![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mark_asphodelI was gonna do that fanfic meme that's been going around but my answers are boring and evasive.
On an IM the other night, Ammie dropped a revelation: Soren, in an "our world" modern AU, would vote Republican.
You can agree or disagree or debate the merits of the label, but she had a point. At least in Fire Emblem fandom, many of the characters if transplanted to our own world and time would probably not be people that internet scribblers (who often hit the "progressive" label on one point or another) tend to associate with. A lot of 'em would vote Republican, or Tory, or Conservative... though perhaps they'd better fit the party labels of a previous generation than, say, anything to do with the Tea Party.
Who are these people? Nobles and those who serve them. The privileged. Representatives of and defenders of the social structure. Not being a racist, or not being in favor of child sacrifice, doesn't make one not a small-c conservative. But how many Fire Emblem playable characters even fit a small-d democrat or small-r republican label? Dude... these are monarchists, for the most part. Oligarchs. Theocrats. Like... no.
If anything, many of these playables are genuine conservative characters putting down a rebellion from fringe elements, and their victory is The Old Status Quo, But Better. And IMO, a modern AU that doesn't GET that is likely to be off-base if it tries to deal with the characters in any kind of political/ideological sense. C'mon, picture AU Seth-- he's a career military man. Maybe not the most religious guy around in an orthodox sense (re: Natasha supports), but otherwise he's all about orthodox values. Country. King. Law and Order. And, yes, God. He probably votes to keep cops on the streets and keep teenagers from getting out of hand. He probably votes to keep marijuana illegal and the penalties for trafficking stiff. He probably thinks "marriage" consists of man + woman and wouldn't see anything wrong with DADT. He's against animal abuse but not much concerned about animal rights. He eats meat and doesn't think much about where his produce is "sourced" or whether or not the stuff's organic (but GM crops sound suspicious to him). He wouldn't want his tax dollars going toward Piss Christ.
(I think the God part may be hard to incorporate unless a character is a pre-packaged cleric because many writers are not religiously orthodox-- or they're coming at faith from something other than the pseudo-Catholic structure of most Fire Emblem worlds. Ordinary characters in FE do not have personal relationships with their Savior; that's limited to the elite, the elect. And you're not it unless your name is Claude, or Micaiah, or some other Chosen specimen.)
I mean, I could see Pent as a fringe-progressive guy, but even so he's coming at the system from a position fairly high within it-- NOT from the outside. He's anything but disenfranchised. Levin... well, in his bard phase Levin strikes me someone who could be tweaked into 1950s/1960s radical, but even so it's all relative, given that you'd be comparing him to power-elite military types like Sigurd and Cuan. Seriously, if Jugdral were 1960s America, I'm pretty sure Sigurd and Friends would be hawks on 'Nam. Supporters of civil rights for 'colored people'? Yeah, maybe. But hawks on 'Nam. Likewise, Levin could be spun into a plausibly Jewish subversive (how appropriate to the era and its fears), compared to WASP-y Grandbellian elites and the oh-so-Irish Lenster crew, and all of those carry their own weight in the cultural context. Catholics then were not viewed as Catholics are now-- and that's just one detail.
(Alvis is the reformer who wants a world where people aren't persecuted for the circumstances of their birth and bloodline. Think about that one long and hard in the context of a modern-world AU. Ow.)
Stefan? Now, he's gonna mix stuff up. Oh yes. Tellius probably offers the widest range of slots to be adequately filled in an AU-- Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Other. And then someone like Marth just kind of doesn't work at all IMO in a modern AU, unless you make him something as exalted and untouchable in the bubble of the AU world as he is in his own. Paul McCartney or Yuri Gagarin, take your pick.
But if he could exist in 1960s America, Marth would probably also be a hawk on 'Nam. And maybe support bombing Cambodia. Just sayin'.
On an IM the other night, Ammie dropped a revelation: Soren, in an "our world" modern AU, would vote Republican.
You can agree or disagree or debate the merits of the label, but she had a point. At least in Fire Emblem fandom, many of the characters if transplanted to our own world and time would probably not be people that internet scribblers (who often hit the "progressive" label on one point or another) tend to associate with. A lot of 'em would vote Republican, or Tory, or Conservative... though perhaps they'd better fit the party labels of a previous generation than, say, anything to do with the Tea Party.
Who are these people? Nobles and those who serve them. The privileged. Representatives of and defenders of the social structure. Not being a racist, or not being in favor of child sacrifice, doesn't make one not a small-c conservative. But how many Fire Emblem playable characters even fit a small-d democrat or small-r republican label? Dude... these are monarchists, for the most part. Oligarchs. Theocrats. Like... no.
If anything, many of these playables are genuine conservative characters putting down a rebellion from fringe elements, and their victory is The Old Status Quo, But Better. And IMO, a modern AU that doesn't GET that is likely to be off-base if it tries to deal with the characters in any kind of political/ideological sense. C'mon, picture AU Seth-- he's a career military man. Maybe not the most religious guy around in an orthodox sense (re: Natasha supports), but otherwise he's all about orthodox values. Country. King. Law and Order. And, yes, God. He probably votes to keep cops on the streets and keep teenagers from getting out of hand. He probably votes to keep marijuana illegal and the penalties for trafficking stiff. He probably thinks "marriage" consists of man + woman and wouldn't see anything wrong with DADT. He's against animal abuse but not much concerned about animal rights. He eats meat and doesn't think much about where his produce is "sourced" or whether or not the stuff's organic (but GM crops sound suspicious to him). He wouldn't want his tax dollars going toward Piss Christ.
(I think the God part may be hard to incorporate unless a character is a pre-packaged cleric because many writers are not religiously orthodox-- or they're coming at faith from something other than the pseudo-Catholic structure of most Fire Emblem worlds. Ordinary characters in FE do not have personal relationships with their Savior; that's limited to the elite, the elect. And you're not it unless your name is Claude, or Micaiah, or some other Chosen specimen.)
I mean, I could see Pent as a fringe-progressive guy, but even so he's coming at the system from a position fairly high within it-- NOT from the outside. He's anything but disenfranchised. Levin... well, in his bard phase Levin strikes me someone who could be tweaked into 1950s/1960s radical, but even so it's all relative, given that you'd be comparing him to power-elite military types like Sigurd and Cuan. Seriously, if Jugdral were 1960s America, I'm pretty sure Sigurd and Friends would be hawks on 'Nam. Supporters of civil rights for 'colored people'? Yeah, maybe. But hawks on 'Nam. Likewise, Levin could be spun into a plausibly Jewish subversive (how appropriate to the era and its fears), compared to WASP-y Grandbellian elites and the oh-so-Irish Lenster crew, and all of those carry their own weight in the cultural context. Catholics then were not viewed as Catholics are now-- and that's just one detail.
(Alvis is the reformer who wants a world where people aren't persecuted for the circumstances of their birth and bloodline. Think about that one long and hard in the context of a modern-world AU. Ow.)
Stefan? Now, he's gonna mix stuff up. Oh yes. Tellius probably offers the widest range of slots to be adequately filled in an AU-- Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Other. And then someone like Marth just kind of doesn't work at all IMO in a modern AU, unless you make him something as exalted and untouchable in the bubble of the AU world as he is in his own. Paul McCartney or Yuri Gagarin, take your pick.
But if he could exist in 1960s America, Marth would probably also be a hawk on 'Nam. And maybe support bombing Cambodia. Just sayin'.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-04 08:42 am (UTC)So I think while they'd understand the concept, they'd see it as inherently inferior and probably doomed to failure.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-04 04:13 pm (UTC)It's kinda like a presidency-- we might vote for our president, but he doesn't hold 100% of the power. The king didn't either/doesn't either. The difference is that a king holds a lot more power than a president. This can be good or bad. They do seek council from advisors buuut what does this do for them really?
Honestly it's pretty iffy. I always thought if you have a lot of God & Country men, like knights/etc, they might be better placed into a military. Boyd? Totally a marine. Haar? Air Force until his eye. Marcus? Army. Lowen? NAVVYYY I mean what.
But most people transplant them into other jobs but have them keep their sense of pride in what they do, which also works. For example, Kieran might be stocking shelves at Wal-Mart, but if his boss is Elincia, then Kieran is probably REALLY PROUD to work under her, at that job. He probably shines his nametag. (Can never unsee. That's a bad example, but you see what I mean. The people who serve a king are loyal to their boss (in an AU this is ANY BOSS, corporate, regional, manager, whatever you choose), and take great pride in what they do, and that's definitely not limited to serving a king or being in the military. I'm sure Lowen would take great pride in head chef at a hotel chain that Eliwood runs.) (I can totally see Eliwood running hotel chains. WHYYYYY. No I DON'T WANNA WRITE THIS, IDEA GO AWAY.)
That said, I hate how one-sided things are. The "Good" people defect to your side almost always, or die tragically (Shiharam), and the Bad Guys are always assholes, on the wrong side, being douchenozzles. There's really not a lot of in-between like with Elincia's council of officials. :/
no subject
Date: 2012-08-04 04:27 pm (UTC)Totally. Or something else very structured, like the FBI.
I kind of picture Lowen as a Mountie, actually. Don't ask me why, as I can't explain it.
That said, I hate how one-sided things are. The "Good" people defect to your side almost always, or die tragically (Shiharam), and the Bad Guys are always assholes, on the wrong side, being douchenozzles.
Some games are more nuanced than others. FE4 has waaaaaaay too many douchenozzles, but there are a surprising number of nuanced characters; more than I expected. Including one of the main villains, which is nice.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-04 08:40 pm (UTC)