Rating: 
Summary: Decent read for a transtlantic flight, or the beach
Review: A tall tale, cheerfully spun out, of a couple of Cambridge (UK) academics who use a time machine to improve world history by deleting Hitler, only to make things worse than ever. For those who've read much science fiction, the alternate history theme -- what would happen if you could go back in time and alter historical events? -- is hardly novel. Nevertheless, the premise is worked out skilfully, and the novel is a fast lively read, with an engaging main character, clever story twists (e.g. imagining Hitler as a child), and reasonably good writing. The other reviews I read here, however, led me to expect more; I found the book funny and clever at times, but not particularly witty, and far from brilliant. All in all, a pretty good yarn with enought intellectual content to make you think -- but not too hard.
Rating: 
Summary: It has it's weak points, but overall a very good read
Review: As an enthusiastic reader of alternative history fiction, I have found that certain themes seem to appeal to writers more than others. Among the more popular ones are "What if there had been no Reformation?", "What if the South had won the American Civil War?" and,of course, "What if Hitler had never been born?" and "What if the Nazis had won World War Two?"Stephen Fry exercises considerable ingenuity in combining these last two questions with the science-fiction theme "Could we travel back in time and alter the past?" The central premise of his novel is that two Cambridge academics, Michael Young, a young historian, and Leo Zuckerman, an elderly German-born physicist, decide to prevent the birth of Adolf Hitler by using a time-machine to introduce contraceptives into the water-supply of his home town of Braunau shortly before his conception. Unfortunately, this experiment goes awry. Then second half of the novel is set in a world where the Nazis still came to power in the early 1930s led by one Rudolf Gloder, a man as ruthless as Hitler but more subtle and cunning. Under Gloder's leadership, Germany develops the atomic bomb and uses it to dominate Europe. America remains independent and nominally democratic, but develops into a deeply reactionary society, racist, anti-homosexual and with an intrusive secret police. This is a clever idea, and Stephen Fry writes with a good deal of wit and style. There are a couple more, very dark, twists of the plot, which I will not reveal. Nevertheless, the book suffers from structural weaknesses. The main one is the decision to set the second part of the book in America rather than Nazi-ruled Europe. (In the alternative universe he has conjured up, Michael is a student at Princeton rather than Cambridge). This means that we never see the effects of the tyranny of Gloder and his successors for ourselves, but merely hear about it at second hand. Nor is it explained why an America engaged in a cold war with Nazi Germany should have become so much more reactionary and backward-looking than an America engaged in a cold war with Soviet Russia. The concentration on the failings of American society in the alternative universe makes the book seem rather unbalanced; indeed, when Michael and his Princeton friend Stephen Burns come up with a scheme to undo the damage by ensuring that Hitler is born after all, one is left with the impression that they are motivated less by the desire to liberate Europe from Nazi rule than by the wish to make America safe for long hair, gay pride marches and Ecstasy. The second structural weakness is that, although most of the book is written in the form of a first-person prose narrative, lengthy (and key) sections are written in the form of a film screenplay. The two styles of writing do not mesh together well, because the screenplay mode of writing does not serve to convey characters' feelings and motivations as well as does prose narrative. In a film, of course, the bare bones of the screenplay are fleshed out by the contributions of the actors and director, who have other techniques of conveying emotion, but when the screenplay stands by itself it makes for very flat reading. This adversely affects the book in one very important way. During the first half of the book, Michael is heterosexual with a girlfriend. During the second half, he becomes a homosexual and he and Stephen fall in love. Unfortunately, the scene where they realise their love for each other is one of those written in the screenplay form, so the reader is left with no idea what has prompted this sudden reversal of the sexual orientation of the central character, and Michael's sudden conversion to homosexuality seems completely implausible. Another point that interested me was the tension between Stephen Fry's obvious political liberalism and the deeper conservative theme of his book. The Law of Unintended Consequences - the law that says that in seeking to make a thing better we often make it worse and that the more radical the change we seek, the more likely it is that it will lead to disaster - is, after all, a basic element of conservative political thought, but one that is generally rejected by liberals and radicals as too pessimistic. I wonder if Mr Fry was aware of this contrast- something I would have like to have seen explored more deeply As another reader has pointed out, Hitler's home town is named Braunau, not Brunau, the spelling that appears in the book throughout. Mr Fry, however, seems to have researched the historical background thoroughly, so I presume that this error is the fault of an editor or proof-reader rather of his own. The idea behind this book is an interesting one; I would, however, like to have seen it better handled. Hence the title of this review- my grandfather's favourite expression for something done clumsily that could have been done better. To declare an interest, Stephen Fry and I were at Cambridge together, and I knew him slightly. I doubt if he remembers me (if he is reading this, he is probably thinking "James who?"), but I certainly remember him. I hope this has not coloured my review.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting speculation but nothing new
Review: British author Stephen Fry is most well known as actor who has appeared in "Blackadder", "Jeeves & Wooster" and "Peter's Friends." Making History, however, is his third novel, so he can be considered something of a novelist as well. This particular novel is an alternate history, although Fry classifies it as an alternate reality. Michael D. "Puppy" Young is a graduate student reading history at Cambridge. His recently finished thesis is on the childhood of Adolf Hitler, a person who has always fascinated Young, not because of who he was, but because of the simple coincidence that they were both born on April 20. A chance meeting with Leo Zuckerman, a refugee whose father was at Auschwitz, provides the impetus of the adventure. Zuckerman has a feeling about Young and shows him a device that Zuckerman has invented which can transmit shadowy images from the past. Zuckerman has it tuned to the day his father arrived at Auschwitz. The two men work to build a transmitter so they can send a permanent male contraceptive pill which Young's girlfriend has developed, to poison the water supply in Brunau, in time to stop Adolf Hitler from being born. The first half of the novel, which sets the scene, varies between being tedious and interesting. Several of the chapters show Hitler's parents or Hitler in World War I and introduce us to a person who will figure prominently in the second part of the novel, Rudolf Gloder. Strangely enough, the interesting parts cannot be said to belong only to the present-day sequences or the historical sequences. They vary without regard to the characters. One of the techniques which Fry uses repeatedly, however, writing three of the chapters as movie scripts, is probably where the novel bogged down the most, especially the final segment where Fry began introducing a lot of background and action which was not germane to the plot, or even a strong sub-plot. The second half of the novel is when Fry really hits his stride. Apparently successful in ridding the world of Adolf Hitler, Young has found himself as an American student at Princeton. Much of this part of the book is spent with Young trying to figure out who he is and later, what the history of this new twentieth century is. As with the first section of the book, Fry returns to World War I and we get to witness Rudi Gloder's rise in the absence of Adolf Hitler. Very little that Fry does is unique or surprising to anyone who has read a fair amount of alternate history. This novel, however, is being marketed in the mainstream, however, and will hold a certain amount of appeal to the readership which found Harris's Fatherland an intriguing read. Fry does handle his material well, and even if he doesn't deliver many full-fledged surprised, the moment when the reader realizes where Fry is going with the pieces of the novel is worth the price of admission.
Rating: 
Summary: Get the Spelling Right, Dear Americans
Review: I believe it was the American edition of the book that I was forced to read--for it was luck in itself that I got my hands on anything by Stephen Fry in this god-forsaken corner of the earth.
Other than being just brilliant, like Mr Fry's other works, I was slightly frustrated with the American spelling. Not only was the main hero a bumbling Brit, but the language and accent played an important role in the story. Why the heck mix up American and British for no particular reason to produce some strange concoction? Also, Braunau is not spelt Brunau, as used in the book.
Rating:
Summary: An entertaining consideration of will and fate
Review: I have to confess that time travel has been a subject that has long made me nervous--too many hackneyed plots have been constructed around the consequences of messing around with events in the past. That said, my past enjoyment of Stephen Fry's *The Hippopotamus* overcame my trepidation, and I picked up a copy of *Making History*. The result was incredibly rewarding. This is a really entertaining novel. The central character is Michael, a Cambridge graduate student on the brink of completing his dissertation on the life of Adolf Hitler. Michael has a penchant for the sensational: his dissertation has long fictionalized passages that outrage the stuffy don who oversees his resarch, his narration of events often lapses into a screenplay format (more justification for the central thesis of Neal Gabler's *Life, The Movie*). Through entertaining exposition, Fry creates the portrait of a character who is supposed to be merely chronicling the past, but can't seem to help getting involved in more creative invention. Without giving away too much, this propensity combined with the research of a Cambridge physics professor into imaging through time makes for a volatile mix. Fry manages to develop a complex character in Michael, along with a fast-moving plot centered around the consequences of Michael's collaboration with a guilt-ridden physicist. Fry also tackles interesting ideas around free will and fate--old hat to be sure, but nicely dressed up in this treatment. Most importantly, Fry manages to treat what could be an overly dramatic story with his customary good humor.The result is an intelligent, thoroughly enjoyable book.
Rating:
Summary: Full of Stephenesque humour
Review: Making History is another classic Stephen Fry novel - an original plot, knee-trembling humour and a protagonist who so resembles Fry, you could be forgiven for thinking it was just another autobiography! All the usual Oscar Wilde flippancy, Evelyn Waugh waspishness and P. G. Wodehouse absurdity, cleverly guided by the pen of one of the world's sharpest wits with, in this case, maybe just a touch of H.G. Wells thrown in for good measure. The nub of the plot is that two Cambridge (UK) academics decide to reverse history and have Hitler 'unborn'. Simple enough, really! Unfortunately, of course, they don't foresee that the void left by a non-Hitler would be filled by someone even worse - the timing and the circumstances in Europe pretty well guaranteed it. And this is where, in my opinion, 'Making History' falls down. When you write a plot-based book, you must be certain that the plot is watertight and, unfortunately it isn't. First of all, as I say, it seems fairly clear that two bright academics would have given some thought to what might have happened in a Hitler-free world. Secondly (without giving away too much of the story) it seems that Michael Young, one of the academics, came out in the future world knowing what had happened in the other world. Leo Zuckermann, the other academic didn't. Same in reverse (not to mention a slight time shift as well). It's not good enough, Mister Fry. I love your writing, but a watertight plot is essential. Also, as with other Stephen Fry novels, the subjects of homosexuality and Judaism are always at the forefront. It would be nice to get back to something more like 'The Hippopotamus' where we didn't have to be subjected to Fry's soapbox opinions. Leave the politics to Ben Elton, and get on with telling a story. But for all my grumbling, 'Making History' was still an entertaining read and I would gladly recommend it to to anyone. The New York Times called it 'shockingly tasteless and deeply offensive'. Time said, 'Wit, cynicism and ill will are the virtues of this . . . funny, sharp-tongued novel'. I think Time got it right.
Rating:
Summary: Imaginative, sometimes comic
Review: Michael is a young doctoral student in England whose thesis centers on the early life of Adolf Hitler. He encounters a physicist who harbors a deep hatred of Hitler (as well as a deep secret), and the two hatch a plot to make so Hitler was never born. The two change history, but the world doesn't turn out how they intended. Michael struggles in this new, disturbing world to find the physicist and to right the wrong, and along the way he finds love with another man. But will this love survive when they try to set the world right? Sometimes fun, always intelligent, this novel can be called a sci-fi comedy, or just a highly imaginative book. Any which way, though, Fry's book is a marvelous read about history and our views on it.
Rating:
Summary: A tremendous what....if... book
Review: Stephen Fry explores the classical question "What would have happened to the world if Hitler would not have been born?" In this book, which is serious, hilarious, inventive and thought-provoking all at the same time, we get a possible answer to this question and it is not a nice one... A young scientist helps an old physicist to change history by preventing Hitler from being born, but an even bigger rogue takes the place left open after this event. The problem is that this man is not as unacceptable to other nations as Hitler was, thus changing history in a way which the two had not quite imagined... So the young man has to struggle to set things right working in a society which is as grim as can be.
Rating:
Summary: It starts with a dream . . .
Review: Stephen Fry's third novel is an interesting and amusing (though not as frightening as he would have it seem) re-imagining of what would have happened had Hitler never been born. Twenty-four-year-old Cambridge University history scholar Michael Young has a penchant for the type of fictional embellishing that Edmund Morris was guilty of in his recent memoir of Ronald Reagan. But unlike Morris (and Reagan himself, to some extent) Young really is a fictional character. He still has to pay the price for his creative scholarship (his thesis is rejected by his advisor), but it is this imaginative sense that bears him up for the journey back in time to sterilize Hitler's father before the evil seed is ever planted. I recommend that people read MAKING HISTORY after Fry's two earlier and more scintillating novels, THE LIAR and THE HIPPOPOTAMUS. The heaviness of the subject matter here is slightly out of Fry's hitting zone and I would hate to have anyone put off perhaps the funniest intellectual writer alive today. That said, this is a fine book in its own right and contains an excellent understanding of academic life (at both Cambridge and Princeton) and human nature. Special points, too, for an opening chapter that ranks among the most screamingly funny in Fry's oeuvre--what would you do if you woke up late for class and only had decaf in the house? As an avid Stephen Fry fan I was in no way displeased with this book, I just know that he has done better work--most recently with the sensational autobiography, MOAB IS MY WASHPOT. MAKING HISTORY is not a book for science fiction connoisseurs, but definitely an ambitious, well-imagined work of literary merit. You'll be surprised how much you laugh.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Read
Review: This novel is well-written in the finest tradition of British humor. The classic premise that when we change things we sometimes make them worse is the basis for the novel, and it is served very well, with vivid descriptions and color. I highly recommend this book, but I think that it takes a certain type of off-color personality to really appreciate it.
|
