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 some wars that came before my time. And if there is one real constant to all of them, it’s this:
At the beginning of every war, lots of people (on both sides) are possessed of ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY I KNOW WHAT’S POSSIBLE AND WHAT ISN’T!!!!. And… they were almost always wrong. So why do you think you can be so certain of what’s possible and what isn’t in a war fought in an alternate history?
You ain’t that smart. Don’t take that personally. I ain’t that smart either. What I am, however, is the author (or sometimes overseer) of said alternate history and so I get to make the final decision of what I think is or isn’t plausible. And since I’m a reasonably honest man I will tell you the truth: the principal criteria by which I make these decisions is what will produce the best and most interesting and entertaining story.
The reason for the looming war with the Ottomans is simple, and it has absolutely nothing to do with military issues. With the victory of the USE in the Baltic War, I faced the horror that peace was threatening to break out all over. Dramatically, to make the series work right, I needed a major military conflict that would tie down most of the USE’s forces in a protracted land war. That would require the protagonists of many of the various story lines in the series — people like Sharon Nichols, Ruy Sanchez, Frank Stone, Giovanna Marcoli, Eddie Cantrell and his young Danish wife, Julie Sims and Alex Mackay, the people in Russia, you name it — to operate largely on their own. That makes for way better stories than being able to bring down the unrestrained might of the USE any time you need it.
The only plausible opponent was the Ottoman Empire, given the defeat of France in the Baltic War. All the military issues are secondary to that dramatic imperative. All I have to do is figure out ways that are plausible whereby the Ottomans can stay in the fight. They don’t even have to win. Dramatically, they just need to serve as the pivot around which the series can revolve.
The key term here is “plausible.” There is a lot of leeway in that word. If you don’t believe me, consult the opinions expressed by people BEFORE any one of the many wars of the last century erupted. The great majority of them turn out to be wrong — and yet most of them were reasonably plausible until they were put to the test.
One of the most laughable opinions was Dick Cheney’s prediction before the invasion of Iraq that the Americans “would be greeted as liberators.” And yet… the prediction wasn’t actually implausible, in and of itself. As an author, I don’t — and didn’t at the time — have any trouble figuring out various scenarios by which that prediction might have been borne out, or at least come fairly close. The problem, of course, was that the regime Cheney was part of did everything wrong. (Starting with refusing to raise taxes. You can’t fight a serious war without raising taxes. Everybody since the pharaohs has understood that. War is the most expensive thing people ever do.)
My point is that you need to have a little humility — or at least rein in your overweening ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY YOU KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN. Because…
You don’t. And I’m the one controlling all the variables in the equation, not you. 🙂
Yeah, I know, it ain’t fair. But there it is.
