What work of AH is the worst offender of the butterfly effect ?

You just beat me to it.

It's like Stirling wanted to write something about South Africa, didn't know anything about it, and was just too GOD-DAMN LAZY to learn anything. So he just pulled some shit out of his ass and smeared it on the page, then threw in some lesbians and hoped to god that that pulled the book through.

Awful. Awful stuff.

At least The Year The Cloud Fell was imaginative and leaves you feeling uplifted. The Draka series just leaves feeling like you've wasted your time and you're never getting it back.

Have never read the Draka books, but have heard enough about them on this site to put me off them for life.

As a South African I get pissed off that it is automatically assumed that whites in Africa automatically becoming frothing racists who hate any other race.

A former member, Diamond, who ironically was banned in The Great Purge which followed Stirling's banning from this site, wrote a good "counter-Draka" timeline, where the USA became a Giant Evil Empire (TM) and European colonists in SA created a liberal, democratic non-racial society.
 

Hendryk

Banned
1. The stories and timelines we write are fiction. Artistic license is allowed! Stories are more interesting if they involve characters or countries we know about. Yes it's anachronistic to pit the USA against the Roman Empire, but it's also fun. And yes, the best pieces of alternate history are stories
I second Marius, the butterfly effect isn't optional, it's the very essence of alternate history. It's certainly possible to have a "butterfly net" in place for a limited amount of time if it can be justified (Jared has done it in "Lands of Red and Gold", which has Australian aborigines develop sedentary civilizations without the rest of the world being affected until actual contact in the 17th century), but artistic license only goes so far. If it isn't plausible, it's no longer alternate history but alternate fantasy.

2. If we applied the butterfly effect in the manner with which it is often suggested we do, we would never get any interesting or thought provoking timelines.
Most of the TLs written on this board so far beg to differ.
 
I second Marius, the butterfly effect isn't optional, it's the very essence of alternate history. It's certainly possible to have a "butterfly net" in place for a limited amount of time if it can be justified (Jared has done it in "Lands of Red and Gold", which has Australian aborigines develop sedentary civilizations without the rest of the world being affected until actual contact in the 17th century), but artistic license only goes so far. If it isn't plausible, it's no longer alternate history but alternate fantasy.


Most of the TLs written on this board so far beg to differ.

Most of the interesting time lines apply the butterfly effect when it's conveniant and ignore it when it isn't, and most people writing them probably don't even realise they're doing it (the classic example is Britain automatically being allied to France in the WW2 of a CP victorious time line!)

Whether or not you apply an absolute interpretation of the butterfly effect probably depends on whether you see alternate history as primarily entertainment, in which case you'll probably be more tolerant of artistic license or whether you see it primarily as an academic exercise is which case you probably wouldn't.

Saying that, history itself tend to be seen as a succession of stories which are interpreted in different ways by different people. This is only natural and as such it's only natural the alternate history is seen as a succession of stories.
 

Deleted member 5719

Most of the interesting time lines apply the butterfly effect when it's conveniant and ignore it when it isn't, and most people writing them probably don't even realise they're doing it (the classic example is Britain automatically being allied to France in the WW2 of a CP victorious time line!)

.

If it's a WWII with nazis then the timeline isn't AH and is unreadable. As for France and GB, the cultural similarities between elites originating in the 19th century and geographical factors make such an alliance plausible.
 
Talking about dinosaurs, there are two egregious examples: Harrison's Eden trilogy (dinosaurs are still around, and they developed intelligence, but homo sapiens evolved anyway), and "A Sound of Thunder", a short story by Bradbury that was adapted into a disaster of a movie. It has time-travelling big game hunters from the future who come to the Cretaceous to bag dinosaurs, and this doesn't make any difference, but when one of them crushes a butterfly, it results in a different electoral outcome in an American presidential election in 2055. Talk about "butterfly effect" :rolleyes:

Now, as bad as the movie was (dunno about the story), I'll admit the poster was pretty cool. We could certainly use it at AH.com--not to mention the tagline ;)
I think I read the story when I was younger... IIRC, the 'explanation' given for why killing the dinosaurs did not have a visible impact, while crushing a butterfly did, was that the dinosaurs were all dinosaurs about to die anyhow, while the butterfly, well, wasn't.
 
I think I read the story when I was younger... IIRC, the 'explanation' given for why killing the dinosaurs did not have a visible impact, while crushing a butterfly did, was that the dinosaurs were all dinosaurs about to die anyhow, while the butterfly, well, wasn't.

The in-story explanation for what happens if you kill the butterfly is something that should be required reading for any AH writer, because it sums up perfectly:

“All right,” Travis continued, “say we accidentally kill one mouse here. That means all the future families of this one particular mouse are destroyed, right?”

“Right.”

“And all the families of the families of the families of that one mouse! With a stamp of your foot, you annihilate first one, then a dozen, then a thousand, a million, a billion possible mice!”

“So they’re dead,” said Eckels. “So what?”

“So what?” Travis snorted quietly. “Well, what about the foxes that’ll need those mice to survive? For want of ten mice, a fox dies. For want of ten foxes a lion starves. For want of a lion, all manner of insects, vultures, infinite billions of life forms are thrown into chaos and destruction.

Eventually it all boils down to this: fifty-nine million years later, a caveman, one of a dozen on the entire world, goes hunting wild boar or saber-toothed tiger for food. But you, friend, have stepped on all the tigers in that region. By stepping on one single mouse. So the caveman starves. And the caveman, please note, is not just any expendable man, no! He is an entire future nation. From his loins would have sprung ten sons. From their loins one hundred sons, and thus onward to a civilization. Destroy this one man, and you destroy a race, a people, an entire history of life. It is comparable to slaying some of Adam’s grandchildren. The stomp of your foot, on one mouse, could start an earthquake, the effects of which could shake our earth and destinies down through Time, to their very foundations. With the death of that one caveman, a billion others yet unborn are throttled in the womb. Perhaps Rome never rises on its seven hills. Perhaps Europe is forever a dark forest, and only Asia waxes healthy and teeming. Step on a mouse and you crush the Pyramids. Step on a mouse and you leave your print, like a Grand Canyon, across Eternity. Queen Elizabeth might never be born, Washington might not cross the Delaware, there might never be a United States at all. So be careful. Stay on the Path. Never step off!”

You can read the illustrated version of it here:

http://www.scaryforkids.com/a-sound-of-thunder/


The thing is that, like Hendryk and Marius are saying, you can fiddle around with the changes not having a big effect for a short period of time but eventually the changes add up. Not addressing this issue immediately turns me off the story and just makes me want to chunk the book into the corner.

"Oh wait - the history of North American from 1800-1900 is completely different from our history on a dozen different levels -- but the same guys end up as President?" :confused:

These errors are even more egregious when you realize just how many elections were so close that just having a few extra thousand people in the wrong (or right) places could have tipped the balances enough that different politicians would have ended up getting elected. Hell--just look at the 1960 Presidential election and realize how things could have ended up differently (Hawaii, for example, was won by Kennedy by just 115 votes). I'm fairly certain that all kinds of other elections (especially local ones that propel a future President to eventual higher office) have been won by small margins like that.
 
1. The stories and timelines we write are fiction. Artistic license is allowed! Stories are more interesting if they involve characters or countries we know about. Yes it's anachronistic to pit the USA against the Roman Empire, but it's also fun. And yes, the best pieces of alternate history are stories

Yeah, no it's not. If I see I ever see United States fighting Rome, I'll put down the book faster than you can say butterfly effect.

3. N00bs often have their initial attempts at writing time lines shot down in flames by old timers yelling "butterfly effect". This is seriously unhelpful and just serves to make the old timers feel better about themselves for a couple of minutes. Constructive criticism is all well and good, having a go just because someones new at something isn't! Remember, we were all n00bs once

Except that most members yell butterfly effect, then explain.

4. The butterfly effect is a useful tool when telling stories, but it is a tool only. It shouldn't be allowed to rule what we do

Wrong - the butterfly effect is a rule, not a tool. People who don't use the butterfly effect in their timelines are lazy bastards who'd rather follow OTL than create something on their own.

Have never read the Draka books, but have heard enough about them on this site to put me off them for life.

As a South African I get pissed off that it is automatically assumed that whites in Africa automatically becoming frothing racists who hate any other race.

A former member, Diamond, who ironically was banned in The Great Purge which followed Stirling's banning from this site, wrote a good "counter-Draka" timeline, where the USA became a Giant Evil Empire (TM) and European colonists in SA created a liberal, democratic non-racial society.

Except that it was the Americans who emigrated to the Cape Colony who were the racists in the Draka TL. And they did enslave Europeans and Asians after conquering those territories.
 
Wrong - the butterfly effect is a rule, not a tool. People who don't use the butterfly effect in their timelines are lazy bastards who'd rather follow OTL than create something on their own.

Er, that's a bit extreme, no? Apart from AH buffs, do you really think the average person picking up a book involving AH elements (not necessarily a pure AH book) is going to go 'GHAHRHA NO BUTTERFLIEZ!' I doubt they'll even know or care what the butterfly is. At the end of the day, the plot or characters of a novel is more important, unless of course the AH is the dominant aspect of the book, in which case yes I agree the butterfly should be kept in mind.
 
Ironically, one of the bigger offenders is the very book which gave the Butterfly Effect its name. In "Sound of Thunder", the guy kills a butterfly over 65 MYA, and what happens?

The other guy won, people write different, and the air smells funny, and that was it.
 
Ironically, one of the bigger offenders is the very book which gave the Butterfly Effect its name. In "Sound of Thunder", the guy kills a butterfly over 65 MYA, and what happens?

The other guy won, people write different, and the air smells funny, and that was it.

Let's be honest, you shouldn't expect much else--cosmically, one dead butterfly is like shifting one atom in a speck of sand.
 
Yeah, no it's not. If I see I ever see United States fighting Rome, I'll put down the book faster than you can say butterfly effect.

That may be true for you, but not everyone. Yeah, I wouldn't take any book that has Rome fighting America seriously, but as light entertainment what's the problem?

Except that most members yell butterfly effect, then explain.

most members maybe, but not most posts regarding it

Wrong - the butterfly effect is a rule, not a tool. People who don't use the butterfly effect in their timelines are lazy bastards who'd rather follow OTL than create something on their own.

The vast majority of people, including most of those who yell butterfly effect don't know what it is. Like Schrödinger's Cat it is an attempt to explain some rather in depth Physics, in this case Chaos Theory, to the general public which is then taken completely out of context by the majority of people and applied incorrectly. If you want to use Chaos Theory fine, but it involves some pretty complicated maths and is only really understandable in that language

Any other use of something called 'the butterfly effect' is in itself artistic license and should be understood as such. this doesn't mean that it's not acceptable, but just that it shouldn't be treated as some hard and fast rule
 

Hendryk

Banned
Let's be honest, you shouldn't expect much else--cosmically, one dead butterfly is like shifting one atom in a speck of sand.
But one butterfly plus 65 million years is another story. Either there's no divergence at all, or there's a huge one.

"A difference of an inch at the start, a difference of a mile at the arrival."
 
At least The Year The Cloud Fell was imaginative and leaves you feeling uplifted.

I enjoyed The Year the Cloud Fell series immensely. Very imaginative and creative. I was very disappointed to learn that the fourth book wasn't going to be printed.

For bad AH I look towards Harry Harrison's Stars and Stripes series. However, I think I fault bad AH being more badly written than thought out. There could be great ideas that are just terribly executed. Turtledove's problem (one of several) is that he writes multi-volume series and the quality isn't there for the entire work.

Regarding the Butterfly Effect, it can be employed as one wishes. Its not a rule - or at least strict adherance isn't going to get anyone's works published. The reading public does want to see familiar characters, which do provide an example of how this AH is so different.
 
I can't believe no-one has said Draka. Huge aggressive empire comes about in Africa, but everything outside of Africa goes like our TL up until WWII.

I was going to bring that up, but I thought someone else would have already.

(It looks like you did)

I actually enjoyed the Draka novels, but they do offend badly against the butterfly effect.

My Afrikaner TL (have you taken a look at it?), which started out as a response to a "quasi-Draka" challenge, has some issues with butterflies (there's still a US and a USSR, albeit with different founders), but I do go to some pretty out-there places along the way.
 
This thread has really taken off ! :eek:
Thank you all for your contributions. :)

Carry on, carry on, it's an interesting discussion. :)
 
I believe in a limited butterfly effect, for two reasons slightly easier historical research. And sheer badassery. For instance in my upcoming TL with a POD in 1774 there will still be a Theodore Roosevelt (mainly because he was so badass), and the Green Bay Packers. But on the same level the Oakland Raiders perhaps will never have left Los Angeles and will be the Los Angeles Raiders or since the Geopolitical scene will be different Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr. might not be killed in an analogue war of World War Two, but his brother John might and so and so forth but I won't have the world completely unrecognizable.
 
After watching the recent Star Trek film, I mentioned to some friends that the plot disregarded the butterfly effect. One of them replied - "Well, they are in an alternate timeline. There is an infinite number of alternate timelines. Why not choose the one where most things are very similar?"

And that's a very good view of the butterfly effect. Of course, it is a rule and will definitely happen. However, for storytelling purposes, it can be ignored as much as necessary.
 

wormyguy

Banned
After watching the recent Star Trek film, I mentioned to some friends that the plot disregarded the butterfly effect. One of them replied - "Well, they are in an alternate timeline. There is an infinite number of alternate timelines. Why not choose the one where most things are very similar?"
That sounds distressingly logical and reasonable.
 
After watching the recent Star Trek film, I mentioned to some friends that the plot disregarded the butterfly effect. One of them replied - "Well, they are in an alternate timeline. There is an infinite number of alternate timelines. Why not choose the one where most things are very similar?"

And that's a very good view of the butterfly effect. Of course, it is a rule and will definitely happen. However, for storytelling purposes, it can be ignored as much as necessary.

You, Sir, are my God. Because this is something that has been plaguing me for months from the point when I started to flesh out TTLs 2009. For example, many people we know will still be around, if only for comedic purposes. ( For example George Lucas might work in the American Propaganda Ministry. )
 
Top