What do you consider AU?
Looking at pb_recs and the different categories you can give a fic made me think and what I should give mine. Basically, what constitutes an AU?
Because I realized that in my personal definition there are two different areas that I don't consider AU namely:
- A fic that wasn't AU *at the time of writing* and written with those very best intentions by that author even though it was later invalidated by canon.
Basically, the author was writing to the best of their knowledge and had no idea that canon would throw them a curve ball in that area. After all the fic wasn't labeled AU at the time of posting (because at that point it wasn't) so would you go and re-label all previous fics AU when something new happens in canon? I think emotionally I consider AU something where the author makes the conscious decision to go against something in canon. Instead with a fic like this there is no intentional dismissal of canon, the author was really writing to the best of their knowledge at that point. They didn't mean to be out of character/AU.
(for example by that definition a fic written after the s2 finale that deliberately ignores that Michael went to Sona or that Sara shot somebody and writes them as immediately having a happy end would be AU. However a fic set in an undefined later future that assumes that Sona did happen and was dealt with in some way would not be AU even if it paints a HEA for Sara [well unless I consider it to fall under the second part of this rule; or it falls into the second rule altogether; hey, I never claimed to be consistent]. Similarly, a fic that presumes a post escape meeting between Lincoln/Veronica is not AU to me if it was written in season 1; It only becomes AU in season 2 after the author knew they were dealing with a dead person; Similarly a "Fix It" fic where a character [like Veronica, Sara or Kellerman] turns out not to be dead doesn't have to be AU to me necessarily as long as it is canon compliant, for example due to being set in some undefined later future; again, it all depends on how you fit it into canon)
Of course, I'm slightly inconsistent about this rule. Some things are so fundamental that I consider them to make something AU when not included in a fic even though the fic was written at a time before it was revealed by canon. Those usually have something to do with back story. For example a Buffy fic that relies heavily on the idea that Angel was Spike's sire. But really any fic where somebody relies on a wrong version of back story and crafts the current character from there. Back then the author was acting on the knowledge they had at that time, but somehow it still feels AU to me. Because if you draw the current character with the presumption that they had a very happy childhood when we know they had a really crappy one; or presume they had a really crappy one when we find out that they actually had a very loving one you might create a character that is very different from canon.
But to be even more inconsistent I don't consider a back story story that gets it wrong necessarily AU, if it's a pure past story for example. Let's say, there is a back story story where Michael and Lincoln's father left them because he was an alcoholic, a miserable jobless inefficient drunk and he secretly comes to see Michael without being seen and it details his pain over missing his children. Obviously not true. Right? But to me it would fall into the "written with the best intentions" category. Yet a story, even one written in the past about adult T-Bag that presumes a very different childhood for him (for example much cooler than the one that was revealed) I would be more likely consider AU just like I would consider a Spike/Angel adventure that relies heavily on Angel being Spike's sire an AU.
I really do realize that that doesn't make mcuh sense. It's really much more of a gut reaction when I see a story whether it feels AU to me. For the sake of consistency I should probably just throw the second part of my rule away and just consider the examples I gave not-AU as well. [all of this was brought on by me wanting to rec a T-Bag back story story that obviously isn't what canon said it is, but that was written with the best intentions]
Also, the best intentions rule also runs into problems when canon is changed at the point of writing. For example, if it is a longer series with a concept that wasn't AU when you posted chapters 1-10, but then something happens in canon that invalidates it. IMO, that does make the fic AU in my eyes if the fic is still continued after that point (yes, even the older chapters retrospectively IF the author continues writing it even though he/she is now going against canon).
So strangely enough a one shot written in season 2 where Lincoln and Sara fall for each other and make sweet love wouldn't be AU (unless it is for some other reason), but a longer series that presumes they fall in love during season 1 or 2 and continues being written even after certain events happen that make that character interpretation unlikely (and without actually dealing with those events in your fic; now if you include all adverse events in your fic and find ways to explain then away then you are not AU in my definition). As a rule of thumb it seems that longer fics, that by definition often presume *more* about the characters in question are more likely to be thought of as AU by me.
- Fics directly set in a certain scene/post episode fic
For example a quick and dirty PWP between two characters set in a certain scene in canon when we know they didn't have sex there. I'm not talking about fics that exist in certain pockets of that scene (let's say After that canon scene between A and B, B came back to see A and they had wild hot monkey sex; or That scene in canon is really longer than what we saw, the conjugal between Michael and Nika lasted longer and they had sex in that half hour we didn't see and that is that story and this is how it fits into the scenes we did see).
I'm talking about scene where we know that characters A and B really, really did not have sex (or did a big confession of love or had a cool fight scene or character A called character B on issue X). Like, we see character A walk in, interact with B, walk off again and see the scene immediately do after that where A does something else. Or the scene starts with A arriving, interacting with B, and in the middle of the scene they are joined by C, D and E with obviously no time where they could have had sex. Or there is a scene in the very same episode which makes it clear that A and B haven't had sex yet.
So any random "A and B have sex during that scene even though WE KNOW they didn't" or any versions of "That is how that scene should have gone" aren't really AU to me. Probably because they are quite limited in scope and yes, everybody knows that that is not how it went down, but it sort of doesn't fulfill the "universe" aspect of Alternate Universe. It's not a universe. It's just a random scene. It usually, hopefully doesn't make any larger claims about the characterization of the characters involved.
Therefore I wouldn't consider them AU (I might consider them "lazy" depending on how they are written, mostly become I'm a big fan of good "pocket" explanations), I guess because they are too closely connected to canon in my eyes.
Of course it's possible that I'm completely ridiculous with my distinctions. Maybe it would be better if AU really covered anything not canon (and that intent/knowledge at that time doesn't matter). For example as information for somebody who walks in after a series has already concluded and is only looking for fic that is canon consistent. As the same time it could be argued that fan fiction is non canon by definition and that 95% of fic is probably not canon consistent in some way and that in that way all fiction is an AU from canon.
So, any thoughts on this? Anybody else have personal AU rules?
Because I realized that in my personal definition there are two different areas that I don't consider AU namely:
- A fic that wasn't AU *at the time of writing* and written with those very best intentions by that author even though it was later invalidated by canon.
Basically, the author was writing to the best of their knowledge and had no idea that canon would throw them a curve ball in that area. After all the fic wasn't labeled AU at the time of posting (because at that point it wasn't) so would you go and re-label all previous fics AU when something new happens in canon? I think emotionally I consider AU something where the author makes the conscious decision to go against something in canon. Instead with a fic like this there is no intentional dismissal of canon, the author was really writing to the best of their knowledge at that point. They didn't mean to be out of character/AU.
(for example by that definition a fic written after the s2 finale that deliberately ignores that Michael went to Sona or that Sara shot somebody and writes them as immediately having a happy end would be AU. However a fic set in an undefined later future that assumes that Sona did happen and was dealt with in some way would not be AU even if it paints a HEA for Sara [well unless I consider it to fall under the second part of this rule; or it falls into the second rule altogether; hey, I never claimed to be consistent]. Similarly, a fic that presumes a post escape meeting between Lincoln/Veronica is not AU to me if it was written in season 1; It only becomes AU in season 2 after the author knew they were dealing with a dead person; Similarly a "Fix It" fic where a character [like Veronica, Sara or Kellerman] turns out not to be dead doesn't have to be AU to me necessarily as long as it is canon compliant, for example due to being set in some undefined later future; again, it all depends on how you fit it into canon)
Of course, I'm slightly inconsistent about this rule. Some things are so fundamental that I consider them to make something AU when not included in a fic even though the fic was written at a time before it was revealed by canon. Those usually have something to do with back story. For example a Buffy fic that relies heavily on the idea that Angel was Spike's sire. But really any fic where somebody relies on a wrong version of back story and crafts the current character from there. Back then the author was acting on the knowledge they had at that time, but somehow it still feels AU to me. Because if you draw the current character with the presumption that they had a very happy childhood when we know they had a really crappy one; or presume they had a really crappy one when we find out that they actually had a very loving one you might create a character that is very different from canon.
But to be even more inconsistent I don't consider a back story story that gets it wrong necessarily AU, if it's a pure past story for example. Let's say, there is a back story story where Michael and Lincoln's father left them because he was an alcoholic, a miserable jobless inefficient drunk and he secretly comes to see Michael without being seen and it details his pain over missing his children. Obviously not true. Right? But to me it would fall into the "written with the best intentions" category. Yet a story, even one written in the past about adult T-Bag that presumes a very different childhood for him (for example much cooler than the one that was revealed) I would be more likely consider AU just like I would consider a Spike/Angel adventure that relies heavily on Angel being Spike's sire an AU.
I really do realize that that doesn't make mcuh sense. It's really much more of a gut reaction when I see a story whether it feels AU to me. For the sake of consistency I should probably just throw the second part of my rule away and just consider the examples I gave not-AU as well. [all of this was brought on by me wanting to rec a T-Bag back story story that obviously isn't what canon said it is, but that was written with the best intentions]
Also, the best intentions rule also runs into problems when canon is changed at the point of writing. For example, if it is a longer series with a concept that wasn't AU when you posted chapters 1-10, but then something happens in canon that invalidates it. IMO, that does make the fic AU in my eyes if the fic is still continued after that point (yes, even the older chapters retrospectively IF the author continues writing it even though he/she is now going against canon).
So strangely enough a one shot written in season 2 where Lincoln and Sara fall for each other and make sweet love wouldn't be AU (unless it is for some other reason), but a longer series that presumes they fall in love during season 1 or 2 and continues being written even after certain events happen that make that character interpretation unlikely (and without actually dealing with those events in your fic; now if you include all adverse events in your fic and find ways to explain then away then you are not AU in my definition). As a rule of thumb it seems that longer fics, that by definition often presume *more* about the characters in question are more likely to be thought of as AU by me.
- Fics directly set in a certain scene/post episode fic
For example a quick and dirty PWP between two characters set in a certain scene in canon when we know they didn't have sex there. I'm not talking about fics that exist in certain pockets of that scene (let's say After that canon scene between A and B, B came back to see A and they had wild hot monkey sex; or That scene in canon is really longer than what we saw, the conjugal between Michael and Nika lasted longer and they had sex in that half hour we didn't see and that is that story and this is how it fits into the scenes we did see).
I'm talking about scene where we know that characters A and B really, really did not have sex (or did a big confession of love or had a cool fight scene or character A called character B on issue X). Like, we see character A walk in, interact with B, walk off again and see the scene immediately do after that where A does something else. Or the scene starts with A arriving, interacting with B, and in the middle of the scene they are joined by C, D and E with obviously no time where they could have had sex. Or there is a scene in the very same episode which makes it clear that A and B haven't had sex yet.
So any random "A and B have sex during that scene even though WE KNOW they didn't" or any versions of "That is how that scene should have gone" aren't really AU to me. Probably because they are quite limited in scope and yes, everybody knows that that is not how it went down, but it sort of doesn't fulfill the "universe" aspect of Alternate Universe. It's not a universe. It's just a random scene. It usually, hopefully doesn't make any larger claims about the characterization of the characters involved.
Therefore I wouldn't consider them AU (I might consider them "lazy" depending on how they are written, mostly become I'm a big fan of good "pocket" explanations), I guess because they are too closely connected to canon in my eyes.
Of course it's possible that I'm completely ridiculous with my distinctions. Maybe it would be better if AU really covered anything not canon (and that intent/knowledge at that time doesn't matter). For example as information for somebody who walks in after a series has already concluded and is only looking for fic that is canon consistent. As the same time it could be argued that fan fiction is non canon by definition and that 95% of fic is probably not canon consistent in some way and that in that way all fiction is an AU from canon.
So, any thoughts on this? Anybody else have personal AU rules?