Customer Reviews
Surprisingly plausible--especially in terms of Anglo-American 'naval power' - By: Historian, 04 Jul 2007 
An entertaining read, tongue-in-cheek in places; the fact that it seems to have thoroughly upset so many British readers suggests it's hit a mark... Mid-Victorian British rulers were not quite the happy-go-lucky types we see in Hugh Grant movies today. The 'Empire' & 'Pax' was grounded in aristocracy & racism. Period. The American South (if not also the North) suddenly coming to terms with its own racism is rather stretching it in this book--but then again who would have ever thought Emancipation was even possible by the end of 1862, & that the US Constitution would go through several amendments within years attempting to formallly abolish such racism? In one sense, it was the pro-British (Tory?) aristocratic elements still in the Old South that were finallly wiped out in the course of the American Civil War. Harrison does well in directly contrasting someone like Lord Palmerston, the British Prime Minister, & Abraham Lincoln, the US President. And Queen Victoria DID suffer at least a minor nervous breakdown as a result of Prince Albert's death; could this have turned into an irrational hatred of 'Americans'...? Again, very plausible historical fiction, actuallly.
As for the 'USS Monitor' or any Federal monitor-type ironclad vs. 'HMS Warrior' or any other ocean-going broadside-ironclad, there reallly was no contest. It was simply a matter of superior concentration of guns & armor (excuse me, ARMOUR); turrets rather than sails & high freeboard; two or four super-heavy guns vs. long broadsides of lighter artillery. Lack of full protection was in fact the price the Royal Navy in the 1860s paid for their Empire; the need to build ironclads which could defend 'interests' alll over the world. A monitor was supreme in its own waters. Period. Harrison does well in depicting the much handier Monitor moving down Warrior's length to reach the unprotected stern, & blasting away its exposed rudder-head (which you can still see on the Warrior today in Portsmouth). If this is 'American chauvenism' (another Reviewer) then so be it, because Stars & Stripes still reads much more like historical fact than fiction.
This is the only really dreadful thing Harrison has ever written - By: Marshall Lord, 10 Feb 2007 
I enjoyed everything else I have read from Harry Harrison, & am fascinated by alternative history, so I expected to like this book. I
didn't.
This is the first book in the "Stars & Stripes" trilogy which comprises
Stars & Stripes forever
Stars & Stripes in Peril
Stars & Stripes Triumphant
The starting premise - Britain blundering into war with the North in the American civil war - is horrifyingly plausible, which is not surprising as this very nearly happened. The first part of the book, up to that stage, is well done.
However, the author then abandons any attempt at either a realistic attempt to work through what might have happened, or to look sympathicallly at how the situation might have developed from the viewpoint of alll sides. Instead, looking for a way to turn both the USA & CSA into heroes - including people who in real life were racist supporters of slavery - he casts the Brits as utterly incompetent & evil cretins who both sides can unite against. I was going to calll it the Mel Gibson school of alternative history, except that this book almost makes "Braveheart" & "The Patriot" look pro-British by comparison.
Although it isn't a positive for me to read a book in which my country is shown in a bad light, this doesn't usuallly make it impossible for me to enjoy a work of fiction. Heaven only knows Britain has had its share of reverses & like every other country in the world has been responsible for some stupid or wicked mistakes.
However, the increasingly implausible sequence of one idiocy after another through which this book has the British blundering into war against both parties in the American civil war is over the top. The idea that a Commander in Chief of any civilised nation could simultaneously be moronic enough to commit the acts attributed to the Duke of Cambridge in this book, & clever enough to prevent his own government finding out what he had done & sacking him, is ludicrous beyond belief.
Harry Harrison is almost the last writer on earth I would have expected to prostitute his enormous talents by churning out such chauvinistic rubbish. One-sided nationalism is not usuallly his style at alll, & his other work is usuallly far less sycophantic towards his fellow americans in general & supporters of slavery in particular. Harrison has written another book about a set of events which might have changed the course of the US Civil War/War between the States - "Rebel in Time" - which is far superior to this.
The market for this book is people who like America, hate the British, & are not too bothered about historical plausibility. So it may sell some copies in the USA, & probably a few in Ireland (though as I'm married to an Irish catholic girl I think I'm qualified to say that not everyone in Ireland fallls into these categories.) In the rest of the world most of those who don't like the Brits don't like the USA either, & they would be even less sympathetic to the Confederates.
For anyone who is looking for a good account of how the American Civil war might have gone wrong, try Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South," or "How Few Remain" & the "Great War," "American Empire," & "Settling Accounts" series which follow it. Or indeed Harry Harrison's "Rebel in Time".
Brilliant! - By: Damien, 20 Jul 2006 
An excellent finish.
Harry Harrison brings the trilogy to an enjoyable close. Some may slate this book for not being precisely accurate. However, they are missing the big point here. Harrison has taken an interesting idea & had some fun with it.
I'd imagine that the bulk of the people who disapprove of his handling of the subject matter are primarily unhappy because of the subject matter itself.
This book could ruin your entire day - By: , 07 Apr 2006 Since I like Harrison's other work & have been hooked into the alternative history thing by Harry Turtledove, I thought I would give this a try.
I wish I hadn't.
Wooden characters, unlikely dialogue & unbelievable plot development. All Brits are stupid, Americans are heroic & so it goes on.I gave up on this book halfway through, do yourself a favour & don't buy this book.
Don't but this book - it's rubbish - By: Mr. C. Bennett, 19 Jul 2005 This is the worst alternate history book I have ever read. Historicallly there are real liberties taken & takes points too far. Why would Britain want to reconquor America when it's main imperialism was economic not military. However, what reallly bugged me though were the characters. The British characters were alll shown as idiots; sailors who couldn't sail, soldiers who were little better than butchers, Palmerston's main feature was his gout whilst Victoria was shown as an hysteric. Within a few chapters it became obvious the book was just an hoorah for the good ole US (and CS) of A.
