Modern AUs: You'd Hate Your Favorite Character

[mark_asphodel]

I 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'.

Comments

[scarletmorning]

I meant ModAU only. In canon I'd say that all of them are at least brought up with a religion. How they express their belief differs, of course, but all of them believe that the God/Goddess created their world, etc.

Yeah, from my perspective the fact that religion matters so much in political battles is bizarre. Spouting your beliefs like that here would more or less disqualify you. :/ That would so not fly. (And I like it that way)

[raphiael]

Well, it's not a hard divide between complete lack of religion and fervent radicalism. Like, chances are in an AU, the vast majority of characters would be living largely secular lifestyles (because most people do), but that doesn't mean they don't have some kind of belief system that they just don't strictly observe. Like for example, given the role of religion in historical knighthood, there are very few AUs where I could buy Seth or Geoffrey as completely irreligious. It's an important enough element on how they likely believe things work that changing it would easily alter them fundamentally, though not so vital that it 100% must be mentioned. I can't see them being able to quote their religious book of choice, or being strict about going to services, or consulting a religious leader for their personal problems, but I do think logically most would have something there even in AU. Even if it's hard for me to get at all into the idea of having faith in organized religion :P

[mark_asphodel]

Like for example, given the role of religion in historical knighthood, there are very few AUs where I could buy Seth or Geoffrey as completely irreligious.

Yeah, Seth gives us evidence of his belief in a higher power (I don't think he's playing Devil's Advocate/mind games with Natasha). And Finn strikes me as someone who'd be extremely orthodox no matter what the setting; other early-game knights not so much, but I don't see any one of them being godless. Michalis is godless. Michalis is portrayed as totally outside the norm. On the other hand, some of the monks-- Artur especially-- I could almost see as tweaked into the kind of priest/rabbi I've known personally who doesn't actually believe but sees their role as the best way to go about doing good in the world.

I can't see them being able to quote their religious book of choice, or being strict about going to services, or consulting a religious leader for their personal problems, but I do think logically most would have something there even in AU.

They might be able to quote from it as a sign of being a literate character in tune with their culture, though. Like Jagen dropping lines from the Raman Bible to illustrate his points in FE3. I don't see Jagen as super-devout, but place that man in a modern American AU and I bet he can recite from The Bible, Shakespeare, and the Declaration of Independence.

"Cultured" people used to do that as a matter of course. I know a few septuagenarian holdouts who can pull that sort of thing off, including the Latin and Greek quotations.

[scarletmorning]

Hm, na. Maybe it's just because I value religion relatively little, but I don't see how lack of religion would change their personalities so much. Or why that would have such a great influence on the development of their personalities. Most virtues that are taught in religious context can just as easily be taught in different, secular ways. But, idk, that may only be the impression of a person who only ever attended a mass four or five times in her life and that highly unwilling and therefore not listening.

I mean, I definitely can see them believing. But I can easily see them not believing and not changing a thing.

[amielleon]

I think the matter of discussion is association, and not a cause. That is, they may have the same morals even if they aren't religious, but people with that level of sense of duty and conformity and obedience to old values tend to be religious people, or at least in modern America.

When writing AUs, you want to make sure that characters give off the right "vibes", so it would ring true for your readers to make Seth and co. devoutly religious, because being highly secular or nontheist would give the impression of a rather different man.

[scarletmorning]

Well, I don't think I would write them as Americans anyway, so I'll probably hold them to different standards :/ Writing them differently would just feel to awkward for me.

Heh? Why couldn't Seth be the son of a man/woman who values very highly, but is an atheist. Or Darwinist? Or socialist? Or communist? They could teach him the same sense of duty and conformity. Especially the communist. I don't see how religion would play such a big role there.

[mark_asphodel]

If you constructed a world in which an atheist Seth makes sense, then yeah. But Seth canonically believes in and refers with respect to a God, unless he's trolling Natasha just to get laid.

Or Darwinist

There is no such thing, unless some fringe group of people accept Darwin's ideas as-is per On the Origin of Species and not the 150+ years of refinement to the model of genetic selection. Acceptance of evolution is not remotely the same thing as belief in an ideology like Christianity or Communism. It's not a value structure. It imparts no information on how to live one's life. It has no ethical content.

Especially the communist

Oh, yes. If we're writing a Stalinist AU, Comrade Seth would be a model for all to follow. That would work.

[scarletmorning]

Lol, I really shouldn't try to breed Pokemon while writing about politics XP Yeah, Darwinists don't really belong there.

Actually, a Communist AU suddenly sounds intriguing... damn.

[amielleon]

Because other Americans treat communists in a way such that Seth would have grown up with a different childhood experience that would likely shape him into a different person -- one who probably wouldn't be all for supporting the current order.

Not to mention that the goals of communism are contrary to supporting the current order in most places.

It'd be long-winded to address every one of those stances, but these things aren't simply a matter of the philosophy of the group itself, but how other people around them treat them.

[scarletmorning]

But that would again assume that the AU would play in America, with the characters being Americans, which they wouldn't be in an AU by me. And if Seth would grow up in a communist country with a family fully supporting communist, then he would certainly fully support communism as well. That would change him, certainly.

I'm just trying to say that depending on where the AU plays, you have to adapt the character a bit because they will have a different education, cultural background and/or political stance. You think that in contemporary America Seth would vote Republicans? Great. What about a Stalinist AU where Seth is Russian and lives in Moskau? Would he be a Stalinist? Maybe.

It's a bit of a nature vs. nurture, imo.

[amielleon]

Certainly so. My comment was in response to your suggestion that these characters would be the same regardless of religion, which is often not the case, in America and likely elsewhere. (Imagine an Iraqi Seth who isn't Islamic!) My point is that religion is often a part of where someone is within a culture.

[scarletmorning]

Aah, I see. Yeah, I can mostly agree with that, though I still wouldn't give it that much value. Just out of personal feelings/experience.

[raphiael]

Well, think of it this way-- wouldn't you be different if you did value religion? Wouldn't that change something fundamental about what you see as being important, or how you thought things worked? It likely wouldn't change your morals drastically; most people think of right and wrong outside "God said so", even if they do believe in that. But as someone whose religious views have shifted drastically several times, I can definitely say, it does change things.

[scarletmorning]

Honestly? No. Nothing much would change.