lessons from history, and plot lines

I ran across an interesting item today reading about FDR. And that is how very minor details, can have an outsized impact on events.

The case in point, FDR and Churchill were having a summit meeting in Casablanc, 1942. The fear was that Germany would find out about it. Germany did find out, but when the information got to Hitler, someone had translated Casablanca, to white house. Resulting in Hitler thinking the meeting was in Washinton DC.

That got me thinking this kind of mistake could make a good plot element.

 

My thought was that they new that it was announced it was in Morocco, but assumed it was just a code for the White House, so didn't consider any raid, but I could be wrong. Not sure they could have done anything if they really considered it was in Casablanca.

I heard another story about a treaty between the U.S. and Russia that resulted in some confusion over the concession of the state of 'Georgia' but not sure if that's sort of like an urban legend.

 

The Germans were still in Tunisia, so a raid was possible.

But that is getting off my point. My point is, there are small details in history where a tiny mistake could have changed the course of events. Such as Lee's general order 183, discovered by the Union wrapped around three cigars. How can we as writers use these types of events, to help your own stories?

 

This actually is closely related to why I'm a discovery writer rather than a plotter (I do very minimal plotting, but I'll freely go off-script if I feel the need to).

Because in the actual writing—the nitty gritty, brass tacks stuff, you never know what's going to happen. You might have plotted one thing, but as you're laying the story down word by word, unexpected possibilities pop up and surprise you. I don't want to be tied in to a strict plot and let these possibilities slip by. I'd much rather dive in and see where they can lead.

That's how I use those little unexpected events. I let them guide the story when they pop up. But I'm talking about unexpected events that happen in the writing, which I don't think is what you mean.

 

This is the definition of the butterfly effect. ""The butterfly effect" was the prompt for the October short story contest. Yes, it makes for a good plot advancer.

 

Reading that had me flash to Harry Turtldove, and his alternate American history. Ten books all predicated on a single event, and how that one minor event changed everything. All based on Lee's general order not falling into Union hands. With POV characters from every segment of life telling the story in inter-related ways. Highly recommend the series, that starts with "How few remain"

 

That reminds me of an article I was reading yesterday about contingency in stories. I'm not going to pretend I understood the article, it was very highly intellectual, but the basic idea is, "how might have things been otherwise?"

 

My favorite 'what if '... Supposedly, the most decorated British soldier, Henry Tandy, had Adolf Hitler in his sights during WWI and didn't take the shot. It was Allied policy not to shoot unarmed or wounded enemies. It's controversial, as there is evidence that it may not have happened as Hitler claimed it did. But still...

 

Interesting I had never heard of that one. But that is the type of event I an referring to. How could we manipulate a simple event like that to help develop a story. That could be turned into a hero at the mercy of the villain moment.

 

I recently had a discussion about this, and consensus is that it is very unlikely to be true. Here's a picture of Hitler during his time as an Austrian soldier:


I'd say it's unlikely anyone looking down a sniper sight would have recognised this man 20 years later as the German Fuehrer.

 

Does the truth of it really matter? That is the kind of story that can take on a life of it's own, and become myth. For all we know, Hitler's hatred of Jews could have been caused by a Jewish jailer who liked to push him down stairs as a punishment.
Here especially, we understand the power of story.
The point of the thread is not to debate the truth of a historical claim, but examine how that type of claim can be used to help our own stories develop.

 

Depends whether or not you're going for historical accuracy in a story based round the event.

 

Supposedly, Hitler told the story during a meeting with Chamberlain. He pointed to Tandy in a WWI picture and said, in essence, 'that's the man that didn't kill me.'

World War One: The British hero who did not shoot Hitler - BBC News

Another of those urban legends involving Hitler; his gas mask would not seal due to his bushy mustache. He trimmed it all off except for under his nose, and the famous "little Tramp" look was born.

There Is Actually A Story Behind Hitler's Mustache - It May Have Saved His Life - World War Wings

 

It's nit about accuracy, unless your doing alternate history. It's about the seeds of ideas for plot points. Like the situation I mentioned in the original post. A simple translation error, had a major impact on events. I could see that concept being a plot point in Fantasy, Scifi, thriller, or mystery genres.

 

Tvtropes.com probably has an entire page for this type of trope, but it may be difficult finding this exact type as misunderstanding is the cornerstone of a lot of comedy.

This comes up probably in a lot of movies. Off the top of my head I can think of 'Brazil' (I think) and 'The Black Cannon Incident'.

 

When you're writing a story, it's about whatever the author wants it to be about - and historical accuracy can be a major part of it. For some people, even when writing alternate history, that's important, so it's important to point out whether a supposed story is accurate or not. It may not be important to you, but it could be to other people reading this thread.

You don't need to look into history to find inspiration for this sort of "what if" scenario - the entire movie Sliding Doors was about this. And the fantasy novel Jingo by Terry Pratchett is also based around it.

Inevitably, asking the question of what would have happened if Hitler had been shot depends on whether you believe in the Great Man theory, in that history is driven by decisions made by particular "Great Men", or whether you believe in the forces of history. What if Franz Ferdinand's driver had not stalled the car exactly where Gavro Princip was standing? World War I would probably have happened anyway due to the myriad forces that were leading Europe to war.

 

You are raising valid points.
My point was, using histories mistakes like the translation error, for ideas in writing. That could be a plot twist, or however works best for a project. I was also looking more on the plot outline side if things, than the editing side.

 

I get what you're saying. Something like a society that was built around a misunderstanding or mistranslation of a line in their holy book, or one of their laws. It's similar to the difference between 'the letter of the law' and 'the spirit of the law'. It's a pretty meta idea.

 

Exactly, and something that simple, can be the underlying plot for the story of a holy war. Group A has the holy book translated one way, and Group B another, resulting in very different interpretations of the same passage. A difference that grows to open warfare.

 

Or a tiny English village that goes way back to a time when Middle English was spoken, and their original laws were written that way. Certain laws were somewhat mistranslated, and so today it's illegal to cross at certain crossroads unless your carriage is pulled by 40 head of geese (maybe the phrase for 40 head of geese is remarkably similar to a pair of horses or something). I mean, not that of course, but something that makes more sense. That was just off the top of my head and rather silly. You'd want to actually look into Middle English and see what kinds of mistranslations are likely.

 

Eric Flint did that in reverse in his 1631 series. A small west Virginia town transported to Germany during the 100 years war. Imagine trying to translate democracy as a concept, into the middle of what was basically a religious war. Where the local religion depended on what the local noble followed. Or how to explain modern technology to the people of that time that see it as magic.