06-25-2004, 12:55 AM
What If? 2: Eminent Historians Imagine What Might Have Been
by Robert Cowley
Many armchair historians have spent hours daydreaming of what might have been if some turning point in history had gone another way. The appeal of the What If? books is that editor Robert Cowley gets professional historians to concentrate on these imaginative questions. The first volume focused entirely on military matters; What If? 2 leans heavily but not exclusively in that direction. Victor Davis Hanson wonders about the consequences for Western philosophy if Socrates had died in battle, Thomas Fleming ponders a Napoleonic invasion of North America, and Caleb Carr argues the Second World War lasted longer than it should have because George Patton's superiors restrained their energetic general. More than two dozen contributors offer bold speculation: If the Chinese had committed themselves to ocean exploration, asks Theodore F. Cook Jr., might they have discovered the New World and even prevented "the worst horrors of the Atlantic Slave Trade [by halting] Portuguese expansion along the African coast at this early date?" Other times they are pleasantly modest: In one of the book's best sections, John Lukacs describes the fantasy of Teddy Roosevelt defeating Woodrow Wilson in the 1912 election--and decides the long- term effects would not have been great. Like its predecessor, What If? 2 is delicious mind candy for readers willing to believe there's nothing inevitable about what has come before us. --John Miller --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
From Publishers Weekly
Like its predecessor (also edited by Cowley), this is an engrossing collection of essays on counterfactual history. Each contributor examines a pivotal event, then considers the ramifications had the event come out differently. In some cases the ramifications are so monumental that their effects are more obvious than intriguing. For example, if Socrates had died in battle during the Peloponnesian War, Victor Davis Hanson suggests, democracy, Christianity and Western thought as a whole would be... read more --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Book Description
What if Lincoln didn't abolish slavery? What if an assassin succeeded in killing FDR in 1933? This volume presents 25 intriguing "what if..." scenarios by some of today's greatest historical minds-including James Bradley, Caleb Carr, James Chace, Theodore F. Cook, Jr., Carlos M.N. Eire, George Feifer, Thomas Fleming, Richard B. Frank, Victor Davis Hanson, Cecelia Holland, Alistair Horne, David Kahn, Robert Katz, John Lukacs, William H. McNeill, Lance Morrow, Williamson Murray, Josiah Ober, Robert L. O'Connell, Geoffrey Parker, Theodore K. Rabb, Andrew Roberts, Roger Spiller, Geoffrey C. Ward, and Tom Wicker.
See all editorial reviews...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
Another good collection of historical challenges., April 21, 2002
Reviewer: Brian D. Rubendall (see more about me) from Oakton, VA
"What If 2," though not quite as strong as the first "What If," collection (and featuring historians, on average, who are not nearly as well known as such first volume luminaries as Stephen Ambrose and David McCullough) is still an enjoyable and stimulating collection for those who like history. While most of the scenarios of the first collection concentrated on military battles, the second features a lot of political twists and turns as well.
The alternate scnerios this time out include, "What if Socrates had been killed at the Battle of Delium before he made his mark on Greek philosophy?" "What if William the Conqueror had not won the Battle of Hastings?" "What if Martin Luther had been executed in 1521?" "What if the Germans hadn't transported Lenin to Russia in 1917?" "What if the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 had been avoided?" "What if FDR hadn't allowed the progressive Henry Wallace to be dumped as VP in 1944 in favor of Harry Truman?" Indeed, "What if any of seven plausible scenerios had kept FDR from the Presidency?" All of these are great questions, presented in the highly readable narrative style that has come to define this series.
My only quibble is that a number of the essays present the questions without really giving an answer. One is left to ponder the "What Ifs" without the essayist presenting the likely alternate reality. Nevertheless, this is still a very enjoyable read for those with a passion for history. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
More What Was Than What Might Have Been, February 11, 2002
Reviewer: jrmspnc (see more about me) from Maryland, USA
Any collection of essays by various writers is going to have its share of hits and misses, and What If 2 is no exception. Some of the contributors dive head-first into the premise and wallow in it. Others stick their toes in, decide it's too cold, and jump right back out.
Every essay is useful as a quick overview of historical events, many of which will be unfamiliar to the general reader except in broad outline. For that alone, the book is worthwhile. The counterfactual histories themselves, however, vary in quality from writer to writer. The best is, perhaps, John Lukacs' tale of Teddy Roosevelt's third term; Lukacs writes as if, in fact, TR won in 1912, and chides his fellow historians for not asking what would have happened if Woodrow Wilson had won. One of the weakest is Victor Davis Hanson's opening essay about Socrates: what if Socrates had been killed in battle before he met Plato? Well, turns out we would never have heard of him - imagine that!
One of the most enjoyable aspects of What If 1 was its focus on events that truly could have turned out differently but for a single moment or decision. The same cannot be said of most of the sequel's essays. For example, Josiah Ober's counterfactual involving the triumph of Antony over Octavian; rather than mark Actium itself as the turning point, Ober goes back to Antony's Parthian campaign. If Antony had defeated the Parthians, Ober posits, Octavian would have ultimately lost. But how likely was an Antony victory over Parthia? Not very. By contrast, Charles I escaping the plague because he happened to leave London a week before it broke out is more intriguing; unfortunately, Theodore Rabb's counterfactual speculation is limited to a few paragraphs at the end.
Overall, as other reviewers have concluded, What If 2 is a mixed bag. It does not entirely live up to its promise and premise, but it does not completely disappoint either. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
Was this review helpful to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Counterfactuals, if they are credible, blow me away., January 21, 2004
Reviewer: John Godfrey (see more about me) from Milwaukee, WI USA
If you love history, you probably have one. These two volumes are worth your time. It helps to know about what really happen & the various historian/authors usually supply background. Of course, unless you enjoy history, you're probably not reading this.
It's simple. Take a historical event & create a plausible alternate outcome. Three examples stood out for me. What if the Allies had lost on D-Day? The Germans throw the invasion back into the sea? It could have happened. Does the U.S. give up & turn it's attention to Japan? Does FDR get reelected? Mushroom clouds over Europe in 1945?
Pontius Pilate pardons Jesus instead of condeming him to death. Chtistainity is changed. No salvation through Christ's death on the cross. No cross, the ultimate symbol of the faith. Jesus dies of old age, confused, a great prophet maybe, but not the savior.
The French win the Franco-Prussian War or even if that stupid little war nevers occurs, history could have been profoundly changed. The unification of Germany could have been slowed down. The German Empire might not ever existed. Without that, a little skirmish in 1914 Europe would never have become World WarI. Without World War I, no World WarII, no Communism, no cold war.
Create your own scenario. Some of the histrians realy get into the aftermaths of their stories. Others not so much so, leaving you clamoring for more. But the reader or listener, can fill in the blanks. There are no right or wrong answers because it never happened. --This text refers to the Audio Cassette edition
Was this review helpful to you?
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
Be careful what you wish for, September 12, 2003
Reviewer: Avid Reader (see more about me) from Franklin, TN
After reading WHAT IF, Volume 1, I stated that I eagerly awaited another collection of a non-military nature. Well, that's what I got and the result is a huge disappointment. As another reviewer noted, the bad ones were too long and the good ones were too short.
My number one objection was the lack of an alternative story. IN many of these, 80% of the writing was a review of what actually happened. So, in the one about Socrates, we get a lot of Plato, Aristotle, Archimedes, Perfect Forms, battles, but almost no philosophical suppositions of a world without Socrates. In the one in which Jesus is not executed, the author could not help but keep referring to "actual" history and apologizing for even discussing the subject.
The list goes on - the Chinese exploration tale centered on what happened with the Ming dynasty rather than an alternate tale. The Cleopatra tale involves a lengthy review of past history. The people who read these stories already KNOW the history - they want a brief forward followed by the story, not another rehash of World Events 101. Where is the imagination, where is the spark? Very poor execution.
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
Here's a 'what if' for you..., September 8, 2003
Reviewer: Jesse Ogden (see more about me) from Michigan
What if in 1963, Rudolf Hochhuth, hadn't written the libelous play The Deputy? We may have been spared having Pope Pius XII becoming the official whipping boy of the anti-Catholics. I give this a book a 1 for a couple reasons, and not just because of the Pius XII essay. First of all, the "good" essays are mediocre at best, especially if you compare them to the works of the original What If? Second of all, some of the essays are really asking you to stretch your imagination past believability. The whole point of the 'what if' scenario in these books was to give a depiction of a crucial event in history and explain what probably would've happened if it had gone different, with as much plausibility as possible. That's what made the original What If? so great.
However, the final nail in the coffin was the Pius XII essay. It ignores the fact that before the war Pius XII (or Eugenio Pacelli as he was known when he was the Vatican Secretary of State) was a well-known opponent of Nazism. In 1935, he gave a speech that denounced Nazism at a time when people like FDR and Churchill (both big government guys themselves) didn't think Hitler was such a bad guy. Pacelli said in his speech that the Nazis "are in reality only miserable plagiarists who dress up old errors with new tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they flock to the banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are possessed by the superstition of a race and blood cult."
Dr. Joseph Licthen, a Polish Jew and official for the Jewish Anti-Defamation League wrote: "Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist governments of both Italy and Germany spoke out vigorously against the possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in March of 1939, though the cardinal secretary of state had served as papal nuncio in Germany from 1917 to 1929. . . . The day after his election, the Berlin Morgenpost said: 'The election of cardinal Pacelli is not accepted with favor in Germany because he was always opposed to Nazism and practically determined the policies of the Vatican under his predecessor.'"
The appeared "silence" of Pacelli, now known as Pope Pius XII, is a misconstruction of facts based upon a play. Pius was hardly ever Hitler's Pope, as some "historians" are leading people to believe. Pius knew that he'd have to be careful with everything he did or Hitler would tyrannize the Jews even more and go after the Catholics as well. His statements were carefully distributed, but still urged Catholics to do what they could. The appeared silence occurred after the Nazis arrested Catholic priests in Denmark for opposing the Nazis. Catholic and Jewish friends of the Pope urged him to be careful or Hitler might start targeting him.
The essay also ignores much of the Pope's humanitarian work and his efforts to help the Jews. Pius hid a lot of Jews in the Vatican and on his summer estate and would even pay the ridiculous fines that Jews had to pay to keep the Nazis from taking them from their homes.
There's so much scholarly evidence that shows that the image of Pius XII has been misconstrued, and misunderstood. Unfortunately though, anti-Catholicism is an attitude that is still widely tolerated. I end this review with a quote by Albert Einstein, a quote he said about the Catholic Church's efforts to help the Jews.
"Only the Catholic Church protested against the Hitlerian onslaught on liberty. Up till then I had not been interested in the Church, but today I feel a great admiration for the Church, which alone has had the courage to struggle for spiritual truth and moral liberty."
Was this review helpful to you?
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
History as the actions of individuals, August 19, 2003
Reviewer: Charles Miller (see more about me) from San Jose, CA USA
As someone who has been an avid amateur student of history for 50 years, I have been dismayed by the current trend toward the "de-individualization" of history. When I read biographies of Davy Crockett, Crazy Horse, Cyrus, Galileo, Peter the Great, and others as a child, I developed the distinct impression that history was shaped by the actions of individuals in the context of their times. Only later, as an adult perusing my children's history books, did I learn that I was out of step with modern historiography. Their textbooks devoted as much, or more, print to those who were simply present as to those who drove events. What If 2 provides a much-needed refutation of this "modern" trend. Counterfactual history offers potent arguments against those who explain everything in terms of broad historical forces. Any thinking person must admit that history would have been very different if Antony and Cleopatra had won at Actium, if Jesus had not been crucified, if the Franco-Prussian War had not been fought, or if Lenin had not made it to the Finland Station. Most of the essays in this collection are well-expostulated explorations of alternative timelines such as these. Unfortunately, the quality is uneven. My advice: if a selection starts to drag, skip to the next one. It will be better.
by Robert Cowley
Many armchair historians have spent hours daydreaming of what might have been if some turning point in history had gone another way. The appeal of the What If? books is that editor Robert Cowley gets professional historians to concentrate on these imaginative questions. The first volume focused entirely on military matters; What If? 2 leans heavily but not exclusively in that direction. Victor Davis Hanson wonders about the consequences for Western philosophy if Socrates had died in battle, Thomas Fleming ponders a Napoleonic invasion of North America, and Caleb Carr argues the Second World War lasted longer than it should have because George Patton's superiors restrained their energetic general. More than two dozen contributors offer bold speculation: If the Chinese had committed themselves to ocean exploration, asks Theodore F. Cook Jr., might they have discovered the New World and even prevented "the worst horrors of the Atlantic Slave Trade [by halting] Portuguese expansion along the African coast at this early date?" Other times they are pleasantly modest: In one of the book's best sections, John Lukacs describes the fantasy of Teddy Roosevelt defeating Woodrow Wilson in the 1912 election--and decides the long- term effects would not have been great. Like its predecessor, What If? 2 is delicious mind candy for readers willing to believe there's nothing inevitable about what has come before us. --John Miller --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
From Publishers Weekly
Like its predecessor (also edited by Cowley), this is an engrossing collection of essays on counterfactual history. Each contributor examines a pivotal event, then considers the ramifications had the event come out differently. In some cases the ramifications are so monumental that their effects are more obvious than intriguing. For example, if Socrates had died in battle during the Peloponnesian War, Victor Davis Hanson suggests, democracy, Christianity and Western thought as a whole would be... read more --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Book Description
What if Lincoln didn't abolish slavery? What if an assassin succeeded in killing FDR in 1933? This volume presents 25 intriguing "what if..." scenarios by some of today's greatest historical minds-including James Bradley, Caleb Carr, James Chace, Theodore F. Cook, Jr., Carlos M.N. Eire, George Feifer, Thomas Fleming, Richard B. Frank, Victor Davis Hanson, Cecelia Holland, Alistair Horne, David Kahn, Robert Katz, John Lukacs, William H. McNeill, Lance Morrow, Williamson Murray, Josiah Ober, Robert L. O'Connell, Geoffrey Parker, Theodore K. Rabb, Andrew Roberts, Roger Spiller, Geoffrey C. Ward, and Tom Wicker.
See all editorial reviews...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
Another good collection of historical challenges., April 21, 2002
Reviewer: Brian D. Rubendall (see more about me) from Oakton, VA
"What If 2," though not quite as strong as the first "What If," collection (and featuring historians, on average, who are not nearly as well known as such first volume luminaries as Stephen Ambrose and David McCullough) is still an enjoyable and stimulating collection for those who like history. While most of the scenarios of the first collection concentrated on military battles, the second features a lot of political twists and turns as well.
The alternate scnerios this time out include, "What if Socrates had been killed at the Battle of Delium before he made his mark on Greek philosophy?" "What if William the Conqueror had not won the Battle of Hastings?" "What if Martin Luther had been executed in 1521?" "What if the Germans hadn't transported Lenin to Russia in 1917?" "What if the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 had been avoided?" "What if FDR hadn't allowed the progressive Henry Wallace to be dumped as VP in 1944 in favor of Harry Truman?" Indeed, "What if any of seven plausible scenerios had kept FDR from the Presidency?" All of these are great questions, presented in the highly readable narrative style that has come to define this series.
My only quibble is that a number of the essays present the questions without really giving an answer. One is left to ponder the "What Ifs" without the essayist presenting the likely alternate reality. Nevertheless, this is still a very enjoyable read for those with a passion for history. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
More What Was Than What Might Have Been, February 11, 2002
Reviewer: jrmspnc (see more about me) from Maryland, USA
Any collection of essays by various writers is going to have its share of hits and misses, and What If 2 is no exception. Some of the contributors dive head-first into the premise and wallow in it. Others stick their toes in, decide it's too cold, and jump right back out.
Every essay is useful as a quick overview of historical events, many of which will be unfamiliar to the general reader except in broad outline. For that alone, the book is worthwhile. The counterfactual histories themselves, however, vary in quality from writer to writer. The best is, perhaps, John Lukacs' tale of Teddy Roosevelt's third term; Lukacs writes as if, in fact, TR won in 1912, and chides his fellow historians for not asking what would have happened if Woodrow Wilson had won. One of the weakest is Victor Davis Hanson's opening essay about Socrates: what if Socrates had been killed in battle before he met Plato? Well, turns out we would never have heard of him - imagine that!
One of the most enjoyable aspects of What If 1 was its focus on events that truly could have turned out differently but for a single moment or decision. The same cannot be said of most of the sequel's essays. For example, Josiah Ober's counterfactual involving the triumph of Antony over Octavian; rather than mark Actium itself as the turning point, Ober goes back to Antony's Parthian campaign. If Antony had defeated the Parthians, Ober posits, Octavian would have ultimately lost. But how likely was an Antony victory over Parthia? Not very. By contrast, Charles I escaping the plague because he happened to leave London a week before it broke out is more intriguing; unfortunately, Theodore Rabb's counterfactual speculation is limited to a few paragraphs at the end.
Overall, as other reviewers have concluded, What If 2 is a mixed bag. It does not entirely live up to its promise and premise, but it does not completely disappoint either. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
Was this review helpful to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Counterfactuals, if they are credible, blow me away., January 21, 2004
Reviewer: John Godfrey (see more about me) from Milwaukee, WI USA
If you love history, you probably have one. These two volumes are worth your time. It helps to know about what really happen & the various historian/authors usually supply background. Of course, unless you enjoy history, you're probably not reading this.
It's simple. Take a historical event & create a plausible alternate outcome. Three examples stood out for me. What if the Allies had lost on D-Day? The Germans throw the invasion back into the sea? It could have happened. Does the U.S. give up & turn it's attention to Japan? Does FDR get reelected? Mushroom clouds over Europe in 1945?
Pontius Pilate pardons Jesus instead of condeming him to death. Chtistainity is changed. No salvation through Christ's death on the cross. No cross, the ultimate symbol of the faith. Jesus dies of old age, confused, a great prophet maybe, but not the savior.
The French win the Franco-Prussian War or even if that stupid little war nevers occurs, history could have been profoundly changed. The unification of Germany could have been slowed down. The German Empire might not ever existed. Without that, a little skirmish in 1914 Europe would never have become World WarI. Without World War I, no World WarII, no Communism, no cold war.
Create your own scenario. Some of the histrians realy get into the aftermaths of their stories. Others not so much so, leaving you clamoring for more. But the reader or listener, can fill in the blanks. There are no right or wrong answers because it never happened. --This text refers to the Audio Cassette edition
Was this review helpful to you?
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
Be careful what you wish for, September 12, 2003
Reviewer: Avid Reader (see more about me) from Franklin, TN
After reading WHAT IF, Volume 1, I stated that I eagerly awaited another collection of a non-military nature. Well, that's what I got and the result is a huge disappointment. As another reviewer noted, the bad ones were too long and the good ones were too short.
My number one objection was the lack of an alternative story. IN many of these, 80% of the writing was a review of what actually happened. So, in the one about Socrates, we get a lot of Plato, Aristotle, Archimedes, Perfect Forms, battles, but almost no philosophical suppositions of a world without Socrates. In the one in which Jesus is not executed, the author could not help but keep referring to "actual" history and apologizing for even discussing the subject.
The list goes on - the Chinese exploration tale centered on what happened with the Ming dynasty rather than an alternate tale. The Cleopatra tale involves a lengthy review of past history. The people who read these stories already KNOW the history - they want a brief forward followed by the story, not another rehash of World Events 101. Where is the imagination, where is the spark? Very poor execution.
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
Here's a 'what if' for you..., September 8, 2003
Reviewer: Jesse Ogden (see more about me) from Michigan
What if in 1963, Rudolf Hochhuth, hadn't written the libelous play The Deputy? We may have been spared having Pope Pius XII becoming the official whipping boy of the anti-Catholics. I give this a book a 1 for a couple reasons, and not just because of the Pius XII essay. First of all, the "good" essays are mediocre at best, especially if you compare them to the works of the original What If? Second of all, some of the essays are really asking you to stretch your imagination past believability. The whole point of the 'what if' scenario in these books was to give a depiction of a crucial event in history and explain what probably would've happened if it had gone different, with as much plausibility as possible. That's what made the original What If? so great.
However, the final nail in the coffin was the Pius XII essay. It ignores the fact that before the war Pius XII (or Eugenio Pacelli as he was known when he was the Vatican Secretary of State) was a well-known opponent of Nazism. In 1935, he gave a speech that denounced Nazism at a time when people like FDR and Churchill (both big government guys themselves) didn't think Hitler was such a bad guy. Pacelli said in his speech that the Nazis "are in reality only miserable plagiarists who dress up old errors with new tinsel. It does not make any difference whether they flock to the banners of social revolution, whether they are guided by a false concept of the world and of life, or whether they are possessed by the superstition of a race and blood cult."
Dr. Joseph Licthen, a Polish Jew and official for the Jewish Anti-Defamation League wrote: "Pacelli had obviously established his position clearly, for the Fascist governments of both Italy and Germany spoke out vigorously against the possibility of his election to succeed Pius XI in March of 1939, though the cardinal secretary of state had served as papal nuncio in Germany from 1917 to 1929. . . . The day after his election, the Berlin Morgenpost said: 'The election of cardinal Pacelli is not accepted with favor in Germany because he was always opposed to Nazism and practically determined the policies of the Vatican under his predecessor.'"
The appeared "silence" of Pacelli, now known as Pope Pius XII, is a misconstruction of facts based upon a play. Pius was hardly ever Hitler's Pope, as some "historians" are leading people to believe. Pius knew that he'd have to be careful with everything he did or Hitler would tyrannize the Jews even more and go after the Catholics as well. His statements were carefully distributed, but still urged Catholics to do what they could. The appeared silence occurred after the Nazis arrested Catholic priests in Denmark for opposing the Nazis. Catholic and Jewish friends of the Pope urged him to be careful or Hitler might start targeting him.
The essay also ignores much of the Pope's humanitarian work and his efforts to help the Jews. Pius hid a lot of Jews in the Vatican and on his summer estate and would even pay the ridiculous fines that Jews had to pay to keep the Nazis from taking them from their homes.
There's so much scholarly evidence that shows that the image of Pius XII has been misconstrued, and misunderstood. Unfortunately though, anti-Catholicism is an attitude that is still widely tolerated. I end this review with a quote by Albert Einstein, a quote he said about the Catholic Church's efforts to help the Jews.
"Only the Catholic Church protested against the Hitlerian onslaught on liberty. Up till then I had not been interested in the Church, but today I feel a great admiration for the Church, which alone has had the courage to struggle for spiritual truth and moral liberty."
Was this review helpful to you?
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
History as the actions of individuals, August 19, 2003
Reviewer: Charles Miller (see more about me) from San Jose, CA USA
As someone who has been an avid amateur student of history for 50 years, I have been dismayed by the current trend toward the "de-individualization" of history. When I read biographies of Davy Crockett, Crazy Horse, Cyrus, Galileo, Peter the Great, and others as a child, I developed the distinct impression that history was shaped by the actions of individuals in the context of their times. Only later, as an adult perusing my children's history books, did I learn that I was out of step with modern historiography. Their textbooks devoted as much, or more, print to those who were simply present as to those who drove events. What If 2 provides a much-needed refutation of this "modern" trend. Counterfactual history offers potent arguments against those who explain everything in terms of broad historical forces. Any thinking person must admit that history would have been very different if Antony and Cleopatra had won at Actium, if Jesus had not been crucified, if the Franco-Prussian War had not been fought, or if Lenin had not made it to the Finland Station. Most of the essays in this collection are well-expostulated explorations of alternative timelines such as these. Unfortunately, the quality is uneven. My advice: if a selection starts to drag, skip to the next one. It will be better.