If certain pivotal moments in history had taken a different turn, the world we inhabit today might not only have looked different in outcomes, but also in the meanings we assign to events, the contexts we construct around them, and the broader contours of geopolitics. Such counterfactual questions have long engaged historians and scholars, but they find their most evocative expression in literature. The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick is one such work.

While it imagines a world in which the Axis powers prevailed in the Second World War, its deeper inquiry is somewhat more unsettling, as it raises the question of whether the reality we accept as truth is, in fact, only a construct shaped by mediated narratives and the imperatives of power.

Or this mere feeling erupts only because, for someone somewhere, history did not manifest as per his, her, or their convenience, a state of denial causing the urge to repudiate what is and profess what it ought to be.

In the real world, beyond nostalgia, repentance, and the negation of systems, states, regimes, or empires that did not appear on the pages of history, or events that never happened, the fact remains that the power which ultimately emerged did not solely thrive or endure through fame, populism, or coercion alone; it also consolidated itself through the control of memory. The past, as we know it now, is considerably edited, its legitimacy redefined, and consent gradually manufactured.........

© The Nation