who is the better writer, Harry Turtledove or S. M. Stirling?
- Thread starter T-rex blood
- Start date
I believe that if you're trying to write an alternate history, the lack of butterflies and plausibility can weaken the writing significantly, regardless of quality.
No contest. Stirling by a landslide. His characters speak like real people, his narratives are efficiently done, he doesn't jump between dozens of redundant PoV characters, but focuses on only a few that are key to the story. As a writer, his worst is far better than the best Turtledove
I also think his true alternate histories (the Draka books and Peshawar Lancers) are more sweepingly "alternate" than most recent Turtledove. On the other hand HT's alternate histories seem generally more plausible and grounded in at least some relevant historical research. But bottom line, if I am looking for a good read to kill some time and I have a choice of two unfamiliar AH books from Stirling and Turtledove, I'll always grab the Stirling.
I also think his true alternate histories (the Draka books and Peshawar Lancers) are more sweepingly "alternate" than most recent Turtledove. On the other hand HT's alternate histories seem generally more plausible and grounded in at least some relevant historical research. But bottom line, if I am looking for a good read to kill some time and I have a choice of two unfamiliar AH books from Stirling and Turtledove, I'll always grab the Stirling.
I used to really like both of their books. Turtledove's The Guns of the South and the first few Timeline-191 books are pretty good, and I really wish S. M. Stirling would continue the Island in the Sea of Time series.
I'm not a fan of their recent stuff. It's crap, actually. The War that Came Early series is horribly repetitive and I can't imagine how Turtledove could possibly stretch out monologues on how bad soldiers' cigarettes are for four books. Stirling's latest followup to the Emberverse series annoys me too, since I don't give a damn about Rudi, the Cutters, or the mysticism malarkey.
That said, I do think Stirling is better writer than Turtledove. Stirling may have stranded Rudi and Co in Iowa for 300 PAGES, but at least he doesn't repeat himself every paragraph!
I'm not a fan of their recent stuff. It's crap, actually. The War that Came Early series is horribly repetitive and I can't imagine how Turtledove could possibly stretch out monologues on how bad soldiers' cigarettes are for four books. Stirling's latest followup to the Emberverse series annoys me too, since I don't give a damn about Rudi, the Cutters, or the mysticism malarkey.
That said, I do think Stirling is better writer than Turtledove. Stirling may have stranded Rudi and Co in Iowa for 300 PAGES, but at least he doesn't repeat himself every paragraph!
Stirling is a better writer and also a more imaginative world builder than Turtledove. It's just some of his hobbyhorses - supercompetent bad guys of mustache-twirling Evil, dangerous muslims, cannibal hordes, olde pulp themes (including Characterization By Stereotype), guilt-free massacres of Rampaging Hordes, Running Around With Swords and Stuff Is Cool, the British Empire Is Cool, etc., get rather annoying after a while.
(If the Emberverse was't bad enough, now it's goddammed Vampires?? Trying to find a substitute for his Draka cravings?
)
Bruce
(If the Emberverse was't bad enough, now it's goddammed Vampires?? Trying to find a substitute for his Draka cravings?
)Bruce
I think Stirling's the better writer, but neither of them have written anything very good in quite a while.
Stirling, as much as I make fun of him, at least I actually enjoy reading his novels, except for the Draka which I will not read. Turtledove, I'm not going to talk about Turtledove...
I just wish Stirling would shut up about cannibalism, bad Muslims, and lipstick lesbians who still act exactly like men. Also, his in-character humor is almost never funny. Seriously, really corny jokes are thrown around by these characters.
I just wish Stirling would shut up about cannibalism, bad Muslims, and lipstick lesbians who still act exactly like men. Also, his in-character humor is almost never funny. Seriously, really corny jokes are thrown around by these characters.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
Stirling is the better writer but Turtledove is more plausible. Mainly I think that is because Stirling is not going for plausibility, but I have not seen any of Stirling's attempts that even try for plausibility.
Also has Bossman ever been a widely used thing? Its weird that technology goes and everyone is at a loss for words. Its like they have no memory of other titles.
I haven't read either in about maybe 7 years, and I can't remember a single character from Turtledove except that dude who kept getting the clap in Worldwar and the chick Confederate from Guns of the South. Otherwise it's all a blur of POV characters goggling at stuff. I can remember a lot of Stirling's characters.
I like Harry Turtledove better. He got me interested in Alternate History.
This, exactly, is pretty much my response to this thread. Stirling is probably the better writer of the two of them, but at least Harry Turtledove is a trained historian and ought to know better. When he gets it right, he gets it right, but when he gets it wrong, man does he ever get it wrong (e.g., Joe Steele, where Stalin's parent emigrate to the US when he is six months old, but he grows up to become the American version of the Stalin from OTL, WTF?!?) and in Stirling's case, he isn't really trying to write "plausible" AH as much as he's writing book-length "what if" thought experiments, some of which are very interesting in their own right, others of which are not.
Lycaon pictus
Donor
Turtledove is a competent, workmanlike writer, except when he gets into the cooking sherry and writes something like "If fragments of steel from the greater madness pierced him, he would scream till he could no longer hear the sirens, till he choked on the song of death." (from Settling Accounts: Return Engagement) Thank Phos this doesn't happen too often.
Stirling, though, creates worlds I want to slow down and take a look around in, whether they're plausible or not.
Stirling, though, creates worlds I want to slow down and take a look around in, whether they're plausible or not.
Last edited:
When Turtledove lets his creativity out, he's a better author. As has been said his short stories and his earlier stuff is quite good and imaginative. His later stuff not so much.
I'll admit I haven't read more than 5 books by Stirling, but when he isn't going for evil wankfest his books are more well written, great characters and interesting setting.
I'll admit I haven't read more than 5 books by Stirling, but when he isn't going for evil wankfest his books are more well written, great characters and interesting setting.