Goddamn it, 1632 is bad

[Thanas]

Biting Time - Virginia DeMarce
This good story deals with Veronica Richter and her false teeth, the school and the education system. Sadly, a lot of bad German translations destroy the otherwise favorable impression. For example, "Beamter" was not a word used up until the prussians invented it. The usage of German is anachronistic.

Wait, but aren't they anachronistic? Being 400 hundred years ago and all? Or do you mean that some other way, excuse me my knowledge of German could fit on the head of a very small pin.

Veronica Richter, a woman from the 1580s, uses words that were not invented at least 100 years later on. She should not be using modern German words, especially not when agitated. Unless you want to argue the Americans deliberately tought their German citizens modern German technical terms like Beamter (state civil servant).

[Mr Bean]

Veronica Richter, a woman from the 1580s, uses words that were not invented at least 100 years later on. She should not be using modern German words, especially not when agitated. Unless you want to argue the Americans deliberately tought their German citizens modern German technical terms like Beamter (state civil servant).

Ok that makes the complaint make a good deal more sense.

[Edward Yee]

I think I nearly threw the book across the room from me when I read the enormous cliche of her meeting the main character

"Mike Stearns, hidalgo" was my first indication that something wasn't right with this story concept...

Characters like her are why Crit Lit folks tend to become ardently radical feminists, and I can understand why.

Out of rage at what happened when a man tried to write her?

Re: Mike Stearns' political acumen... I'd also think it's beyond the "washed-up pro boxer" (as someone else here called him) who probably should have CTE, even if Eric Flint wouldn't have known what that is... (read: "punch drunk.")

[Thanas]

Power to the People - Loren K. Jones
A short story about the powerplant in which nothing of consequence happens.

A Matter of Consultation - S.L. Viehl
A story about how awesome americans and a herbalist save a man from the clutches of the bad court phyisician of charles I. It is notable for the anachronistic German once more, but it is the first story in which the AMERICANS are outsmarted and made to look like fools, so thumbs up for me on this one.

Family Faith - Anette M. Pedersen
A story about what the different faiths and war do to a family. It is too bad that the rather desolate tone is shattered by the happy end. Turns out the americans are so awesome that they got resources in place to look for the family of orphaned children. I cannot imagine how that is in any way logical.

When the Chips are Down - Jonathan Cresswell and Scott Washburn
This one is a rather well-done story that has a few overblown elements - granny and her broom - but it is worth reading. How do you make potato chips in the seventeenth century?

American Past Time - Deann Allen and Mike Turner
Baseball. I do not care much for it, so this story was rather uninteresting to me. One thing stuck out though - the americans still seem to eat a lot of meat. Why? They should eat a lot more vegetables.

[Thanas]

All of those books are available at this site.

The books are there legally, with Baen giving their full consent.

The specific link you're looking for is this one.

No, they are not. For example, the first two 1634 books are missing.

[Mr Bean]

No, they are not. For example, the first two 1634 books are missing.

This Link Thanas has everything, his second link
http://baencd.thefifthimperium.com/23-T ... rnFrontCD/

[Simon_Jester]

First five stories are done. Honestly, they are a vast improvement, but suffer from a lot of small mistakes.

Yes.

Dennis and DeMarce, in particular, became co-authors of quite a few of the later novels; going by what Bean's saying, that probably explains the improvement in the Flint/Weber product.

Re: Mike Stearns' political acumen... I'd also think it's beyond the "washed-up pro boxer" (as someone else here called him) who probably should have CTE, even if Eric Flint wouldn't have known what that is... (read: "punch drunk.")

Mitigating factor: I don't think he was at it very long. Boxers' brains don't dissolve overnight, after all.

There's an underlying proposition here that interests me in the abstract, not as a defense of 1632. Historically, only a small fraction of the population at any one time ever got the chance to demonstrate their skill at politics and war- the aristocracy. We tend to assume that the people actually responsible for making those calls were best suited to do so, but is this really true? When the potential talent pool for ruling a country is restricted to the relative handful of people in the high aristocracy, common sense suggests that there's no genetic reason why those people would be best suited to the task.

Obviously, an enormous amount of this depends on training: someone who's spent forty years at court will be a more effective diplomat than someone who's spent forty years on a farm, even if the farmer would have been the better diplomat had he been raised at court.

But it's interesting to speculate just how many people there were with the theoretical potential, the talent, to become prominent players on the world stage... if only they'd had anything to play with.

Flint takes this proposition to its absurd extreme, allowing essentially random people from a small town to function on the same political level as the leading lights of an entire era of history, even though they don't know the local culture worth a damn.

But how far could the proposition be taken legitimately? Are we to assume that King X is intrinsically a better general than Peasant Y, because King X led an army to battle once and Peasant Y did not? How much military experience would Peasant Y need to duplicate King X's competence?

[PeZook]

There's an underlying proposition here that interests me in the abstract, not as a defense of 1632. Historically, only a small fraction of the population at any one time ever got the chance to demonstrate their skill at politics and war- the aristocracy. We tend to assume that the people actually responsible for making those calls were best suited to do so, but is this really true? When the potential talent pool for ruling a country is restricted to the relative handful of people in the high aristocracy, common sense suggests that there's no genetic reason why those people would be best suited to the task.

What is a "genetic reason" for being a good politician, though? We could go around in circles arguing for nature vs. nurture, but as you yourself noted, training and experience is absolutely crucial to the task. Why do you think all ambassadors are people over 40?

It's one thing to have an innate talent and charisma, and one could indeed argue many people with such talents were condemned to a life of poverty (then again, much of that is still true today) ; But figuring out just how many of those undiscovered people were left undiscovered is a losing proposition. Probably somewhat less than today, but that's not saying much.

But how far could the proposition be taken legitimately? Are we to assume that King X is intrinsically a better general than Peasant Y, because King X led an army to battle once and Peasant Y did not? How much military experience would Peasant Y need to duplicate King X's competence?

Assuming King X is not an idiot (which happened), then yes, he'll probably be an instristically better general by the virtue of having experience in what leading an army entails. That way he can foresee problems before they happen, and knows what an army can and cannot do ahead of time. Thus, King X's army would be able to maneuver (on average) better than the one commanded by Peasant Y and dictate the terms of the campaign, or at leats not get in as many blunders.

Obviously the matter is more complicated: for example, Peasant Y might have a talent for picking advisors, and thus have an experienced general to tell him what's what, plus he could enjoy popular support and good weather, etc.

Usually, though, even peasant armies and "popular" uprisings were actually still led by nobles with the appropriate training.

[Thanas]

Usually, though, even peasant armies and "popular" uprisings were actually still led by nobles with the appropriate training.

Usually, they still failed as well.

There's an underlying proposition here that interests me in the abstract, not as a defense of 1632. Historically, only a small fraction of the population at any one time ever got the chance to demonstrate their skill at politics and war- the aristocracy. We tend to assume that the people actually responsible for making those calls were best suited to do so, but is this really true? When the potential talent pool for ruling a country is restricted to the relative handful of people in the high aristocracy, common sense suggests that there's no genetic reason why those people would be best suited to the task.

Obviously, an enormous amount of this depends on training: someone who's spent forty years at court will be a more effective diplomat than someone who's spent forty years on a farm, even if the farmer would have been the better diplomat had he been raised at court.

But it's interesting to speculate just how many people there were with the theoretical potential, the talent, to become prominent players on the world stage... if only they'd had anything to play with.

First off, a lot of nobles were idiots or just did not have the talent despite the breeding (see: Wilhelm II). However, these people are the descendants of noble families that managed to be there by beating the opposition for hundreds of years, which means that on average, they were better rulers than the others. Also, keep in mind that since the 15th century, it became possible for well-off commoners to purchase noble titles. So when Flint rails against the bad, bad nobles, he actually fails to take into account that the best and most succesfulll "commoners", except for those of the hanseatic cities, would be nobles in these days and age. Very high nobles, in fact. For example, Jakob Fugger, the richest man of his age, was a commoner by birth and a Reichsgraf by patent.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Also, keep in mind that since the 15th century, it became possible for well-off commoners to purchase noble titles. So when Flint rails against the bad, bad nobles, he actually fails to take into account that the best and most succesfulll "commoners", except for those of the hanseatic cities, would be nobles in these days and age. Very high nobles, in fact. For example, Jakob Fugger, the richest man of his age, was a commoner by birth and a Reichsgraf by patent.

Which brings to my mind: poor Redmond Barry (The Memoirs of Barry Lyndon, Esq. one, not the historical Sir Redmond Barry). He should have married a rich German widow instead of a rich English widow, since apparently getting to aristocracy was a lot easier in Germany. (Of course psychologically that would have been impossible, because Barry was from the Irish gentry by birth.)

[Thanas]

Heh. Actually, that brings up another thing Flint missed. Earlier in 1633 he ranted on how the nobility owned far more land than in England. However, what he missed was that there were a lot more nobles. I am not an expert on this, but my limited look at the situations tells me that the english gentry was on average far richer. I know about some nobles who were nobles but essentially little better than rich farmers.

[Simon_Jester]

What is a "genetic reason" for being a good politician, though? We could go around in circles arguing for nature vs. nurture, but as you yourself noted, training and experience is absolutely crucial to the task. Why do you think all ambassadors are people over 40?

It's one thing to have an innate talent and charisma, and one could indeed argue many people with such talents were condemned to a life of poverty (then again, much of that is still true today) ; But figuring out just how many of those undiscovered people were left undiscovered is a losing proposition. Probably somewhat less than today, but that's not saying much.

True. What I'm getting at is that if 1 in 20 people born to a noble family had the talent to do backroom maneuvering effectively, I'd tend to expect something like 1 in 20 people not born to a noble family to be able to do it if they had the same experience, which obviously they did not.

I happen to find it interesting to reflect on how many random people could potentially have done well playing for high political stakes, had opportunity given them the chance to acquire the experience on some reasonable time frame. But that's mostly just me, and it's not really germane to the topic under discussion since Flint took this idea and ran so far with it that he took it over a cliff into "anyone can rise to any occasion instantly" territory.

I don't doubt that people thrown into the game with no experience would mostly get flattened, especially if they're dealing with major political "fish out of water" moments.

[Thanas]

The last five stories in the anthology

Skeletons - Greg Donahue
A short story about the bad pasts of some of the new German inhabitants of Grantville. To be honest, this one was pretty bland and uninteresting.

A Witch to Live - Walt Boyes
This story takes one of the best known letters about witchcraft (the letter of Iunius to his daughter veronica) and mixes it with the work of Friedrich Spee (who the author mistakenly calls Friedrich von Spee). This one was a favorite of mine because I read the cautio criminalis. This is a good story, which again would have been massively improved by leaving the americans out of it. And of course, noble-bashing again, as apparently one German knight decides to just attack the americans instead of agreeing to enter a city unharmed. So what started out as a great story became a rather mediocre one, especially when the German became bad (again).

The Three R's - Jody Dorsett
Well. This story was decent, but I wonder how high the chances are anybody in a WV mining town would have heard of Comenius and his brethren. Really, I doubt if many Americans have even heard of him. Oh, and yes, sending people into Bohemia by the Americans to preach revolution is certainly a very smart thing to do.



Here Comes Santa Claus - K.D. Wentworth
Oh boy. I thought it was impossible to outdo Wentworth in both ameriwank and idiocy. I was wrong.
First of all, we have Pappenheim (himself) and two of his subordinates trying to infiltrate Grantville posing as refugees. On orders from Wallenstein. First, this is stupid beyond measure. Grantville is composed of a lot of former Imperial soldiers. The chances of being recognized therefore are pretty high. And never mind the wisdom of sending your best cavalry general on a high-stakes mission.

Then, we have the Imperials confusing Julie McKay as "Jew Lee Mckay". WTF? Julia is a well-known German name. And it is also well known (among the swedes at least, which means Wallenstein with his spies would know it as well) that the shooter was female. So where the heck does the author get the idea that Pappenheim would mistake Julie McKay, female shooter, as "the Jew Lee McKay"?

Next, we got "Anton Berg", who supposedly is from a noble family. If so, why has he no title (Ritter) nor the ennobling "von"? Anyway, he and another Imperial Flunkie got the bright idea of smuggling in powder casks disguised as christmas presents. But let us get on with the idiocy. The Imperial General and his brightest officers ask around and suddenly confuse Julie with Rebecca Stearns (because she is female and Jewish, got it?). Then, they run into Julie at the school.

Next comes the part where I had to drink a double whiskey before continuing Julie McKay is so awesome she manages to get Pappenheim to play Santa, just ordering him around not caring for his objection. Yes, you read that right. General of horse Pappenheim, terror of the battlefield, a warrior through and through, does not manage to get a word in and is shanghaied into playin Santa.

Then, Imperial officers are astonished at the custom of giving alms to orphanages. WTF? Does the author think orphanages did not exist in 17th century Germany and that alms were an unknown thing?

Anyway, after three hours or so, Pappenheim manages to get a word in (gee, I wonder how he ever managed to command armies with such audacity and daring). Anyway, before they come to blows, Pappenheim smells the gunpowder. In what is one of the most excruciating scenes the two bad Imperials who tried to blow up the school (why go after it in the first place? Unless you want to picture the Emperor as some sort of baby-eating madmen) are caught. Noble bashing ensues with them screaming for a ransom. In any case, Pappemheim is handing out gifts at the end (URGH. Can you imagine Sherman handing out christmas gifts in a santa suit? No? Well, neither can I. And Pappenheim was a lot harder than Sherman). And then he comes out with the secret offer by Wallenstein. He wants to switch sides.

And all he wants in exchange are - new teeth. That is all. So in exchange for making him chew again...the AMERICANS get the most capable Imperial General to switch sides. Right. I'll not even try to explain how defecting to Adolf was not something Wallenstein ever contemplated IRL. He had plenty of opportunities to desert, even when he was in Imperial disfavor. And he took none. But hey, who cares, right? We got Pappenheim playing santa after all.

Well, I promised I'd get all five stories. But the last one is called The Wallenstein Gambit and is by Flint. I'll leave that for tomorrow.

[Mr Bean]

*Edit
My impression was the story was that he was not just getting teeth but the best in American medical care. Not an small gift in this day and age and after taking a bullet to the jaw.

The Wallenstien gambit might surprise you, if nothing else for how Flint handles Wallenstein who has some very good lines.

[Thanas]

*Edit
My impression was the story was that he was not just getting teeth but the best in American medical care. Not an small gift in this day and age and after taking a bullet to the jaw.

However, at this time, he has already survived infection. What else is going to kill him then? I think he should demand much more.

[Mr Bean]

*Edit
My impression was the story was that he was not just getting teeth but the best in American medical care. Not an small gift in this day and age and after taking a bullet to the jaw.

However, at this time, he has already survived infection. What else is going to kill him then? I think he should demand much more.

Well the much more is the whole point of the next story so I have to refrain my comments until you've read it.

[Simon_Jester]

And all he wants in exchange are - new teeth. That is all. So in exchange for making him chew again...the AMERICANS get the most capable Imperial General to switch sides. Right. I'll not even try to explain how defecting to Adolf was not something Wallenstein ever contemplated IRL. He had plenty of opportunities to desert, even when he was in Imperial disfavor. And he took none...

In mitigation, he's a lot more likely to regain Imperial favor after losing it than he is to regain the ability to chew after losing it.

It's a human motivation, if not one that fits well with the (apparently ironclad loyal) Wallenstein.

Of course, he's playing a rather more complicated game than that in any case.

[Thanas]

And all he wants in exchange are - new teeth. That is all. So in exchange for making him chew again...the AMERICANS get the most capable Imperial General to switch sides. Right. I'll not even try to explain how defecting to Adolf was not something Wallenstein ever contemplated IRL. He had plenty of opportunities to desert, even when he was in Imperial disfavor. And he took none...

In mitigation, he's a lot more likely to regain Imperial favor after losing it than he is to regain the ability to chew after losing it.

It's a human motivation, if not one that fits well with the (apparently ironclad loyal) Wallenstein.

Of course, he's playing a rather more complicated game than that in any case.

Doubtful. Once he deserts, there is no way he can go back and survive. See Eger. And Wallenstein was not ironclad loyal. However, he also never considered allying with the Swedes.

*************************
So, the Wallenstein Gambit.

First, Flint has Wallenstein's life limited, with the doctor being surprised if Wallenstein lives a few more years. Really, can we all say copout to prevent future impact of the character?

Then Wallenstein agrees to get involved in the Ukrainian civil war on the side of the Jews...in return for getting a modern-day goldsmith. Eh...yes. I am sure that goldsmith is going to make such beautiful workmanship once his machine tools break down - and how are they going to power them for long anyway? And we got the classic "pull something out of my behind" of Flint, as one character just happens to have tons of information on 17th century Prague on her PC harddrive. Really. So that means, out of a population of a few thousand, we got multiple weapon nuts, history buffs, people who collect ancient weapons etc...and now someone who researched 17th century prague. I am not buying it, these things happen way too often to be believed.

"The Habsburgs," he said, almost hissing the words. "There is the source—well, the driving engine, anyway—of Europe's bigotry in this day and age. The Austrians as much as the Spanish."

Nevermind the Spanish were far more relaxed with regards to children of mixed "races" etc and the Habsburgs held together a multinational and multicultural empire...whatever.

"He's the stinking bastard who ordered his Croat cavalry to attack our school last year. Tried to slaughter all of our children!"

I never got that. Why would Wallenstein do this instead of trying to capture something of significance?

That said, the story is surprisingly good. Though I think Flint overemphasized the relationship between Wallenstein and Pappenheim (indeed, it comes across as if Pappenheim is really the chief organizer of the army), he writes a good one. I also think that the role of Edith Wild smacks of ameriwank (she is able to ingratiate herself with Wallenstein and his wife, overrule his astrologers, become his confidante and Wallenstein apparently likes Agatha Christie novels).

Example:

"He won't listen to me, Edith," complained Isabella Katharina. Wallenstein's wife shook her head. "Those damned astrologers! All he listens to! And they are telling him he has nothing to fear in the year ahead."

Edith Wild scowled and glanced at the door. Her bedroom directly adjoined the suite that served Wallenstein and his wife as their living quarters in the palace. That was due to Isabella Katharina's insistence that Wallenstein's nurse be readily available in the event his poor health suddenly deteriorated. In the months since she'd arrived in Prague, Isabella had come to trust Edith's advice far more than she did those of her husband's doctors. Much less his astrologers.

Smart woman, thought Edith. "What does Pappenheim say?"

"My husband won't listen to him either. I spoke to Gottfried myself, and he says he can do nothing beyond make sure that a guard is always stationed at the entrance."

"Well, that's true enough. He can't very well force the Duke to accept guards in his own suite."

Isabella seemed close to tears. Edith patted her on the shoulder. "All right, then, you'll just have to rely on me, if something happens."

As much as Isabella trusted her, the look she gave Edith now was definitely on the skeptical side.

Edith sniffed, and marched over to the chest in the corner that held her clothes. After rummaging in the bottom for a moment, she brought out something and showed it to Isabella.

"This'll do the trick."

Now more intrigued than anything else, Isabella came over and stared at the thing.

"Is that one of your American pistols?"

Edith grunted. "Don't call it a 'pistol.' It's a revolver. Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum Chief Special. Holds five rounds, 125 grain. Kicks like a mule and it'll damn near blow your eardrums, but it'll drop an ox. I wouldn't have bought it myself, it's my son's. But he gave it to me after the first time he fired it on the shooting range." She sniffed again. "I hate to say it, but he's something of a sissy—even if he does like to hang out with those bums at the Club 250, pretending otherwise."

She was wearing seventeenth-century-style heavy skirts with a separate pocket underneath, attached by a drawstring. Using a slit in the skirts designed for the purpose, she slipped the revolver into the pocket. "Anyway, relax. If anybody gets into the Duke's rooms, I'll see to it they don't leave. Except in a coffin."

Isabella gazed up admiringly at the large American woman. "What would we do without you?"

"I don't know," grunted Edith.

It was the truth, too. There were ways in which taking care of Wallenstein and his wife was like taking care of children. Still, she'd grown very fond of the two of them. The Duke himself was always courteous to her—far more courteous than any "fellow American" had ever been, she thought sarcastically—and Isabella had become a real friend.

Edith Wild hadn't had many friends in her life. That was her own harsh personality at work, she understood well enough. She'd never really been sure how much she'd like herself, if she had any choice in the matter. So it was nice to have a place again in life, and people who treated her well.

"Don't worry about it," she gruffed. "I like it here in Prague, and I plan on staying. Anybody tries to fuck with the Duke, they're fucking with me."

"You shouldn't swear so much," chided Isabella. The reproof was then immediately undermined by a childish giggle. "But I'm so glad you're here."

Long live the AWESOME AMERICAN.

So there is going to be a new co-ed university in Prague. How is this going to work in a day and age where education for women was reserved to princesses only? Are they suddenly going to reverse hundreds of years of chauvinist society in one generation?

Avigail spoke Yiddish, not German, but Judith had no trouble understanding her. Except for some loan words, the languages were almost identical.

Really? Yiddish and German do not even sound alike.

Oh, and remember Edith WANK-Wild from above? Well, she and another american manage to save Wallenstein's life with ease from four assassins. Edith guns the assassins down in cold blood. Oh god, not another AWESOME FEMALE KILLING MACHINE. Wallenstein is pretty passive during this - he gets thrown around by one american female and then all he does is club one of the guys. Right.

Edith's last shot had gone a little wild too, it seemed. The man had only been wounded in the shoulder—from what Ellie could tell, nothing more than a flesh wound—and Edith's gun was out of ammunition. Fat lot of good it did him. Don't fuck with Nurse Ratchett. Edith had wrestled him to the floor and was now clubbing his head with her revolver.

Thump. Thump. Thump. Thump.

Wallenstein stuck his own head out the door, crouched a little higher than Ellie. "Rossbach is dead," he announced.

He studied Edith at her work for a moment, then straightened and helped Ellie to her feet. When she looked at him again, to her surprise, Wallenstein was smiling thinly and stroking his badly scarred jaw.

"A pity there are so few American women," he announced. "If I had an army of you mad creatures, I could conquer the world."

And Flint then starts into torture porn area. I think it is meant to be comical, but it comes across as really sociopathic.

Ellie never saw it herself, since she spent the next many hours closeted in the telephone center. But she heard about it. In the famous "defenestration of Prague" that had been the incident usually cited as the trigger for the Thirty Years War, the Catholic Habsburg envoys thrown out of a high window in Prague Castle by rebellious Protestant noblemen had landed in a pile of manure. Their survival had been acclaimed as a miracle by the Catholic forces and had been disheartening to the Protestant rebels.

Marradas fell about the same distance—seventy feet—after Pappenheim threw him out of a window in the castle. But, as [Wallenstein had] commanded, there was no second miracle. Marradas landed on a pile of stones on the street below—placed there by Pappenheim's soldiers at his command, while Pappenheim kept the screaming and struggling Spanish don pinned in his grip for ten minutes until the work was finished.

You know, passages like this just destroy what would otherwise be a decent story. And then Flint has Wallenstein declare freedom of religion. I wonder why Flint thinks that would outweigh the possible conflicts between Jews and non-jews.

And it gets better in the WANK AMERICA. When Wallenstein marches away to fight the Austrians, guess who is elected to command the defence of Prague against mercenaries? Yes, you guessed right, the American Morris. Who is a jeweler. I for one cannot believe Wallenstein would not leave one of his decent subordinates behind to defend his capital. No, instead he leaves behind a very young subordinate. And the Jews naturally trust the American instead of someone who, you know, actually has experience at fighting a besieging army. And of course, Flint's usual thing - the americans impressing the greatest intellectuals etc.

Then of course the Americans just happened to bring a Katyusha-like rocket launcher with them, which breaks the enemy mains charge. And of course it is an American who actually persuades the Jesuits to stay and support Wallenstein, just with his example.

The only unfortunate episode in the day's celebrations—and that, only mildly unfortunate—was that the biggest cheer of all was not reserved for Wallenstein himself. That cheer erupted, quite spontaneously, when the two APCs from Grantville rumbled onto the Stone Bridge from the Malá Strana side and were met halfway by the katyusha coming from the east bank. Now that they could see what a real APC looked like, almost dwarfing the katyusha drawn up before it, Prague's citizens were greatly heartened. Their own little one had driven off Holk, no? Who knew what the big ones could do?

***************

All in all, Flint's writing has much improved and he seems to slowly get a better handle on the complexities. The stories and characters are not that one-dimensional anymore and his portrayal of Wallenstein is decent, if flawed. However, the same things that plagued 1632 and 16433 are still very much in evidence here. If he can reign them in, 1634 should be a more pleasant affair.

Alright. Ring of fire Anthology done. 1634: The Galileo Affair is next.

[Dahak]

Really? Yiddish and German do not even sound alike.

I'm not quite sure you can say it that strongly, given that it developed out of Middle High German and still has a lot of words that are quite close to current German (especially if you consider dialects).
Understanding it is a lot worse than Swiss German, but still I managed to get at least some limited understanding out of it.
Now, if you had said Hebrew, that's different...

[PeZook]

Edith grunted. "Don't call it a 'pistol.' It's a revolver. Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum Chief Special. Holds five rounds, 125 grain. Kicks like a mule and it'll damn near blow your eardrums, but it'll drop an ox. I wouldn't have bought it myself, it's my son's. But he gave it to me after the first time he fired it on the shooting range." She sniffed again. "I hate to say it, but he's something of a sissy—even if he does like to hang out with those bums at the Club 250, pretending otherwise."

Oh man infodumps about guns! Quality writing, that

True. What I'm getting at is that if 1 in 20 people born to a noble family had the talent to do backroom maneuvering effectively, I'd tend to expect something like 1 in 20 people not born to a noble family to be able to do it if they had the same experience, which obviously they did not.

I happen to find it interesting to reflect on how many random people could potentially have done well playing for high political stakes, had opportunity given them the chance to acquire the experience on some reasonable time frame. But that's mostly just me, and it's not really germane to the topic under discussion since Flint took this idea and ran so far with it that he took it over a cliff into "anyone can rise to any occasion instantly" territory.

Well there is some merit to the saying that many great people were not particularly great, just in the right place at the right time. And, in fact, measures were often instituted to find that talent, even in ye olden times. Most striking examples are of course public education systems, scholarship, etc: this is such an obviously good idea that nowadays practically everyone does that, and so we've managed to up the percentage of people finding themselves in the right positions according to ability, and doing great things.

I would actually have little trouble with Stearns showing extraordinary political acumen, if he wasn't so painfully wanked and had to actually overcome obstacles and learn things along the way. After all, historically we've had charismatic monks gaining power over city-states, insane people who didn't wash themselves commanding royal courts from behind the stages, etc: but their power was hard-won and took decades to acquire, not one or two years, and thus MIKE AWESOME STEARNS is completely unbelievable. I'm not sure he got into a single blunder during his XVIIth century political career (though I only skimmed the books, so maybe it's there).

I know about some nobles who were nobles but essentially little better than rich farmers.

The further East you went the worse the problem was, wasn't it? There was an entire extra strata of society in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the "naked nobility") who had nothing but their title and a sword. Which led to such awesome things like magnates paying them a pittance to dissolve parliamentary meetings

Which reminds me: the Commonwealth seems awfully passive during the whole world-shattering event, even though it's happening in their general neighbourhood

[Zaune]

Small point of clarification; was Grantville temporally displaced before or after Wikipedia started offering downloadable and/or physical media copies of itself? Whole bunch of missed opportunities for contrived coincidence avoidance there.

[Mr Bean]

Small point of clarification; was Grantville temporally displaced before or after Wikipedia started offering downloadable and/or physical media copies of itself? Whole bunch of missed opportunities for contrived coincidence avoidance there.

Per Flint the year in question was 1995 to 1999 when the town ported. It's 90's in any case

[Simon_Jester]

Yeah, so pre-Wikipedia. Probably pre-Google and certainly before Google was famous. Arguably pre-Internet, in terms of the Internet actually having major social impact rather than being the province of a minority of computer geek types.

Yes, many people here remember the 1990s Internet quite well; we are not a representative sample of the population.

Incidentally, the more recent short story collections have tried to enforce a lot more discipline on the "come on, we're stuck with the resources of a 1990s small town here." This is, like historical accuracy and overall plot sanity, an area where the novels have improved (somewhat) over time.

[Thanas]

Really? Yiddish and German do not even sound alike.

I'm not quite sure you can say it that strongly, given that it developed out of Middle High German and still has a lot of words that are quite close to current German (especially if you consider dialects).
Understanding it is a lot worse than Swiss German, but still I managed to get at least some limited understanding out of it.
Now, if you had said Hebrew, that's different...

Yeah, that was a bit overblown. Still, I question the sanity of an author who claims to understand Yiddish due to speaking German.

I would actually have little trouble with Stearns showing extraordinary political acumen, if he wasn't so painfully wanked and had to actually overcome obstacles and learn things along the way. After all, historically we've had charismatic monks gaining power over city-states, insane people who didn't wash themselves commanding royal courts from behind the stages, etc: but their power was hard-won and took decades to acquire, not one or two years, and thus MIKE AWESOME STEARNS is completely unbelievable. I'm not sure he got into a single blunder during his XVIIth century political career (though I only skimmed the books, so maybe it's there).

Agreed.

The further East you went the worse the problem was, wasn't it? There was an entire extra strata of society in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (the "naked nobility") who had nothing but their title and a sword. Which led to such awesome things like magnates paying them a pittance to dissolve parliamentary meetings

You have the same thing in Germany. That's why so many officers were noblemen even in the age of mass armies? Because that was the only way they could make a living in a "noble" profession.

Which reminds me: the Commonwealth seems awfully passive during the whole world-shattering event, even though it's happening in their general neighbourhood

Apparently they don't matter (though to be fair, they stayed out of the thirty Years war as well).

[Mr Bean]

Apparently they don't matter (though to be fair, they stayed out of the thirty Years war as well).

Yes and no, to be exact as per 1632 verse they were still building back up after the last time Sweden went to war with them and sat out the first few years after the Ring of Fire occurred. Not to say they were not busy reacting to the event just as far as story concern goes you don't find what they were up to until 1635.