|
Updated Sunday 15 May, 2011 12:18 PM |
|
|
Join Writer Development Section Writer Development Member Section
This Day in Alternate History Blog
|
Book
Review – Stars and Strips Trilogy I shall be honest – I used to
be a big Harry Harrison fan. I grew
up on a diet of the Stainless Steel Rat books (although the last one really
sucked) and his Invasion: Earth book, while trite, was fun to read.
However, Harrison’s latest foray into the field of Alternate History is
not a partially good attempt, even through it does have a few inspired moments. The basic plot is simple; the
dastardly British (and that is the impression throughout the books) take great
offensive to the Trent Affair of OTL (no deaths, no sinking, no change)
and decide to attack the US after blunders on both sides and a couple of
accidents lead to a war of words – which promptly elesicates to a shooting
war. The British manage to make
several mistakes, which lead to them getting embroiled with the CSA as well.
Incredible, no? You’ve
only seen the beginning. After such
blunders, and the loss of Canada and the West Indies, you’d expect the British
to improve a bit, but no. One year
or so after the war ends, with the US reunited on good terms and the slaves
freed, the Brits are back – in Mexico! Some
cunning British man has thought of the idea of a Panama Canal idea, using a road
instead. Then they can bring troops
from India and invade from there to the south.
Well, this can’t go on, so Lee and Co. have the bright idea of invading
…… Ireland!! Needless to say,
the plan works perfectly and Ireland is freed, along with a plan to get rid of
its religious problems. Somehow,
the British won’t lie down, and therefore the Americans invade Britain itself,
meeting complete success and imposing democratic rule to Britain.
The world is safe again. Sounds great?
Well, there are huge problems with the book.
I’ll list a few below, but first the movements of genius.
Ok, that was all I could think of, now the problems…. 1) It is ludicrous to imagine the British of the 1860 period either repeating the mistakes of the Revolution (the march to Saratoga) or attacking the CSA by accident. Britain was expert at such operations and several were called off in the Napoleonic wars because of fears that the navigation was faulty. 2) The results of the battle between the ironclads is fantasy. The monitor could not go far into the open sea, while the British craft could. They could retreat with ease, while monitor would either capsize or be forced to retreat. 3) The British would be unlikely to repeat the attack on Washington, as it had been done before. 4) I can’t see the CSA just agreeing to ban slavery like that. It was completely contradictory to their economic instants. 5) Or, for that matter, rejoining the union. Co-belligence is a much more likely outcome. 6) The dialogue is forced and hackneyed. Lee’s and the others catchphrases are overused. Erickson is egoistical. The British are dogmatic. The Russian (s) are vodka drinkers to excess and way too cheerful. Victoria was not a whiny old woman. 7) Mexico is a good place to carry out that plan, but Indian regiments would not be there, as they could not be forced to travel over the sea in most cases. 8) How is the American force supplied, particularly if the Mexicans are not enthusiastic about the exhibition? 9) Free Blacks? Working on Military Projects? In 1862????? 10) Jefferson Davis a KKKer? Possible, but unlikely. And the black who shot him would be lynched at once. 11) I’m sure Texas had slaves. 12) Ireland would be torn apart in civil war as soon as the Americans landed and the British withdrew. 13) The British would gather forces before counter-attacking. 14) The British would have embarked upon a massive program of ship-building as soon as they heard about the results of the battle, not just one or two little ships, by then they would have more ships than the Americans and probably better ones. There is NO way the British would allow an independent Ireland with a hostile military force encamped in it. |
