Talk:Lee at the Alamo

Every time I think I'm going to take myself off of the Videssos list, we get some piece of wonderful exciting awesome news that stays my hand.

Per Steven H. Silver: "Harry also just dropped me a line to let me know he sold another story to Tor.com. He is not sure, however, when "Lee at the Alamo" will appear." TR 22:29, May 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * Lee at the Alamo, huh? I assume he becomes some sort of adventurer in his youth rather than respectably going to West Point? That would be an interesting change-up for him. Turtle Fan 00:52, May 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * That seems a logical assumption. I suppose it's possible that HT is screwing with us, and he'll have a much older Lee make some sort of pilgrimage to the Alamo and meet the ghost of Davy Crockett or something.  Or, HT could have Light Horse Harry live longer (but he'd have been just turing 80 at the time of the Alamo if he'd lived), or some other schmuck named Lee.  But I'm inclined to believe this will be Robert E. at the Alamo.


 * You see it's here a Lee, there a Lee, everywhere a Lee a Lee, here a Lee, there a Lee, everywhere a Lee, a Lee! There's Arthur Lee! Bobby Lee!  And General Light Horse Harry Lee!  Willie Lee! Jesse Lee! and Richard H-- That's me!


 * Sure were a lot of them, though that would be a very cruel tease on HT's part. So would sending Old Man Lee to the Alamo for a little communing with the ghosts, even if it's in a Rebs Win timeline.  Maybe especially then: Even if a Rebs Win timeline is a pretty dead horse to be beating at this point, there's got to be something more interesting to do with it than send Lee to the Alamo.  Especially if this turns out to be a short that's set within TL-191.  It would just make me sick if after all these years we get to explore the Lost Years of that timeline, and all we get is something this out of left field.  (Or maybe since it's TL-191 I should say "out of the red zone" or some such.) Turtle Fan 15:42, May 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * This begs the obvious question: Does Lee change the battle, or does he die along with everyone else? I can't see the former happening; that was a battle that really boiled down to sheer numbers rather than any great strategy or tactic.  If the latter, then it begs another question: is HT considering some sort of 19th-Century-without-Lee TL? (Based on other works like "The Daimon", I doubt it; based on the Evidence!, it's an inevitability).  TR 14:48, May 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * Lee was 37 at the time of the Alamo. If he's an ex-US Army officer with an impressive service record who took an honorable discharge and turned to adventuring (and why would he do that?  Maybe his wife died young and he decided to pull a TR?) he might be pretty high in the Texan command structure.  Hell, conceivab-LEE he might even command the Alamo.  Let's see what we can do with that.


 * Maybe he's been in command for a long while, and using his military engineer's eye and his experiences with the coastal defense installations, he's decided the Alamo is hideously vulnerable and has been fortifying like there's no tomorrow? He did that on the Peninsula when he inherited command of the ANV and was so unpopular among the men he was forcing to dig that they derisively called him the King of Spades.  Of course, all the ranks came around and respected and loved him soon enough, but that's another story.


 * I really don't know whether it would be possible to fortify the area around the Alamo to the point that it could have held out. I vaguely remember something about Santa Anna delaying the attack for days because he didn't want to cross a certain moat.  But the numerical disadvantage still approached 20-1, steeper odds than even Appomattox; and unlike McClellan, Santa Anna wouldn't jump at his shadow till he was convinced Lee had more men than he did.


 * I guess the other difference a commander could make would be to use the better part of valor before it was too late. Travis and Bowie always struck me as hotheads, and to my knowledge--which is slight, slight--there was no real strategic reason that the Texans had to hold the mission.  A tactical withdrawal, a willingness to trade space for time, isn't really what Lee's famous for: After Gettysburg and Petersburg he withdrew because he'd gotten his ass kicked and had no choice, and during the Overland Campaign he fell back because Grant had the unmitigated gall to keep advancing despite casualties and Lee had to keep between the Army of the Potomac and the capital.  I guess he wasn't forced to retreat at Antietam, but there was really nothing to gain by hanging around for another day, and even McClellan would have committed the reserve against him sooner or later (probably later, of course).  If not, Lincoln would have sacked McClellan and replaced him with someone who would fight, and he wouldn't have waited until November in such a case.  If you want a Confederate general who's likely to give Santa Anna the Alamo and move the garrison to a stronger position, Joe Johnston's the man.  But he doesn't have a name to conjure with the way Lee does.


 * At any rate, I'm excited about the high probability of being able to write articles on Crockett, Bowie, Travis, and Santa Anna. I guess we already have one on Houston, but it's likely to get another section. Turtle Fan 15:42, May 6, 2011 (UTC)