This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Apart from MAYBE Cordelia, are the examples really appropriate to the description as it's worded now? Both Fred and Tara are relatively innocent. If anyone in those couples needs redeeming, it's Wesley and Willow... and yet, it's not them that die, but their partners.
Gus: I think the original entrant left it a little murky, true. I believe the point was meant to be a thunderbolt always seems to strike right after a redemption, especially in the Whedonverse, where the three most dangerous things a person can do are: be happy; fall in love; and redeem yourself.
Seven Seals: I removed the "Fred declares her love to Wesley, Fred dies" example, because there's no way this could be interpreted as redemption in any way. If we want to have a separate trope about how happiness and love spell instant death in the Whedonverse, by all means. We could also extend the description of this trope to cover that, but that's a little shaky, because Redemption Equals Death is a lot more common than Doing Any Sort Of Thing That Might Have Long Lasting Good Effects Equals Death.
GMO: I am not so sure about any of the Whedonverse examples, either. Spike is effectively a Heroic Sacrifice (and one that gets reversed, at that). Tara indeed could hardly be said to have been in need of redemption (unless, somehow, breaking up with a main character is seen as being a sin. I surmise that there actually is a trope to this effect). Likewise Cordelia was really not responsible for any of her actions for much of the time before her demise, so her showing up was not so much a case of setting things right as it was a way to tie up loose ends and "say good bye". For a more catch-all take on this category, one might re-name it Reconcilation Equals Death?
Chuckg: Altered the Tara/Willow example to highlight the subversiveness of it... Willow redeems, but Tara then immediately dies.
Lale: BTVS already has another example. The Willow/ Tara example looks like even more of a stretch now; who's up for cutting it?
Chuckg: I actually like letting it stand, if the subversion is clearly noted — its a public service to warn those who haven't watched BTVS yet that the Whedonverse is often a cruel place.
Lale: While his death was a cool sequence, Kaiser didn't express any remorse or regret at what his new life had done to him. The shortening of his life only motivated him more to have one, great, ultimate duel before it was too late. I believe his deathbed speech was about how dying was worth it for the intensity of what he just experienced, that proverbially being to hell and back was an experience that couldn't be matched. So no redemption.
Lale: Darth Vader?
TheNifty: Sure, Vader fits this trope to a tee. The more I think about it though, Tara really doesn't, even as a subversion. No one gets redeemed; the two just make up after a fight. The trope isn't subverted, averted or played straight, it just plain doesn't occur. I'm removing it.
Micah: Removed:
- Doesn't Grima Wormtongue killing his boss Saruman at the end of the book and then getting killed himself count as this? Or is he too evil for that?
Psyga315: How does the Death Sentence count as redemption? From what I see the Death Sentence means you CAN'T be redemed.
