Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

StudiodeKadent: I think that the example given for "Deconstruction" with "The Butler Did It" is an incorrect example. A Deconstruction is meant to criticize a trope by taking the trope to its logical conclusion (i.e. "If trope X were real, it would absolutely suck because..."). "Butlers Association as front for Assassin's Guild" is, yes, the logical conclusion of the trope . However, does that actually criticize the trope?

On second thought, IF the Butler's Association were an ancient guild of Assassins, then they would HAVE to have been working for a long time, killing rich people. So the police would have to be utterly incompetent and/or being bribed by the Assassins Guild (which had access to all their client-victim's wealth in order to pay the bribes). In either case, this would mean we weren't in a Merrie Olde English Country Manor (where most of these murder mystery stories occur) but rather in a Crapsack World that resembles Warhammer40k meets Charles Dickens and the Assassins Guild would be an extraordinarily wealthy global political puppet master (having the ability to selectively kill off the rich, famous and powerful). So I guess that yes, indeed, this COULD be a Deconstruction depending on how it was handled by the author.

Luc: Added Conversational Troping, but I'm not certain it should be under that name. Anybody care to change it?

Xander77: Shouldn't Invoked Trope be somewhere in this?

Fire Walk: Added, not sure about the butler one works quite right, though. Any better suggestions are welcome.

Halfling Daniel: Why do this page and Meta Trope Intro both exist with the exact same content?

Ununnilium: Isn't this exactly duplicated by Lampshade Hanging and Subverted Trope?

Seth I didnt even know this one existed. It doies seem pretty pointless when we have those two pages.

Pepinson I like it—I can think of a few great examples of this sort of thing off the top of my head, and none of them fall neatly into either above category.

Scifantasy: Noting your examples, especially the Neon Genesis Evangelion ones, I have to agree with Ununnilium...those are definitely cases of a Subverted Trope, or just straight examples of one (such as the N2 mines).

Pepinson No, the N2 mines aren't straight examples—they're subtle Lampshade Hanging at worst, and I doubt Hideaki Anno was doing something that obvious—and the other examples can't be subversions, because they're actually played too straight. Making Asuka a perfectly nice girl who has a nice, healthy platonic relationship with Kaji would be subverting the Clingy Jealous Girl trope—here, the trope is actually explored in extreme depth, hypothesizing about what sort of conditions could combine in real life to produce such a messed-up character.

Scifantasy: Run this by me again. Taking a trope out of its fictionalized, TV-friendly context and saying, in short "here's what it would really be like," effectively satirizing or at least analyzing it, isn't subverting it?

Ununnilium: I can imagine a situation in which one could do that and it wouldn't be a subversion; however, all the examples given are.

(Perhaps we need a new subtrope of Subverted Trope, for examples where the show takes the trope and shows how it would be in real life. Playing It Straight, maybe?)

Seth I dont think so, i think a mention on the example iteslf. List it as a subverted trope but then specify that it was subverted in that it was played realisticaly. I know that we have done this before somewhere but i can't think of where.

Eg: Subverted in ???: The trope was played realisticaly and showed the actual concequences of - The Trope -

Tzintzuntzan: My reply got deleted minutes after it was sent — that the entry Deconstruction seems to cover this, for instance how My So Called Life plays teen comedy tropes straight. The current entry on Deconstruction is about genres, but we could have the same thing for individual tropes.

Pepinson I like Ununnilium's idea.

Ununnilium: Deconstruction, that's it. Deconstruction of a trope.

Scifantasy: That works out well. So, what, will this page be folded into Deconstruction?

Ununnilium: Guess so, though it might work as an independent subtrope. Really getting into Splitter territory there, mind.

Insert Name Here: I agree the definition sounds like it's covered under Deconstruction and Subversion, but I think the title "playing with a trope" implies something completely different from the definition currently up. I think you could ditch this entry and reattach the title to a situation where the writers , as the title implies, play with a trope, meaning take advantage of its existence and the audience's knowledge of it and allude to it/dance around it/acknowledge it, without actually using/subverting it. When I first read "playing a trope", I first guessed, that must mean they didn't use it (properly or subverted) but you would guess they were about to.

Citizen: Haha, yeah, Deconstruction makes a direct hit with that one sentence: A deconstructionist show will not just make fun of its genre, but attack it. Often, it will show that the genre's tropes (consciously or not) represent a very dark moral. 'The most common way to do this is to take a trope (often a comic one) and play it utterly realistically — showing just how bad an idea it would be in the real world.'

Jim: Talking about the examples used, aye, Neon Genesis Evangelion does play with a lot of tropes, but Ryoji Kaji as "a truly wretched, amoral individual who is probably very lucky to not be in prison,"? What the hell? He refused to take advantage of Asuka, several times, despite her throwing herself at him, was the closest thing to a wise mentor that Shinji had, and despite being a cad, he tried to fix things with Misato. I'm just wondering where the perception of him as wretched and amoral came from, when he was one of the few characters to be a sane, half decent human being in the series. Sure, he wasn't perfect, but the series did not portray him as an amoral scumbag, far from it. His conversation with Shinji about women had him talking about them as mysterious creatures, which men could never really hope to understand, in terms of awe and love, particularly in reference to Misato.

To be honest, I'd even call into question whether he embodies the Lovable Sex Maniac as a real character trait, either. He doesn't steal panties, he doesn't sneak into the womens' changing rooms, etc, during the course of the series, he has one serious relationship, and flirts with the women in the series. Asuka tried to be seductive, and he brushed her off, telling her she was still a child. The only time his trait of being lecherous gets played for laughs is when he gets casually shot down trying to flirt with Maya, and asks Shinji if he wants to go for a coffee instead. Shinji's deadpan response: I'm a boy.

Lale: I only got into Evangelion after reading about it on this wiki, and I was really surprised with how off-the-mark this site's descriptions of Kaji seemed to be. Kaji just strick me as a flirt and a tease who's legitimately deeply in love with Misato (of course, the Double Agent thing complicates things). Pokemon's Brock is more of a Lovable Sex Maniac than him. I think whoever created the Evangelion show and character entries personally didn't like him and nobody bothered to alter his descriptions, so there they are.

Jim: Possibly. Whoever wrote the articles for Neon Genesis Evangelion sees Shinji as a shining hero with the weight of the world on his poor little shoulders, obviously doesn't like Asuka a lot, and clearly thought Kaji was a total asshole, and wrote the articles with those opinions firmly in mind. Granted, the series is open to interpretation, but Shinji isn't as great a hero as the author sees him, ('s kinda the point, innit?) and Kaji isn't a lecherous scumbag. I might edit the articles to be a little more accurate to the events and portrayals.

Lale: Shinji has the heart of a hero — the paragraph that says he's the only child who pilots out of a sense of duty and responsibility is very true. He just has a lot of issues that eventually overpower him, albeit arbitrarily.

Jim: Oh, the kid is a hero, I'm not questioning that, but the article on him is a little glowing in regard to his actions and reasoning. Originally, it said that he piloted to save the earth, because he was the only one who knew what was at stake. I'm the one who edited it and added that one of his real reasons for piloting Eva (which is a huge issue for the series. "Why do you pilot Eva?") was to try and earn the praise of his father, even though he wanted to hate him.

Also, Anno was depressed well before beginning work on Evangelion, and to be honest, I can kinda feel the descent of the hero into bitterness and self loathing ("All they ever did was hurt me, so they can just go die." What a great line, full of silly adolescent angst, except that it's justified. Every relationship he ever had did cause him pain, and he had to accept that in order to live), not as Character Derailment, but as a fall. He had to go all the way down in order to come back up.

In any case, since we agree that the description of Kaji ain't accurate, you wanna fix it, or will I?

Lale: No way. I don't think any description I could come up with for anything Evangelion could do it justice.

Jim: Oh, I'm not talking about totally redoing the articles, for the most part they're well written, even if they are a little too sympathetic towards the characters. I mean about correcting the references to Kaji being a lecherous amoral scumbag.

Mister Six: Soooo.... is this just one for the Cut List then?

Lale: The conversation or the articles in question?

Ununnilium: Playing with a Trope? It stands on its own now, IMHO.

Morgan Wick: But I still don't see how this version differs from being a mishmash of Lampshade Hanging and Deconstruction.

Scientivore: The first two paragraphs of the description of this trope describe Deconstruction. They describe it well and they do not describe anything else. The third paragraph is fluff.

From Charles in Charge: Lampshade Hanging.
From Neon Genesis Evangelion: Justified Trope.
From Neon Genesis Evangelion: Deconstruction.
From Excel Saga: You wouldn't know it from this vague description here, but from our article on the series it sounds like a combination of Deconstruction and Surrealism (as in Dada Comics).
From Stargate SG-1: Justified Trope.

I'm sorry for the work that's been put into this, but IMO it should go in the Cut List. I like the description of Deconstruction here — it's very accessible — and I hope that someone inserts it into the other article. I'm also glad that you indirectly brought the lack of a non-webcomic article on Surrealism to my attention; we should fix that.

Fast Eddie: Skimming through the references, it seems like this could be renamed Deconstructed Trope pretty easily, as this is at the particulars level and Deconstruction is at the general.

Why does Justified Trope mean handwaved? Surely justified tropes should be ones with a good justification.

Fast Eddie: Well, Unknown Troper, it has more to do with the justification being there, in the text, rather than just silently assumed. Handwaving would be one way to present a justification.

Nibbles: I think that was me. Although I'm not sure in retrospect why I asked that: a look at Handwaved clearly indicates that it is a different concept from Justified Trope. As I see it, a Handwave is either a trivial Lampshade ("Hey, I thought shooting open a door doesn't work" "Yeah, so did I") or a flimsy excuse that does not hold water. (Personally, I consider it pretty hard to claim that, say, Phlebotinum is a handwave...because really, given that we don't know anything about future tech, we aren't in a position to judge what is coherent and what is not. A lot of real modern science would sound like a crazy handwave to people from years past.) In other words, when an author Handwaves, they're "taking the hit" and just hoping that the viewer won't consider it a Wall Banger. Conversely, a Justified Trope is a case where the trope usually represents a mistake, but in this case it is perfectly logical and there is no "hit" to the show's credibility.

movie007: What kind of trope would this be? The butler didn't do it, and he was the only major character to never even be a suspect. I'm guessing that, if the butler was never even a suspect - and there were other characters to not be suspects - this would be an averted trope. If the butler was one of the suspects, but didn't do it, would this be a subverted trope?

Nibbles: Reading from the trope entry, The Butler Did It is about A) the dramatis personae includes a butler B) nobody suspects the butler ("What an absurd idea!") C) the butler did it in the end ("Gasp!").

Including any of these without including all of them is a subversion. If none are true (there is no butler to begin with) it is averted. The trope's justified/unjustified status depends on whether the aforementioned (A, B, C) components make sense in the universe of the story. E.g., if there really is no reason to suspect the butler (he is on surveillance camera tapes from the grocery store miles away during the time of the crime, he has no motive, etc.) it's probably perfectly justified for them to not suspect the butler. If there is clear reason to suspect the butler and nobody does, it's probably unjustified. (I say "probably" because there are many considerations, such as the personalities and skills of the investigating characters.)

Ununnilium: Pulling out:

Spoofed:
- "Everyone Knows" that more powerful items glow better. That's why wizards just set cool glow on minor or mundane items and sell them. Moreover, this scam is already so old that only most gullible adventurers are eager to swallow the bait.

...because "spoof" and "parody" are synonyms, and the example just seems like a parodied trope.

TBeholder: Perhaps, but there are many cases that belong to the intersection of "parody" and "deconstruction" and/or "subversion" sets, so they cannot be clearly classified as only one of those. How to call them ?..

Neophos: Alright, I don't get it. Just how does is the deconstruction example a deconstruction? Even according to it's second sentence, the example given is neither very realistic nor the logical extreme of the "The Butler Did It" trope. So, please, could anyone tell me just how the example is a deconstruction of anything?

King Kobold: Okay, what the hell happened to this entry. Why is the butler example all mixed up with the power glows example? What is even the point of this entry?

Robin Zimm: Love the rewrite, but I'm saving the old text anyway...

Standard: "The Butler Did It." — The trope is simply used: no one suspected the butler, but it turns out he did it after all! Often referred to in the Wiki as played straight.
- Powerful objects generally glow more than less powerful objects.
Inverted: "The butler was the victim. Poor loyal Alfred!" — The trope is exactly reversed and then simply used.
- The glowier something is, the less powerful it is.
Lampshaded: "I've always wanted to say that the butler did it!" — Like a standard trope, but where it's explicitly pointed out, and... that's all. It's just the author's way of winking at the audience and letting everyone know that they're using the trope on purpose.
- A character explicitly references the odd coincidence that the glowier something is, the more powerful it is, and just leaves it that. "Wow, it sure is cool that we can tell how powerful something is by its glow!"
Justified: Nobody suspected the butler (there was no reason to), but it turned out he did it after all (because of some reason that nobody could be expected to have realized).
- The trope is used for all weapons that use Technology X: the reason is that weapons fire powered by Technology X produces a visible-light burst as a waste effect, proportional to the power used in the blast.
Subverted: "The butler didn't do it, even though we found him holding the knife and shouting 'I did it!'" A trope is set up to occur, but then the audience's expectations are thwarted in some way.
- For example, imagine a scene where some young children are playing where they shouldn't, see a new energy weapon being tested, and talk about how it must be really powerful because it lit the whole valley up like daytime. We then cut to the scientists testing the new weapon. It hardly does any damage at all, and they complain about how the glow is a sign of an unusually inefficient loss of energy that they're still trying to work out. That is, the audience suspects that the kids will be right, because of this common trope, but the audience ends up being mistaken. (Just like they thought it would be the innocent-seeming butler, but in fact it wasn't!)
Double Subverted: "The butler didn't do it, even though we found him holding the knife and shouting 'I did it!'" "'Ah, my plan to frame the Ambassador for the murder worked perfectly!' the butler thought to himself." — Like a subverted trope, but then later it turns out that the apparent subversion was misleading, too. We were right the first time. This allows writers to make use of the memetic power of the trope while demonstrating their own conscious awareness of it and messing with the audience's heads — all at the same time. If handled poorly, though, it can seem like a cop-out.
- In the example under Subverted, suppose that the scientists technically didn't actually say that all weapons glow the same amount; the writers just deliberately phrased their banter for maximum ease of misinterpretation. Later, it's revealed that all battle-ready energy weapons have about the same efficiency. So, more powerful weapons really would glow more in practice, because of using more energy and shedding about the same percentage of it. If Mr Exposition laid out the explanation explicitly, it would also be a justified trope, making it a Justified Double Subversion.
Parodied: "Mr. Butler did it." — The form of the trope is twisted and used in a silly way for comic effect.
- For example, the writer could twist it around and present it as if glowing brightly actually causes powerfulness, so our heroes build a Humongous Mecha with a giant lightbulb for a head. Of course, that makes it too easy to spot — even for a huge robot — so they put a Stealth Shield around it, literally lampshading the trope. In a secondary parody of Lampshade Hanging itself, one of the knee joints eventually get shot, causing the robot to begin lurching about and stumbling into buildings like a partygoing drunk with a lampshade on its head.
Deconstructed: "The butler's union is really a front for an ancient guild of assassins." — The trope is twisted for dramatic purposes by breaking it down into its component parts and re-assembling it in a realistic way, or just taking it to its logical conclusion.
- The author could present it as if everything glows and its quality is easily determined by its brightness — so society has developed a strict hierarchy with your status based on your glow. Or, a Magical Girl anime could have the prophesied Most Powerful Heroine Ever be blind, along with half of her village, because of the sheer intensity of the glow whenever she uses her powers.
Reconstructed: "The butler did it! He'd had no choice, or the Assassin's guild would have ashed his whole family!" Reconstructed tropes are the new and improved Played Straight of an oft- or well-deconstructed, taking the best parts of the Deconstruction or reassembling the original Trope to strengthen its flaws or improving its feel.
- Shade goggles are considered standard safety equipment and are sold with all energy weapons, or the strength of a magician's power can be just as easily identified by how dark their sunglasses are as by the glow of their powers.
Averted / Ignored: "The butler didn't do it." — There's no real evidence within the work that the trope is being used in any of the above ways. In general, cases where a trope was simply ignored should not be listed as an example. The exception would be if the Discussion page for a trope reaches a consensus that it's so nearly universal in this sort of story that its absence is really interesting.
- For example, all weapons glow equally, but their power varies. Any viewer/reader who expected some kind of relationship between glowiness and power was just assuming, possibly based on their past experiences with the trope in other works — maybe even thanks to having read about it in this Wiki! It may have subverted their personal expectation of the trope, but that's entirely subjective and external to the work.
  - Or...weapons don't glow.
  - Wait, what?? That's simply madness!
  - Madness? This! Is! Oh you know the rest.
Not Subverted: "The guest in room 10 — who, it turns out, works as a butler in another town — did it." A usage which might differ from the most basic or most common form of a trope, but still falls within the definition of the trope. This is still considered played straight, but is worth a separate mention here because it is often incorrectly labeled subverted.
- The weapons glow brighter with ultra-violet light depending on their strength, so you don't see the light, but it's there.
Invoked: "We should investigate the butler. It's always the butler in the movies." A character uses their knowledge of a trope as a reason for their own actions, hoping that the effect will come through as it does in fiction. Usually comes with a Lampshade Hanging, and often manifests itself through a Discussed Trope.
- Whether or not power actually glows, the people creating weapons or items attempt to make them glow, based on the assumption that this will make them more powerful.
Defied: "We have to lock all the butlers up before they can kill!" A character recognizes a trope is about to happen, and takes steps to avoid it. It's the opposite of Invoked.
- A sorcerer paints all his magic items black to stop people from determining their power by their glowiness.
Discussed: "Unlike what you may read in detective stories, the Butler is a somewhat unlikely suspect in any murder investigation of this sort, for reasons X, Y, and Z." The trope is explicitly discussed by Genre Savvy characters in a situation that is directly relevant to the trope; may lead to a Justification, a Deconstruction, or an Aversion, depending on the story and trope.
- One character asks another whether the relative glow of their magic compared to the Monster of the Week is indicative of relative power level, and the response mentions "bad mecha anime" while explaining why the Power Glows trope is not in play.
Conversational Troping: "In these shows, the butler always does it." A conversation about tropes, that has nothing to do with the plot; a common method of Leaning on the Fourth Wall.
- In a mundane comedy, two guys are watching some unspecified anime, and one asks the other "why that guy doesn't glow as bright as that other guy does"; cue Expo Speak Gag.
Enforced:"The butler had to be the killer, because our producer was aiming for target audience of people who never read mysteries before." The trope happens due to outside events forcing the writer to include it.
- The toy company handling the merchandising wants to make all the best weapons glow in the dark, so the producers have that incorporated into the strongest weapons on the show.
Zig Zagging: "The Butler did do it, but he was under Mind Control at the time. (And it later turns out that the one mind controlling the Butler looked exactly like the Butler... and then we find out that it was actually his Evil Twin, who was also a Butler.)" None of the above, or more than one of the above; a trope that gets triple subverted, or inverted and played straight at the same time, or, well, just done confusingly.
- The main character wields a particularly glowy sword which is also very powerful. However, there are also many other powerful weapons present which don't glow at all. It is explained that the main character's weapon glows because the people who built it intentionally made things really glowy so they would look cooler. Then the protagonists start fighting beings made of pure shadow, against whom flashlights are more powerful than normal weapons and the hero's glowy sword is really powerful.
Exaggerated: "All the butlers in the city went on killing sprees." The trope is taken to levels that just would almost never happen in Real Life, if they are even possible.
- The strongest weapons don't affect the characters, but the audience can barely see anything by the glow of the weapons.

herczy - "The heroes fight with giant glowsticks." - This is not an example of parody, this is exactly the plot of Star Wars.
- Robin Zimm: I would honestly have never thought of that.

Luc: I just added in Played for Laughs and Played for Drama. Any comments?

Robin Zimm: I think they're good, but I wonder if they shouldn't be filed with They Plotted a Perfectly Good Waste.
- Addy The Pawn Slayer: Robin - no, they shouldn't. They Plotted a Perfectly Good Waste is about knowingly playing a trope that normally has negative connotations straight because there's something about the situation in that work that allows it to be done credibly. Playing for laughs/drama is emphasising humerous/dramatic elements of a trope but otherwise using it as normal. Often it's for playing a trope out of context or for satirical purposes. I wouldn't call them the same thing by any means.
  - Robin Zimm: I'll buy that.
  - Addy The Pawn Slayer: No worries, and I apologise if I came across as excessively critical in my last post!

superslinger2007: Who came up with three hundred and seventeen tries for "Played for Laughs"? It's too much of a coincidence. Is someone stalking me?

Peteman: Because Zig Zagging is related to Subversions, I think we should put it with the Subversions to help with the flow better, instead of sticking Deconstruction between them.

Robin Zimm: I would be inclined to put it right after Parodied, but I agree - it's orthogonal to (de/re)construction.

Iron Lion: I think Gender Flip should be listed here. I haven't added it because it doesn't really work with the Power Glows example.

Robin Zimm: I think that's a sign - it's a trope-trope, but not really a fully-general one. I don't think we can use it here.
Iron Lion: The same could be said about Deconstructed Trope, Reconstruction and Zig-Zagging Trope. How many Playing With Wiki pages draw a blank for these?
Robin Zimm: Let me check ...
- Robin Zimm: Taking a sample of 27 Playing With Wiki pages circa 18/Feb/10 at 01:22 PM by clicking on one link per screen:
  - Tropes with proper (in my opinion) examples of Deconstruction - 16: Absolute Cleavage, Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Caffeine Bullet Time, The Chick, Cutting the Knot, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto, He Didn't Make It, Latex Space Suit, Male Gaze, Most Common Super Power, Paper-Thin Disguise, Ron The Death Eater, Shotgun Wedding, There Are No Therapists
  - With proper Reconstruction - 3: Absolute Cleavage, Back from the Dead, Don't Fear the Reaper
  - With proper Zig-Zagging - 4: Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto
  - With proper examples of all-three - 2: Back from the Dead, Don't Fear the Reaper
  - With any Deconstruction, 'real example' (in my opinion) or not - 23: Absolute Cleavage, Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Bloodier and Gorier, Caffeine Bullet Time, The Chick, Cutting the Knot, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto, Gender-Bender Friendship, He Didn't Make It, I Hate You, Vampire Dad, Latex Space Suit, Male Gaze, Most Common Super Power, Paper-Thin Disguise, Puny Earthlings, Ron The Death Eater, Shotgun Wedding, Stepford Smiler, There Are No Therapists, Ultimate Job Security, Xanatos Gambit
  - With any Reconstruction - 20: Absolute Cleavage, Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Bloodier and Gorier, Caffeine Bullet Time, The Chick, Cutting the Knot, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto, Gender-Bender Friendship, He Didn't Make It, I Hate You, Vampire Dad, Male Gaze, Most Common Super Power, Puny Earthlings, Ron The Death Eater, Stepford Smiler, There Are No Therapists, Ultimate Job Security, Xanatos Gambit
  - With any Zig-Zagging - 13: Absolute Cleavage, Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Bloodier and Gorier, The Chick, Cutting the Knot, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto, He Didn't Make It, I Hate You, Vampire Dad, Puny Earthlings, Stepford Smiler, Ultimate Job Security
  - With any all-three - 13: Absolute Cleavage, Ambition Is Evil, Back from the Dead, Bloodier and Gorier, The Chick, Cutting the Knot, Don't Fear the Reaper, Every Car Is a Pinto, He Didn't Make It, I Hate You, Vampire Dad, Puny Earthlings, Stepford Smiler, Ultimate Job Security
  - With none of the three - 4: Fatal Family Photo, It's Popular, Now it Sucks, Not a Game, Wasn't That Fun?
- Robin Zimm: I don't think the problem with Deconstruction and Reconstruction and Zig-Zagging is that they are not general, I think the problem is that they are often misunderstood.

Luc: Time for Not A Deconstruction, I suppose.

Robin Zimm: Upon consideration, I probably agree with Iron Lion about half of De/Reconstruction - to a large extent, they're meta-meta-tropes: performed to families of tropes in a genre rather than to individual tropes in a work. Deconstruction takes the tropes much more seriously to the point of rejecting established conventions in the field - and Reconstruction takes the knowledge gained in the process to build works which reinvoke the things we wanted out of our conventions without the problems that the Deconstructions found. You cannot Reconstruct what has not been Deconstructed.

Archived Discussion Main / PlayingWithAtrope