Rating: 
Summary: A Treasure Trove of What If's in Alternate American History
Review: Robert Cowley has done it again!
After two first-rate "what if" books covering alternative endings of major events in World History, Cowley and his distinguished coterie of authors (James McPherson, Jay Winik, Caleb Carr, Cecilia Holland, et. al.,) have taken on the major events of American History and have provided a fresh view and sometimes not too pleasant alternative endings to them.
Consider this: Jay Winik's "John Wilkes Booth's Wildest Dream" - a Union angered by the assassination of Lincoln enacting retribution on Southern leaders, with the South in turn resorting to widespread guerrilla warfare, which by the time Grant takes office, is practically uncontrollable. Winik had already alluded to the possible horror of guerrilla warfare had Lee NOT surrendered at Appomattox; here he elaborates on it.
In another essay, Anthony Beevor writes an intriguing "what if" Eisenhower had given the "green light" for American forces to seize Berlin ahead of the advancing Red Army in the spring of 1945, and the probable consequences of such an order. We now know that Stalin was prepared to order Red Army commanders to open fire if the U.S. 9th Army had entered the city.
Or a Nuclear Holocaust where the United States, having experienced a Soviet tactical nuclear response in Cuba, and several strikes on the United States itself, resulting in the deaths of both JFK and Lyndon Johnson, resorts to a massive Nuclear assault on the Soviet Union? A quarter of a million Americans are killed, but that is nothing compared to the virtual obliteration of the old USSR, where only a tenth of the population survive the American air and sea bomber and missile assaults - and the world is so revulsed by this overkill that America is ostracized for the next three decades. Wow!
And that is just the tip of the alternative history iceberg...consider a Nixon Presidency that survived Watergate, or an America wracked by Labor Strife in 1877!
About the only faults that I can find in this remarkable work is the regurgitation of James McPherson's brilliant essay on an alternative Antietam which turned in a Lee victory at Gettysburg, an "event" already visited in the first "What If" volume. Also no alternative 9/11 or war on terror essay, as this book ends with Nixon and Vietnam. It also might have been fascinating to see alternative endings to Little Big Horn, where Custer was victorious over Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, or a turn of events in the Spanish-American War. Hope Mr. Cowley and his associates will take on these and other events next time around.
Rating:
Summary: Imaginative Speculation On Roads Not Taken
Review: The introduction to one of the selections in this book suggests that it can be thought of as an "American Baedeker of roads that could have been, or almost were, taken." That's as good a description of any of this third volume in the "What If?" series of historical speculations. Once more, editor Robert Cowley has assembled a panel of noted historians and novelists, who offer all sorts of intriguing possibilities--an America without a revolution; what might have happened if the plot to assassinate Lincoln had also succeeded in killing Vice President Johnson; what might have been the consequences if the US and Britain had actually gone to war over a South American boundary dispute in 1896; and what might have happened had John F. Kennedy not been murdered. The tone of the pieces varies from the tongue in cheek(speculation on what the true motives between Senator Joseph McCarthy's anti-Communist crusade might have been) to the truly frightening (a picture of the world in 1972, ten years after the Cuban Missile Crisis leads to a widespread launch of nuclear weaponry). Playing "What If?" can be an interesting parlor game, but it can also help to illuminate the importance of real-life decisions. In the scenario of a world where both Lincoln and Johnson are killed, the resulting chaos triggers a decision by Robert E. Lee to endorse the wish of Jefferson Davis and many others in the Confederate military--not to lay down arms at that point, but to continue the fight as a guerrilla war, one that might have ended up costing countless more lives and prevented the nation's sectional breach from ever healing. With contributions from writers of the caliber of Caleb Carr, Robert Dallek, Tom Wicker and Jay Winick, the reader can be assured of an entertaining as well as a thought-provoking read. My one complaint is about the decision to include two pieces from the first book in the series, published in 1999. The jacket copy says these are pieces any American history collection would not be complete without. That strikes me as a rather thin excuse for the recycling. A big part of this book's audience will obviously be readers who have purchased the first two volumes, which are still easily available. If the publishers wanted to include some reprinted material, they could have easily mined the rich archives of the alternate history genre.
Rating:
Summary: American History that Might Have Been
Review: This is the third collection in the superb "What If" series, and the first to focus exclusively on American History. The first caveat I would give to anyone thinking of making a purchase is that two of these essays (by David McCullough and James McPherson) are repeats from the first volume in the series. I would secondly note that the quality of the essays included here vary wildy. Some, like the speculation on John Tyler's ascendency from Vice-President to President upon the death of William Henry Harrison, and the possible outcome of a third U.S. war with Britain (circa 1896) are quite informative. At least one, a telling of the Cuban Missle Crisis as if it precipated World War III, is quite chilling. Others, however, are less engaging. Anthony Beevor's recounting of Eisenhower's decision at the end of World War II not to march on Berlin, for example, adds little to the controversy that wasn't already there. Overall, a worthwhile collection for those who love counterfactual historical speculation, with the above reservations.
Rating:
Summary: American History that Might Have Been
Review: This is the third collection in the superb "What If" series, and the first to focus exclusively on American History. The first caveat I would give to anyone thinking of making a purchase is that two of these essays (by David McCullough and James McPherson) are repeats from the first volume in the series. I would secondly note that the quality of the essays included here vary wildy. Some, like the speculation on John Tyler's ascendency from Vice-President to President upon the death of William Henry Harrison, and the possible outcome of a third U.S. war with Britain (circa 1896) are quite informative. At least one, a telling of the Cuban Missle Crisis as if it precipated World War III, is quite chilling. Others, however, are less engaging. Anthony Beevor's recounting of Eisenhower's decision at the end of World War II not to march on Berlin, for example, adds little to the controversy that wasn't already there. Overall, a worthwhile collection for those who love counterfactual historical speculation, with the above reservations.
Rating: 
Summary: Extremely uneven
Review: Unfortunately, the defining characteristic of the "What If?" series of books (edited by Robert Cowley) is their scattershot approach to alternate history. While the first volume was fairly sound, "What If? 2" and now "What Ifs? of American History" are plagued by uneven quality of writing, questionable conclusions and most surprising, a pronounced lack of allo-historical content. For a series that defines itself by what might have been, the lack of authors willing to make leaps into the future is a serious, perhaps even crippling problem for any future editions. Identifying tipping points is generally well done, but that is something one finds in conventional history; it is projecting a meaningful alternate outcome rooted in historical fact that defines alternate history, and it is that projection that is becoming less prevalent with each passing volume. That said, I don't want to indict every author who contributed to "What Ifs? of American History", as there are some genuinely excellent contributions. However, taken as a whole the seventeen chapters are something of a let down. This is true not least because two of the pieces are reprinted from the original "What If?"; while there is nothing wrong with them in their own right, I find it sorely disappointing that a major hardcover release couldn't drum up new contributions. The problem with many of the contributions is that they find an engaging turning point, and then fail to flesh it out. This is true from the start in "Might the Mayflower Not have Sailed?" which makes a compelling case that this was possible, and outlines significant consequences, but never ties them together to paint a cohesive portrait of how a different America might have evolved.
"The Northwest Conspiracy" is another work that is admirable for a number of reasons. First, it identifies a relatively obscure event (which always make for the most interesting divergences), and secondly, it offers a superb overview of the gross violations of the Constitution committed by the Lincoln administration during the Civil War. Nonetheless, the speculation never evolves into genuine alternate history, and therefore the piece is something of a let down. Finally, there is "The Revolution of 1877" which does delve into some alternate history, but which could have been fleshed out to even greater effect. "William Pitt the Elder and the Avoidance of the American Revolution" has the opposite problem as it draws conclusions that are to my mind entirely unsupportable. Carr's portrait of the British Empire as a force for benevolent change doesn't seem to be born out in the historical record. The same is true of "JFK Lives" which seems all to ready to ignore Kennedy's cynical manipulation of Cold War politics to his own ends, his relative clumsiness in foreign policy, his hawkish advisors and his indifference to any real momentum in the civil rights movement. Finally, there is "Joe McCarthy's Secret Life" which while somewhat allo-historical is really more of a secret history. An amusing, tongue in cheek look at one of America's most loathsome politicians, but not really alternate history. Next are three works that never go anywhere. "No Pearl Harbor? FDR Delays the War" and "If Eisenhower Had Gone to Berlin" both change history and then predict virtually identical outcomes. Such considerations are valuable in traditional history, but they aren't really alternate timelines as things rapidly converge back to what we know in months or years. Finally "'His Accidency' John Tyler" raises an interesting question about presidential succession, and then fails utterly to answer what the impact would be. Now with the negatives aside, let's focus on the highlights. "Lew Wallace and the Ghosts of Shunpike" is a far ranging contribution that posits military, cultural and political impacts springing from the battle of Shiloh. Next is "Beyond the Wildest Dreams of John Wilkes Booth" which examines a Constitutional crisis and a guerilla South to great effect. "The Whale Against the Wolf: The Anglo-American War of 1896" is another interesting military piece that also addresses the shocking absence of Canada (and Mexico) from this book in any meaningful sense. "If the U-2 Hadn't Flown" suffers from some of the problems above, but ultimately offers so much detail on the consequences of Gary Powers' ill-fate flight it overcomes them. Which brings us to the highlight of the book "The Cuban Missile Crisis: Second Holocaust". Written from an entirely allo-historical point of view, this piece offers a realistic divergence with realistic consequences. Of particular note is the author's appreciation of how vastly larger the U.S. nuclear arsenal was than the Soviet. Not only does this justify the level of destruction of the author envisions, but it is a salient point in that the Kennedy administration seemed to have bought into the myth of the missile gap, in spite of blatant evidence to the contrary. This willful ignorance led Khrushchev to believe Kennedy something of a bumpkin, and ultimately contributed to the decision to deploy missiles to Cuba in the first place. Finally there is "What If Watergate Were Still Just an Upscale Address?" which like the U-2 piece isn't exactly allo-historical. However, it likewise makes up for this fact with a wealth of detailed consequences. As one can see, I have mixed feelings about this book. Ultimately, the good outweighs the bad, and I can honestly recommend it to history and alternate history lovers. That said, I think that the overall direction of this series and the consistency and methodology of the contributions need to be seriously considered before any future releases. As such, I know that I will turn a more critical eye to any future books, and will probably hesitate before making a purchase. Jake Mohlman
Rating:
Summary: Extremely uneven
Review: Unfortunately, the defining characteristic of the "What If?" series of books (edited by Robert Cowley) is their scattershot approach to alternate history. While the first volume was fairly sound, "What If? 2" and now "What Ifs? of American History" are plagued by uneven quality of writing, questionable conclusions and most surprising, a pronounced lack of allo-historical content. For a series that defines itself by what might have been, the lack of authors willing to make leaps into the future is a serious, perhaps even crippling problem for any future editions. Identifying tipping points is generally well done, but that is something one finds in conventional history; it is projecting a meaningful alternate outcome rooted in historical fact that defines alternate history, and it is that projection that is becoming less prevalent with each passing volume. That said, I don't want to indict every author who contributed to "What Ifs? of American History", as there are some genuinely excellent contributions. However, taken as a whole the seventeen chapters are something of a let down. This is true not least because two of the pieces are reprinted from the original "What If?"; while there is nothing wrong with them in their own right, I find it sorely disappointing that a major hardcover release couldn't drum up new contributions. The problem with many of the contributions is that they find an engaging turning point, and then fail to flesh it out. This is true from the start in "Might the Mayflower Not have Sailed?" which makes a compelling case that this was possible, and outlines significant consequences, but never ties them together to paint a cohesive portrait of how a different America might have evolved.
"The Northwest Conspiracy" is another work that is admirable for a number of reasons. First, it identifies a relatively obscure event (which always make for the most interesting divergences), and secondly, it offers a superb overview of the gross violations of the Constitution committed by the Lincoln administration during the Civil War. Nonetheless, the speculation never evolves into genuine alternate history, and therefore the piece is something of a let down. Finally, there is "The Revolution of 1877" which does delve into some alternate history, but which could have been fleshed out to even greater effect. "William Pitt the Elder and the Avoidance of the American Revolution" has the opposite problem as it draws conclusions that are to my mind entirely unsupportable. Carr's portrait of the British Empire as a force for benevolent change doesn't seem to be born out in the historical record. The same is true of "JFK Lives" which seems all to ready to ignore Kennedy's cynical manipulation of Cold War politics to his own ends, his relative clumsiness in foreign policy, his hawkish advisors and his indifference to any real momentum in the civil rights movement. Finally, there is "Joe McCarthy's Secret Life" which while somewhat allo-historical is really more of a secret history. An amusing, tongue in cheek look at one of America's most loathsome politicians, but not really alternate history. Next are three works that never go anywhere. "No Pearl Harbor? FDR Delays the War" and "If Eisenhower Had Gone to Berlin" both change history and then predict virtually identical outcomes. Such considerations are valuable in traditional history, but they aren't really alternate timelines as things rapidly converge back to what we know in months or years. Finally "'His Accidency' John Tyler" raises an interesting question about presidential succession, and then fails utterly to answer what the impact would be. Now with the negatives aside, let's focus on the highlights. "Lew Wallace and the Ghosts of Shunpike" is a far ranging contribution that posits military, cultural and political impacts springing from the battle of Shiloh. Next is "Beyond the Wildest Dreams of John Wilkes Booth" which examines a Constitutional crisis and a guerilla South to great effect. "The Whale Against the Wolf: The Anglo-American War of 1896" is another interesting military piece that also addresses the shocking absence of Canada (and Mexico) from this book in any meaningful sense. "If the U-2 Hadn't Flown" suffers from some of the problems above, but ultimately offers so much detail on the consequences of Gary Powers' ill-fate flight it overcomes them. Which brings us to the highlight of the book "The Cuban Missile Crisis: Second Holocaust". Written from an entirely allo-historical point of view, this piece offers a realistic divergence with realistic consequences. Of particular note is the author's appreciation of how vastly larger the U.S. nuclear arsenal was than the Soviet. Not only does this justify the level of destruction of the author envisions, but it is a salient point in that the Kennedy administration seemed to have bought into the myth of the missile gap, in spite of blatant evidence to the contrary. This willful ignorance led Khrushchev to believe Kennedy something of a bumpkin, and ultimately contributed to the decision to deploy missiles to Cuba in the first place. Finally there is "What If Watergate Were Still Just an Upscale Address?" which like the U-2 piece isn't exactly allo-historical. However, it likewise makes up for this fact with a wealth of detailed consequences. As one can see, I have mixed feelings about this book. Ultimately, the good outweighs the bad, and I can honestly recommend it to history and alternate history lovers. That said, I think that the overall direction of this series and the consistency and methodology of the contributions need to be seriously considered before any future releases. As such, I know that I will turn a more critical eye to any future books, and will probably hesitate before making a purchase. Jake Mohlman
Rating: 
Summary: essentially silly
Review: We all realize how much history is a matter of chance. Except for the brilliant essay by Ted Rabb about the possibility of the Mayflower never have sailed to Plymouth the rest of these essays shows how otherwise excellent historians can be banal and unconvincing.
|
