17. If we accept argument by some historians that knowledge of Holocaust widely shared in Nazi Europe, what becomes of "Fatherland"?
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
18. Why are alternative history novels considered part of science fiction, even if not set in future & featuring no technology?
11 replies 3 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
19. One explanation is that time-travel (creating new timelines) & parallel worlds are scientific concepts, so alternative history is s.f.
4 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
20. As per Darko Suvin, science fiction involves "cognitive estrangement" based on novum. Alternative history falls into that definition.
3 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
21. More radically, I want to argue modern science fiction and modern historical thinking were born at the same moment, 18th/19th century
9 replies 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
22. Of course there were historical chronicles before 18th century as well as lots of proto-science fiction (Lucien, Donne, Milton, Kepler)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
23. But both historical chronicles & proto-science fiction very different than new thinking that emerged out of French Revolution.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
24. French Revolution forced us to think of history in new way, with new emphasis on ruptures and uncontrollable social forces.
4 replies 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
25. Out of French revolution emerged more ambitious historical writing (Michelet, Walter Scott) and science fiction (Mary Shelley)
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes
@HewsonMartin Gibbon still working in Newtonian framework: momentum, entropy. Michelet more dynamic, proto-Darwinian view.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.