Many a German would wish to undo his country’s past. We would prefer that Hitler had never been born, that the Third Reich and especially the Holocaust would have never taken place. However, how is it that an immense number of the (non-German) alternate histories about the Third Reich – and there are actually quite a lot – depict the world as not better or even worse without Hitler. This essay will focus on the uchronian nightmare scenario Making History written by the British author Stephen Fry in 1996 and winner of the Sidewise Award for Alternate History. First, I will treat the protagonist’s utopian wish to create a better world by preventing Hitler from being conceived and the dystopian effect of the “changing” of history. This playing with expectations attracts the reader’s attention and shows the complexity of history and society, even though it naturally has a merely entertaining tenor as well. Second, I will briefly analyze that the style of rewriting history, the contrasting juxtaposition of the different chapters and particularly the two opposing parts of the novel, and, finally, the ironic tone implied continuously underline the sometimes satiric developments of fate and the naïve wish of making a better, “utopian” world without being able to assess the outcome. Finally, against the concept of alternate history in general, it will be seen that alternate history is a means to examine history and present, but how history would have turned out differently is hard to tell since it depends on more than just individual events or persons. By thinking about how things could have been worse, we perhaps learn to accept that everything that happens shapes us and our present, as barbaric as it might be.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction: Changing the Course of History
2. Making History Even Worse
2.1 Dystopian Characteristics in Making History
2.2 Narrative Structure and Style of Rewriting History in the Novel
2.3 The Essence of History and Responsibility in Alternate Holocausts
3. Conclusion: Accepting and Learning from History
Objectives and Themes
This academic paper examines Stephen Fry's novel Making History through the lens of dystopian literature and counterfactual history. It explores the narrative and structural consequences of attempting to alter historical events, specifically the Holocaust, and discusses the philosophical implications regarding human agency and the unpredictability of time.
- The intersection of dystopian fiction and alternate history genres.
- Narrative structure and satirical elements in Making History.
- The theoretical value of counterfactuals in historical analysis.
- The ethics of historiography and the responsibility of the historian.
- The role of "irony of fate" in shaping uncontrollable historical outcomes.
Excerpt from the Book
The Essence of History and Responsibility in Alternate Holocausts
In the two preceding chapters, Stephen Fry’s novel Making History has been analysed with regards to its dystopian contents and structures. Now the novel shall be imbedded in the genre of alternate history in general. Why do we ask the question ‘what if’? Why do so many alternate histories deal with Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich? And why do so many of them portray a world without Hitler as dystopian? Counterfactuals are both good entertainment value, since their plots are often unforeseeable and, thus, suspenseful, and valuable in the field of history. Accounts about how history might have turned out if something in the past had happened differently “foreground the notion of cause and effect that is so important to historians” (Hellekson 2001: 16). Hence, imagining alternative historical outcomes makes it is easier to understand what actually happened in the past and how it came about. Therefore, lots of ‘what if’ questions have been asked in several particular historical circumstances (Rosenfeld 2005: 4), one of which is the Third Reich, “a pivotal event that has shaped the contemporary world like few other events have” (Rosenfeld 2005: 12).
Consequently, for a long time, Hitler and the Holocaust have been considered delicate or even inappropriate topics for popular literature. Nevertheless, a large number of alternate histories about the Nazi era have been written so far (Rosenfeld 2005: 2). Making History belongs to those narratives that describe a world without Hitler. The attempt to change history by eliminating one individual from the past shows that Hitler alone is being made responsible for the Third Reich. Delimiting the Third Reich to Hitler eventually leads to another question, namely if the world would have been better or worse without him.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Changing the Course of History: This chapter introduces the premise of alternate history and sets the scope for the analysis of Stephen Fry’s novel as a dystopian exploration of historical intervention.
2. Making History Even Worse: This chapter examines the dystopian characteristics of the novel and the unforeseen negative consequences of the protagonists' attempts to engineer a better world.
2.1 Dystopian Characteristics in Making History: This section defines the novel as a "nightmare scenario" and explores how its satirical tone criticizes the naive belief that the past can be easily manipulated.
2.2 Narrative Structure and Style of Rewriting History in the Novel: This section analyzes the novel's two-part structure, its juxtaposition of realities, and the use of classical narrative elements to convey its themes.
2.3 The Essence of History and Responsibility in Alternate Holocausts: This section situates the novel within the broader genre of counterfactuals, questioning whether individual agency or structural circumstances drive historical change.
3. Conclusion: Accepting and Learning from History: This final chapter synthesizes the arguments, reinforcing that history is fundamentally unpredictable and that attempt to manipulate it often lead to disastrous results.
Keywords
Alternate history, Dystopia, Stephen Fry, Making History, Holocaust, Historiography, Counterfactuals, Third Reich, Narrative structure, Satire, Unpredictability, History, Hitler, Rudolf Gloder, Responsibility.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper provides a critical analysis of Stephen Fry's novel Making History, specifically focusing on how it employs dystopian themes to illustrate the unpredictable nature of historical events and the limitations of human intervention in the past.
What are the central themes explored in the text?
The core themes include the ethics of counterfactual history, the role of the historian in "making" history, the limitations of individual agency, and the impact of the Holocaust as a pivotal historical marker.
What is the core research question addressed by the author?
The author investigates why novelists like Stephen Fry choose to create "alternate Holocausts" that result in outcomes worse than the real history, and what these narratives reveal about our understanding of historical cause and effect.
Which scientific or literary methods are applied?
The paper uses literary analysis, examining narrative structure, genre classification (dystopia vs. alternate history), and historiographical theory, while referencing academic works on the representation of the Nazi era in film and literature.
What is covered in the main body of the analysis?
The main body breaks down the dystopian aspects of the novel, the narrative techniques used by the author to juxtapose realities, and the philosophical debate regarding whether history is shaped by individuals or overarching social circumstances.
Which keywords best describe the content?
Key terms include alternate history, dystopia, historiography, unpredictability, counterfactuals, and the Holocaust.
How does the author evaluate the "happy ending" of the novel?
The author notes that while the ending is technically "happy" because the protagonists undo their interference, it ironically highlights the permanence of historical trauma and the necessity of accepting the real past.
What specific role does the character Rudolf Gloder play in the story?
Gloder serves as a fictitious replacement for Hitler; his existence demonstrates that removing a single individual does not prevent disaster, as the underlying societal conditions (the "spirit of the time") remain unchanged.
Does the paper argue that Germans were "willing executioners"?
The author discusses this controversial concept via Daniel Goldhagen’s thesis but concludes that there is no explicit proof in Fry’s novel that he characterizes the entire German population as such, despite the novel's satirical tone.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Doreen Klahold (Autor:in), 2013, Making History Even Worse, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/233591
