The 1632verse isn’t spicy, but there are a few sex scenes and there is no prohibition on them. Sex just isn’t written about much or graphically. “The Golden Age of science fiction is a 13 year old boy.” (Jim Baen among others.) This was a comment within the thread and above where Eric replied. The comment continued to say that while a 13 year old boy wouldn’t mind what we now call spicy content, his mother probably would. And that’s the crux of it. Graphic sex scenes can hurt sales. But at the same time, sometimes they are needed to move the narrative along, force character development, or for another reason central to the story being told. These are Eric’s thoughts about writing sex scenes. – Bethanne Kim (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Baen’s Bar 07 May 2015 07:11 I think the scene in any 1632 novel that comes the closest to being graphic sex is the one in GALILEO AFFAIR when Frank Stone and Giovanna Marcoli consummate their romance. 07 May 2015 07:24 Contrary to some suggestions made in this discussion, neither I nor Baen Books has any formal policy concerning sex scenes. My decisions are not based on whether or not including Sex Scene A in a novel would result in a loss of sales to libraries. (Or gain, for that matter.) My decision is based on purely literary criteria — would including Sex Scene A in a novel improve the story? The answer is almost always “no.” Sex, as such, is fascinating for the people (usually two, but…) who are directly engaged in the activity. For everyone else, it’s either pornography or plumbing — neither of which do anything to enhance a novel that isn’t either a porn novel or a sex manual. The key is the emotional content of the scene, not the sex itself. In those few instances were I have included fairly explicit…
BaensBar
This is an interesting family. These characters really aren’t written about outside of the mainline Baen novels. Even passing mentions are rare. As high-level characters with major political implications in pretty much anything they do, that makes sense, but they really are incredibly well-developed and interesting, given how little “screen time” they really get. – Bethanne Kim (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Baen’s Bar Comment: David Weber needed a character to become a serious naval expert and influence in 1633, and Simpson was the best choice. That led to Simpson and his wife, Mary, being “rehabilitated.” 12 October 2018 04:44 It’s more complicated than that. I would have “rehabilitated” Simpson even without the naval and ironclad developments. In 1632, he’s simply a foil for Mike Stearns. He and Mary only appear on stage in two chapters out of 61. For a stand-alone novel, that’s fine. But once the decision was made to turn this into a series, keeping Simpson and his wife Mary as the one-dimensional characters they were in 1632 would have just gotten boring after a while. Keep in mind that Simpson’s “villainy” in 1632 was not really all that villainous. It’s not as if he betrayed anyone or gave aid and comfort to the enemy. All he did was advance a political program for Grantville that was wrong-headed. So it wasn’t really that big of a stretch to have him get reconciled with Mike by the end of 1633. The ironclad program and the navy was just a very convenient way to do it, as well as killing two birds with one stone since we needed a naval expert anyway. But I would have done it anyway. About the only major American character in 1632 who winds up drifting the other way was the mine manager, Quentin Underwood. But even that was a pretty limited “drift.” At no point did he betray anyone and he winds…
It’s been exactly 8 years since this was posted and honestly, I don’t think we have an answer yet. But all of what Eric posted back then still stands. – Bethanne Kim (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Baen’s Bar 24 April 2018 17:24 I can give you a few guidelines: 1) It won’t be “German,” for two reasons. First, not all Germans will be citizens of the USE. Austria is also a German nation, and if Bavaria retains its independence (which is still an open question) it will be also. Second, not all citizens of the USE are Germans. That’s already true and will become more true as things progress. (Tum te tum te tum…) Finally, there will be considerable political resistance to making the citizenship and ethnic terms synonymous. 2) It won’t be “Amideutsch.” The idea is preposterous. 3) There are two most likely possibilities: a) Someone who knows German better than I do may come up with a nifty way to solve the issue. “Vereinigen” (or something similar — I don’t remember the exact spelling) has already been suggested. b) Somebody comes up with something completely off the wall. These things do happen, after all. The term “American” came off the wall. So did the term “Ram Rebellion.” So did the terms “Yankee” and “Yank.” So did the term “Dixie.” My own preference would be for alternative 3-b. What about a term like “Yankee”? The following was in response to: Yankee didn’t come from nowhere. I read that the earliest use in English referred to the Dutch, from Janke, a diminutive of Jan. The association with the New England colonies is most likely because of 17th century Nieuw Nederland colony, which was taken over by the English as a result of the Anglo-Dutch Wars. 25 April 2018 05:52 When I said “came from nowhere,” I didn’t mean that the term literally had no connection to anything. All…
This isn’t an area I know much about, but Eric was meticulous about this, and he definitely knows a lot about it. This is a quick explanation of the structure and I am sure Eric and many of the other writers can spend hours talking military structure with you, if you are ever at a minicon or on a salon call and are so inclined. – Bethanne Kim (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Baen’s Bar 05 July 2015 15:38 (Bjorn Hasseler) Eric Flint created the second lieutenants, battalions, and majors, not me. “Officially, the USE army had a very clear and simple structure: Each division consisted of nine thousand men commanded by a major general. Each division had three brigades of three thousand men, commanded by a brigadier. Each brigade had three regiments of one thousand men, commanded by a colonel. Each regiment had two infantry battalions of four hundred men, commanded by a major, and an artillery company of two hundred men usually commanded by a captain. Finally, the infantry battalions were composed of four companies of one hundred men, commanded by a captain. A company consisted of three platoons of thirty men commanded by a second lieutenant, and a heavy weapons unit of ten men commanded by a sergeant. The company’s first lieutenant usually served its captain as his executive officer.” (_1636: The Saxon Uprising_, chapter 1, page 18) But since “Such was the neat theory reflected in the official table of organization. Mike was pretty sure the ink hadn’t dried yet before reality began to diverge from theory” (ibidem), I’ve had Colonel Derfflinger appoint Old Reinhold (Reinhold Rühle) as captain of camp followers because he’s used to having someone handle that and Major von Hessler make a couple cousins fähnriche (ensigns) instead of second lieutenants because while they’re family, they’re 20 and 16 years old and extremely inexperienced (in his mature, 23-year-old opinion. Ahem.). Yes, at…
Eric wasn’t perfect, and he would have been the first one to say so. Below is his comment on the bar regarding why there are 8 stars on the USE flag. But after that is what Mike Nagle wrote in the Grantville Gazette. The reason was given in the original novel 1632, something Eric wrote more than 20 years before his Bar post. It’s easy to think that an author will remember everything they’ve written, but that simply isn’t the case. It especially isn’t the case when it’s been decades with many books in that series and multiple totally unrelated series having been written in the interrim. Personally, I think it’s pretty amazing that we have so many writers and fans who can help us keep track of all these details even when we forget them. – Bethanne Kim (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Baens Bar 20 February 2020 00:59 I’m guessing, because BALTIC WAR was written so long ago that my memory is fuzzy, but I suspect the reason there are eight stars on the cross of the USE flag is simply because that’s how many our artist Tom Kidd put on it and it didn’t occur to me at the time to think about the logic behind it. There’s no logic at all to having it based on the original cities in the New United States. What would make sense would be to do it the way the USA’s flag works, which is to add a star every time a new province is formed. Then — oh, joy! — we can have endless wrangles because the imperial cities start clamoring that they damn well ought to be represented on the flag as well as the provinces, and grouchier members of the CoCs would insist that provinces under imperial administration shouldn’t be given the same august status as self-governing provinces. Mike Nagle (excerpted from 1632 and Flags of…
An interesting point many 1632 readers may not realize is that it has sister storylines. In the original novel, we find out that alien artists from a race called the Assiti caused the event by being careless with their artwork, allowing “shards” to fall randomly. One of those caused Granville to swap places with some land in 1631 Thuringia, but it was not the only event. We eventually learn that there were many micro-events that didn’t register with the public mind. No one would notice if a sphere of land in the middle of the ocean swapped with land pretty much anywhere in history, for example. It would just literally be swallowed by the ocean and disappear without a trace. But in addition to events that no one noticed, there were a few bigger events. Time Spike was the first of these to be published in 2008, with Marilyn Kosmatka. In 2017, The Alexander Inheritance with Gorg Huff and Paula Goodlet was published, followed by The Crossing in 2022 and An Angel Called Peterbilt in 2024. At the time Eric wrote the post below, it was the only additional shard to be written. Two sequels to it were printed by Ring of Fire Press and they are being re-released by Baen Books in early 2026. In Time Spike, an Illinois prison is sent back through time millions of years, landing them with the dinosaurs. But it’s not just dinosaurs. Along the way, they picked up native Americans, murderous conquistodors, and a few post-Civil War American soldiers. In addition to having a lot more people travel back, it’s a much larger amount of land and the land, like the people, represents multiple eras. Garrett W. Vance has taken this fertile landscape and written Time Spike: First Cavalry of the Cretaceous and Time Spike: The Mysteerious Mesa. There are also short stories set in the Time Spike shard in The Grantville Gazette…
One of the things I love about the 1632verse is the way the same characters pop up in different stories by differen writers – the way they would pop up in different people’s lives in a real small town. This addresses the basics of asking to use someone else’s character. The short version is: ask nicely on BaensBar.net (1632 Tech forum) and you’ll probably get permission, unless the author with a claim has plans you might impact. Krystal Reed is one of my characters. Shortly after claiming her, someone else wanted to use her. I knew I was going to write a minimum of one novel with her but I didn’t really know where I was going, so I declined to share. Others on the Bar hopped into the thread and we provided several different options fo the writer that fit their parameters and they were good to go. She’s a good example of a character where you are likely to get very limited permission from the author with a claim. She’s one of my lead characters. I have written three novels that feature her, at this point, as well as short stories. I have one more novel planned. That’s not saying I won’t share. It IS saying there’s a lot more canon around her than most characters outside of the mainline novels. I have two other characters, sisters name Gude and Demuth. Another author needed a couple of nurses to send to the Three Leagues. They were both in training to be nurses and I no longer needed them at the point he needed nurses, so I modified what I was doing with them in my story a bit and handed them off. They are now mine up to a certain date, and his after that date. Then I have Irene Flannery. She appeared for one paragraph, about three lines, in 1632. I asked for, and received, permission to…
Note: I didn’t copy the date, but I’m pretty positive this was adapted from something Eric wrote on Baen’s Bar. At any rate, I’m giving him credit. Or blame. Whatever. BaensBar It’s easiest if you choose from the very beginning. Just go into the programming and toggle a button for your preference. Like most publishers, Eric Flint and the publications written in his name – Ring of Fire Press, the Grantville Gazette and now 1632 & Beyond – prefer straight. But if you go smart instead of straight, that’s okay (as long as you are consistent) because it’s pretty easy to change from one to the other. It’s when you mix smart and straight that it gets problematic. So please, if you are writing for us, turn on smart quotes and smart apostrophes. Wait. You didn’t realize I was talking punctutation? ((Shaking my head.)) We don’t care about that other stuff.
Not every comment is going to be deep and original. Some are blunt and, well, kind of obvious. Like this one. But that doesn’t mean the thing doesn’t bear saying – and (re)publishing. Sometimes things are not spelled out for the simple reason that there is no dramatic issue (in the literal sense) that needs to be dealt with. There was a recent thread on the 1632 subReddit about education and why it’s not talked about more. Quite simply, it’s not dramatic. Are there new schools? You betcha. Are they spreading the up-time style of teaching and attitudes? Yupper. Are there places to learn the new teaching methods? Totally, and for sure. (Hey, they went back from 2000 – Valley Girls weren’t that far in the past!) Do these get mentioned in stories? Indeed, but mostly in passing. Why? When’s the last time you watched or attended a local school board meeting? Exactly. They are important, but boring. While it’s possible to write something interesting about such a boring topic (see “David Weber Orders a Pizza”), is it something you really want to read? There are just so many more interesting things to write about, even if they aren’t as important. Thus, Eric’s question: What IS the point? – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) This comes up fairly regularly. In short, sometimes slush readers (stories that haven’t been published, but might be) need to stop fussing about minor points and focus on whether it’s a good story. If not, what about THE STORY needs to be attended to and why? 03 January 2015 01:01 I have been following this thread with increasing exasperation. WHAT THE **** IS THE ISSUE HERE? Aside from a lot of what seems to me — pardon my English — pointless pettifoggery. When I say, “what is the issue?” I mean that in terms which are relevant to the 1632 series. I.e., terms…
This is definitely not a secret. Eric is writing fiction and, as writers, we create worlds and scenes that are fully for entertainment and not something we are wishing on the world. But at the same time, we are people and generally don’t want to create a thing that is anathema to our personal core beliefs. Thus, Eric Flint, avowed socialist, is not going to create an empire to take over the world in his succesful, sprawling universe. Beyond that, if you are truly looking for a universe with everything planned in meticulous detail, this isn’t the universe for you. We have nearly 200 authors, each of whom has their own characters and story arcs and they kind of go where they will. And by “they,” I mostly mean the characters. Some authors can plot things out and have characters go where they want them to. I am not one of those authors. When Eric finished reading my novel Mrs. Flannery’s Flowers, he commented that he could never have imagined her that way. And I think that’s what makes the 1632 universe amazing and unique, and utterly resistant to any kind of Grand Plan. Every single author makes their own contribution and everyone, including Eric, respects those other contributes and what they add to the tapestry of the 1632verse. So while there are definitely plans for the future of the 1632verse, it’s not a GRAND Plan that involves “peace threatening to break out all over.” – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) 26 February 2009 04:03 I figure that Eric’s plan is either one of two things: 1) Set up an “endless formula” (in this case, “When the Grantvillers make peace with one country, another country starts a war”) so that he can keep writing novels till he dies; or 2) his long-range fictional goal is for Gustav II Adolf and the Grantvillers to conquer all of Europe and…
Question being answered: Is there any difference on what author is paid by how I buy the book? We know that fans genuinely want to buy in a place that supports their authors the most. Obviously, Amazon and other businesses take a share of anything sold on their site, but does the author get more if you buy it direct or does it somehow add a bunch of costs and they don’t really end up earning more? So, short answer is that yes, we earn a bit more if you buy directly from an author or our publisher, but the important part is that you actually buy what we are producing. (If you are paying for Kindle Unlimited, that counts – and pretty please, swipe through to the very end, even if it’s biographical and other material you’ve seen before because every page is paid.) For magazines including Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond, our subscription base through our website gives us a measure of financial stability. In other words, please subscribe! You can also give gift subscriptions. Based on his experience and knowledge of the publishing business, Eric is clear in his post that the difference in income between buying from a major book store or directly from an author isn’t significant. I will add one caveat to what he wrote because it was more than a decade ago. You can now borrow digital copies from libraries and authors do indeed get some income from that. I don’t know the details, but there is some income. What really matters is having people read, buy, and share. Authors need new readers. Publishers need new readers, and new authors. You undoubtedly already know this but it bears repeating, one of the best ways to help us find those new readers is to review what we publish. Even a simple star rating helps. Please and thank you. – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632…
It’s no secret that Grantville is based on the real town of Mannington. Eric explains how the name came about. – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) [I didn’t copy the date and time on the first posts I copied, which are generally the most recent.] Grantville is a composite of the names of two towns in the area: Grant Town and Barrackville. I had originally planned to model my fictional town on Grant Town, because that’s where the power plant in the area was located. (I needed both a power plant and a high school to make the plot work, and I knew I’d have to move one of them. Moving a high school seemed a lot simpler.) But when I came to the area in 1999 to do the research, I discovered that in the 20 years since I’d lived there in the late 70s, a lot had changed. A couple of big malls had opened up on I-79 between Morgantown and Fairmont, not far east of the various small towns along US 250. They’d sucked the life out of the downtowns and turned them into bedroom communities, which is not what I needed. So I drove west to see what might still work. Barrackville had suffered the same fate, but Mannington (which is the westernmost of that little string of towns) was far enough from the malls to have remaining a fully rounded town. The high school is located just outside of Mannington so I switched my plans and moved the power plant. Voila. Such were the origins of “Grantville.” It had nothing to do with Ulysses Grant or any other person named Grant so far as I know. (Don’t ask me who Grant Town is named after. I don’t have a clue.)
The British Isles remain a few years behind everything else in the main line in terms of politics and Baen novels. It’s just how things have ended up. The current most recent novel in the British Isles is the Dragon Award Finalist 1635: The Weaver’s Code by Eric Flint and Jody Lynn Nye. More than nine years after Eric’s post below, the British Isles are STILL in 1635. As a result, authors are still fairly constrained in what we can write in the British Isles. With that said, constrained doesn’t mean we can’t write anything. Tim Sayeau wrote the charming story “A Guest At The New Year” (Issue 6) and the sequel “Rose-Hip And Red Velvet” (Issue 9), which are set in England. (Personally, I’m hoping to read more of the story – hint, hint, Tim if you are reading this!) The story itself works without any reference to politics, but even within it, there were a few references that had to be removed because the political situation is still fluid. The basic rule is that the short stories in the magazines can’t muck about in anything that hits on high politics, as Eric explains in more detail below. Because everything is canon, all the writers have to be careful if we write anything that uses. – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) 13 January 2016 12:33 The problem mostly involves people trying to write stories that take place in the British Isles, if those stories either impinge upon so-called High Politics — or, and this is the trickier issue, presuppose that something already established is going to stay that way. This same issue exists everywhere in the series, of course, but most things happening on the continent are taking place within the context of story lines that are established through early/mid 1636. The problem with the British Isles is that that story line is lagging behind most…
Canon is really important to us here in the 1632 universe because even if you “just” look at the writers who are currently actively writing or planning stories and novels, that is still generally coordinating at least a couple of dozen authors with different backgrounds, knowledge bases, and goals for their story. Everyone wants the best for the universe, to be clear. But their character and story goals may vary wildly, as may their real-world knowledge and their knowledge of the 1632verse. So, canon matters, and defining what is canon matters. Our basic stance is that everything is canon, but to varying degreees. Primary, essentially unchangeable canon belongs to things published by Baen, with hardbacks having precedence over paperbacks which have precedence over ebook-only. Then Ring of Fire Press books, which at this point are mostly either being republished by Baen as ebook only publications or are no longer available. A small number have been self-published on Amazon. Magazine stories (Grantville Gazette and 1632 & Beyond) have been considered provisionally canon, meaning mainline Baen novels can contradict them. In reality, great effort has been made to ensure the two streams don’t cross in any meaningful way. With all of that said about how everything is canon, this is fiction, people are human, and sometimes mistakes happen or things are overlooked. Sometimes it’s a detail, like one Virginia notes below about a person being somewhere they shouldn’t be. Sometimes it provides an opportunity for a story. One of the driving forces for my novel Mrs. Flannery’s Flowers is my extreme irritation that in over 20 years of writing, not a single writer had mentioned stashes of crafting supplies! In West Virginia! Impossible! When I mentioned it to them, they all looked a bit sheepish and admitted they did remember seeing such things around. So, I wrote a whole novel to establish they existed and exactly why it was no one talked…
In this comment from BaensBar.net in 2015, Eric notes that because he is the author (sometimes overseer) of the 1632 alternate history, hegets to make the final decision on what is or isn’t plausible, and a big part of that is what makes the best, most interesting, most entertaining story. Since Eric has died, that mantle has passed. There are now a few who carry that mantle, but it starts with Bjorn Hasseler, editor-in-chief for Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond. If you disagree with Bjorn’s canon call, you can appeal above him – but I strongly suggest you have a really good reason if you do. You may know some specific subject matter area better than Bjorn, but you don’t know the 1632 universe better than he does. Seriously. You just don’t. And now, for Eric’s thoughts, which are what you are really interested in anyway. – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) 06 April 2015 12:39 There’s a lot of overlap between this discussion and the one under the thread title “Military guns in 1636 (the Ottomans)” and I’ve already made a couple of posts in that thread. I’m pressed for time because I’m trying to get a novel finished — well, most if it, anyway — before Lucille and I leave for a ten-day trip to the eastern Mediterranean in two and half weeks. And I have to go to LA for the Writers of the Future event this weekend, which will eat up a big chunk of that time. So I’ll keep this as brief as possible. I want to start by making a general comment. I am bemused by the ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY I KNOW WHAT’S POSSIBLE AND WHAT ISN’T!!!! attitude that’s being taken by some people in this discussion. My response is blunt: Bullshit. I am 68 years old. I have personally observed a number of wars and have a very good knowledge of…
Unfortunately I didn’t copy the date Eric wrote this, but he hadn’t published 1634: The Baltic War yet, so it’s been a while. With our writers looking toward Issue 15 of Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond, which has romance as a theme, and our next Salon call focused on romance, it’s timely content to share. In the many years since he wrote this, romance in all it’s glorious varieties has continued to be a strong part of 1632. Marla and Franz’ relationship is one of the most thoroughly fleshed out romances, but it’s far from the only one. In my own writing, my personal favorite relationship is between two octogenarians in my forthcoming Baen e-book release Red Shield. But I am looking forward to hearing more about Andrew Mackey and Julie Sims and their romance. And Eddie Cantrell and his bride. And… Well, you get the idea. The 1632verse isn’t just about battles and technological developments. It’s about people, and people have romances. We even dedicated the January 2026 issue of the magazine to romance, although, like most of romance itself, things didn’t go exactly as planned. Enjoy some insights on romance from Eric! – Bethanne (Publisher, Eric Flint’s 1632 & Beyond magazine) Romance RULE NUMBER ONE. What really keeps readers alert and on the qui vive, romance wise, are NEW romances. Old familiar ones are fine, of course, and you want to keep them simmering nicely on the pot or your fans will get grumpy. But you need a new romance to really liven things up. This can get tricky, mind you, in a long series, because after a while how many damn romances can you keep piling up? Still, while it’s a challenge, it can usually be done. One gimmick, of course, is to draaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwww out the romance across several books. I used this gimmick shamelessly in the Belisarius series, starting the Rao-Shakuntala romance in the first novel…