's perspective is a feat that I have yet to see replicated, and provides the anthology an air of credibility, all the while remaining entertaining. For genre newcomers, it makes a superb entry point, and for long time AH veterans, it makes an excellent reference guide. Regardless if you are new or experienced, the What if? series proves to be one of the rare serious academic looks at alternate history, one made all the better by the high-level of content quality.

The What if? series is a must read for anyone with an interest in alternate history, and for those who lack that interest, perhaps it will kindle that interest in you like it did for me. In either case, I cannot recommend the series highly enough, and urge you to pick up a copy at once.

Soldier, scholar, writer and web-voyeur, Sean CW Korsgaard has been active in the alternate history community since 2006, and was recently elected to succeed Mitro as President of the Alternate History Online Facebook group. In addition to his contributions at the Alternate History Weekly Update, he writes for several websites, including his own, which can be found here.