-->''"The reason that clichés become clichés is that they are the hammers and screwdrivers in the toolbox of communication."''\\
--TerryPratchett, ''[[Discworld/GuardsGuards Guards! Guards!]]''

-->'''Norman:''' ''"I just don't want to be cliché!"''\\
'''[[ChuckNorris Chuck:]]''' ''"It's not cliché, Norman, it's the formula, and it works!"''\\
-''Sidekicks''

Good writers understand tropes and use them as tools, using them to control audience expectations (either by using them straight or by subverting them) and to convey things to the audience quickly without saying them.

Human beings are naturally pattern seekers and story tellers. We use stories to convey truths, examine ideas, speculate on the future and discuss consequences. To do this, we must have a basis for our discussion, a new language to show us what we are looking at today. So our story tellers use tropes to let us know what things about reality we should put aside and what parts of fiction we should take up.

There are other things than tropes in works. It's those other things that make the works distinct. It’s the particular combinations of tropes. It’s the small variations, it’s how it’s presented, how it’s acted, worded and what it does beyond the tropes that are important.

Bad writers either don't understand tropes at all and therefore parrot them mindlessly even in situations where their work would be better if they could look past them, or mindlessly repeat tropes as an attempt to substitute for having any original contributions of their own. The problem isn’t the tropes, the problem is they don’t know how to put them together or just don’t have anything to say.

Nobody buys a house just for the foundations, so nobody watches a show just for the tropes. So when editing the wiki remember these two mantras:

!! TropesAreNotBad

There is one thing that you must keep in mind to retain your sanity here, and that is that including a trope in a particular work does not make it "''[[RuinedFOREVER ruined]]''." Not even ''[[BadWriting those]]'' tropes.

If your favorite shows have long lists of tropes associated with them, well, so do everybody's. A show featuring an [[ActionGirl Action Girl]] or showing a character [[KickTheDog kicking the dog]] is not a bad thing; the former is merely a reasonable type of character (badass character who happens to be female) and the latter is a character action that happens plenty in [[RealLife Real Life]].

That said, some trope entries are just highlights of common mistakes, and generally ''are'' bad. For instance, a modern-day show where all the cops have [[WhereDidTheyGetLasers laser guns]] is probably just necessary lameness to appease censors (unless [[JustifiedTrope superhero-tech from superhuman geniuses is a common part of the universe]]), and a writer that includes [[InstantDeathBullet Instant Death Bullets]] probably just [[DidNotDoTheResearch screwed up]]. Still, even if a show includes always-bad and unjustified tropes, the harm is likely non-fatal.

Consider the following points before you label simply including a common story element or character type as a sign of creative failure:

'''There is nothing new under the sun.''' Including that very statement. And the [[TheBible book]] from which it comes. Completely ignoring the possibility that one's favorite show just might ''not'' be hewn from the very essence of the universe by Thor himself and placed in the periodic table under '''Or''' for "Originalium" doesn't change the fact that it ''wasn't''. And acknowledging that it isn't should not lessen its appeal, either.

Every story is influenced by what came before it -- and storytellers (e.g., writers, directors, actors) are bound to show that influence, intentionally or not, in the process of telling. Just because something's been used before doesn't mean it's a cliché, and stories often gain something by having [[ShoutOut ties to other works.]] That said, there certainly is such thing as ''too'' derivative, but there's a difference between playing a trope straight and utter ClicheStorm.

[[TheTropelessTale It's impossible to write something completely and utterly without tropes, anyway, so stop trying.]]

'''Every trope has a silver lining.''' Just because there's a lot of bad, ''bad'' [[MarySue Mary Sues]] out there doesn't mean nobody could ever, or has ever, [[DivineComedy did it well]] in the form of PuritySue Beatrice (based, incidentally on Dante's lifelong crush of the same name). The much-reviled AllJustADream was, let's not forget, used in [[{{Newhart}} one of the most highly regarded series finales]] in the history of television, as well as one of the [[TheCabinetOfDrCaligari best twist endings]] in any movie. While DarkerAndEdgier revisionism isn't always a good thing, it's been used in one of the [[MontyPython best movie series in recent memory]], and indeed [[TheDarkKnight the biggest blockbuster of 2008.]] Remember, while this site is fairly snarky, most of the snark is directed towards shows that ''don't'' use tropes well.

'''Fiction isn't necessarily supposed to be realistic.''' When your reader wants to escape from the tired drudgery of reality, you shouldn't be trying to indexically recreate it. Much fiction seeks to show not what is, but what could be, or what should be. A trope being unrealistic isn't necessarily a flaw, and is often covered by RuleOfCool, RuleOfFunny, or RuleOfScary. Indeed, a trope, however unrealistic, can be a convenient shorthand when played straight; setting up aversions or subversions for it can be more wordy than is needed to get on with story.

!! TropesAreNotGood

TropesAreNotBad covers the bad half of this, but there are good reasons to remember TropesAreNotGood, too:

'''All tropes can be written badly.''' This includes tropes that everyone thinks are good, like MagnificentBastard or even CrowningMomentOfAwesome. A badly written MagnificentBastard may be done in such a way that everyone else in the story are [[IdiotBall idiots]] and generally gives less of an impression of intelligence and more of an impression of [[TheComputerIsACheatingBastard cheating]] or changing the [[ScrewTheRulesIHavePlot internal rules]] of the story. A badly done CrowningMomentOfAwesome can break the WillingSuspensionOfDisbelief, so instead of "WOW THAT WAS AWESOME" you get "[[JumpingTheShark C'mon. that guy could never do that in real life.]]" RefugeInAudacity has different breaking points [[SubjectiveTropes for different people.]]

'''All tropes can be overused.''' Too many [[XanatosGambit Xanatos Gambits]] tend to make the show [[MindScrew confusing]], no matter how well written they are. And while the XanatosRoulette and the ThirtyXanatosPileup are not necessarily bad, they too occur because of the overuse of the Gambit. Too many CrowningMomentsOfAwesome take up room where plot could go, or make the audience pay less attention to the relatively boring plot bits, making the story more shallow. The CrowningMomentOfAwesome is supposed to be a singular moment for a character and the RuleOfCool can make up for weak points in a story, but rarely does it work ''as'' the story.

'''Just because a trope is realistic doesn't mean it's good.''' There is a reason why we have an entire category devoted to AcceptableBreaksFromReality. That category only applies to video games, but there are some good non-video game examples as well. For example, TheHero gets shot in the shoulder and dies. TheDeterminator doesn't come into play, no MyNameIsInigoMontoya, nothing. Realistic, maybe, but that that is not what we want a hero to do. That's right, one of the most fundamental character archetypes is usually unrealistic. The important thing when writing a story is that it's ''believable'', not that it's ''realistic''.

'''A good show doesn't need good tropes''' A well written show won't be any worse if it doesn't have a MagnificentBastard. A good show doesn't get worse if the main five characters don't form a FiveManBand. Heck, a good show doesn't even need basic tropes like TheHero or BigBad. If they can do it, good for them.
----
<<|WikiTropes|>>