TLIAW: Walking In My Dreams
- Thread starter Comisario
- Start date
I don't know if it's the fact it's an hour later and I've had a cider, but I think I enjoyed this one even more than the first. It might be my bias toward the 1970s, too - there's something plastic and gauche about the era, certainly compared to the 1960s, which is a lot of fun to watch politicians struggle to get to grips with.
Where to begin? Maurice Macmillan is an inspired choice, and while I was sad to see that this wouldn't become the board's great 'Barbara as PM' TL, her career and its end was entirely plausible. Benn also had a very believable fate, never quite going for it (in-story) but being feted and hated all the same. You are very, very good at constructing ATL narratives that are mundane enough to be believable but interesting enough to be readable.
You really don't like Edward Heath, do you?
Other highlights were the American tidbits, though you'll need to explain to me how Shriver ends up a serious candidate in not one but two elections, and indeed POTUS! I'm sure it's plausible with the right chain of events.
The 'dash for growth', i.e. the credit revolution attempt at the end of the story, is another nice touch that reinforces a sense of a very different world without saying 'and then Michael Foot was trodden on by an AT-AT'. Macmillan's alcohol trouble leading to a public absence and a brief 'leave' on health grounds seemed believable for the period (I don't think Cameron would get away with it today, a PM being bedridden for longer than a week would, I think, have to resign). I think even back then, though, more questions would have been asked - even by people who believed it was flu.
All in all, a great couple of stories. If you can PM me the word count we can start talking about you know what.
Where to begin? Maurice Macmillan is an inspired choice, and while I was sad to see that this wouldn't become the board's great 'Barbara as PM' TL, her career and its end was entirely plausible. Benn also had a very believable fate, never quite going for it (in-story) but being feted and hated all the same. You are very, very good at constructing ATL narratives that are mundane enough to be believable but interesting enough to be readable.
You really don't like Edward Heath, do you?
Other highlights were the American tidbits, though you'll need to explain to me how Shriver ends up a serious candidate in not one but two elections, and indeed POTUS! I'm sure it's plausible with the right chain of events.
The 'dash for growth', i.e. the credit revolution attempt at the end of the story, is another nice touch that reinforces a sense of a very different world without saying 'and then Michael Foot was trodden on by an AT-AT'. Macmillan's alcohol trouble leading to a public absence and a brief 'leave' on health grounds seemed believable for the period (I don't think Cameron would get away with it today, a PM being bedridden for longer than a week would, I think, have to resign). I think even back then, though, more questions would have been asked - even by people who believed it was flu.
All in all, a great couple of stories. If you can PM me the word count we can start talking about you know what.
Good to hear! I'm certainly a '60s man, myself, but I know where you're coming from. It's especially funny to watch the straight-edged, grey-suited and ultimately very serious politicians of the 1960s suddenly have themselves tarnished in varying shades of avocado.
I had pangs of doubt and despair over not launching into such a timeline (it's something that I've always wanted to do), I thought that giving Maurice Macmillan his time in the sun was more important. Castle can wait for another day...
On the believable/interesting balance, I have to say that it's something I genuinely enjoy nowadays. Politics, even at a minute level of personalities and small differences of opinion, can make great timelines. It's the kind of thing that only comes up when people write communist TLs, really - it's about internal factions, clashes of ego, and the synthesis between the personal and the political. In TLs about democratic nations, it's often "Politician 1 beat Politician 2, leading Politician 1 to nuke the moon". When it comes to communist TLs, there's talk about functionaries, secretaries, real people with real ideas, and a feeling that the inner workings of the state can be as dramatic as the world of elections and wars.
You really don't like Edward Heath, do you?
Up until he bangs on about Europe, he's fine by me. After then, he's fair game!
I will have to explain to you, but that's for another day. I've got rough outlines of the American side of things. For 1972, it's just the taint of social liberalism around Romney and the lack of Vietnam as a major issue after the earlier withdrawal that lead to Shriver taking the Democratic nomination. Let's just say that the Democrats are stuck between a Southern demagogue and a dull leftist in '76... leading to something of a "Draft Shriver" movement. After that, winning against a worn-out (but no less radical) Reagan is, as they say, a piece of piss.
The credit revolution was OTL, but pushed later until Barber had some free reign. Once again, personalities come into play.
I agree that maybe it was a slight stretch to have him gone for so long, but I did make sure to include the part that "those in the know" would keep schtum about the issue for the sake of unity.
Sure thing. Thanks for all your feedback!
Election boxes are actually quite easy if you know the templates - the referendum one is particularly trivial since it counts out all the percentages on its own. Personal boxes are a lot more laborious.
I never knew that about the referendum box - very interesting.
Still, figuring out those numbers and getting them to seem realistic for the number of seats is always something that I am cautious about. I do more personal boxes because of that (and because it's a bit like character development within a handy box).
I hate to be like this because those election boxes really are very good - but the seat numbers add up to 633 in all three of them...
This is terribly uncouth of me, but as I was going off the numbers provided in the body of the TL, I blame Liam for this.
(I'll adjust the seat totals)
I hate to be like this because those election boxes really are very good - but the seat numbers add up to 633 in all three of them...
This is terribly uncouth of me, but as I was going off the numbers provided in the body of the TL, I blame Liam for this.
(I'll adjust the seat totals)
I've only just seen this! Damn, I fucked up on those. I don't know why, but I thought I'd upped the total number of seats somewhere along the line.
It's not unreasonable to assume that there would've been a boundary review between 1975 and 1980, that would've increased the seat number. BTW, do the Ulster Unionists still take the Tory whip?
Yeah, I was thinking of things hitting about 640/650 in a boundary review.
And yes, the Ulster Unionists still take the Tory whip owing to a much less volatile situation in Northern Ireland and the lack of any Sunningdale-esque agreement.