#taking fl apart on my autism table because i know how to party

[irrigos]

this is only tangentially related to fl, but ive been thinking a lot about the genre of historical fiction where nobody is prejudiced ever (or if they are, it's in ways that aren't real, like being prejudiced against rubberies but not people of color, or are no longer relevant, like people in fl still being anti-catholic but not antisemitic. as far as we know anyway)

it's... interesting. it definitely has its pros, and i see why people would want to craft that kind of world to play in, but i also think it's worth acknowledging the downsides, too. also this post is really long but i couldn't find a good place to stick a readmore. look at my posts, boy

like, i get that nobody wants to write Period Accurate Racism Simulator, both for personal moral reasons (ie "I don't want to write racist texts") and for commercial reasons ("No person of color is going to want to buy Period Accurate Racism Simulator") but also... so much of society is structured around prejudice that historical stuff almost falls apart without it

i was in two Regency-era larps, and both of them were "no prejudice" alt history, one of which had a whole alternate timeline explaining why Britain was a global superpower even though colonialism didn't happen, and the other one... well never quite got around to explaining the worldbuilding. but both were in agreement that Queen Elizabeth I ended sexism forever (and also homophobia and transphobia i guess??)

but like... so much about what is iconic about the regency era (especially in regency romances) is the negotiation with extremely strict social rules, which were, at their core, about controlling women. a woman can't be alone with a man because that's improper! i mean... what if they fuck each other???? But if it's equally valid for this woman to be in a relationship with another woman, then... it would also be improper for her to be alone with other women? okay so she can't ever be alone... but if polyamory is a possibility, then i guess she can't be in groups, either, because they still might all fuck each other!!! so nobody can... ever be around anybody? of course, if we dont view a woman's assumed reproductive capability as a commodity that must be protected and secured, then we don't need to police who she is alone with, but then we remove the stuff that's fun and interesting about Regency romances! At this point, we're just writing regular fiction, but everyone's dresses are really high waisted.

And I mean, if we imagine a Regency era Britain where colonialism flat out did not happen... how are any of these characters this wealthy? How are they still using the products that were made accessible to Britain because of colonialism, like fabrics from India? If there were no colonies, then Britain didn't colonize North America, then there was no Revolutionary War, which means France didn't go into debt FUNDUNG the Revolutionary War, which means it wasn't in the dire financial straits that lead to the French Revolution, which means that Napoleon would not rise to power because of his military service DURING the French Revolution, which means the Napoleonic Wars aren't going to happen, but obviously we're still having the Napoleonic Wars because how are you gonna do Regency Era without its tentpole features, like people achieving upward mobility through exceptional military service against the dreaded Napoleon. And don't even get me started on how the history of Corsica would fit into all this!!!

People made the decisions they made because of the world they lived in, and if you change fundamental aspects of the world they lived in, its absurd to have them make the same decisions.

And on top of that, it actually ends up being kind of limiting for what kinds of stories you can tell. i mean, if no prejudice exists, then you can't have anyone interacting with it, internalizing it, or overcoming it. To have a character that, for example, is concerned about homophobia would be as bizarre in this setting as someone worrying about societal backlash because... idk their favorite color is red instead of blue. Who cares! Do you care? Clap if you care.

I know that's the fantasy some people like engaging with, and that's perfectly fine, but... well, it's not what I like writing.

I think Fallen London splits the difference pretty well- society still exists on the Surface as it always has (more or less), so you can still write characters engaging with it, but having London be it's own little pocket of equality has its own problems. I mean, if London was moved underground and the Masters granted everyone equal rights under the law, then that means no minority has ever campaigned for an expansion of their own rights and succeeded. There was no real Women's Sufferage movement in London, because there was no need. But there were Suffragettes who did cool stuff!! Stuff that might be interesting to engage with, but you can't, because of the setting. You have to overlook the accomplishments of real marginalized people, because the very premise of your story depends on the new government just... deciding to be nice.

Is this a problem that needs fixing? Nah, I don't think so. I think it was good when FBG went to remove some of the #problematic bits of text that still hung around (like changing the description of the Fourth City Airag so it's less... shitty, for example) because that doesn't fit with the tone they're setting. But I think it's fun and interesting to look at the opportunity costs of these decisions!!! im just having fun lol