Follow TV Tropes

Following

Rename: Dawson Babies

Go To

djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#1: Feb 15th 2011 at 10:57:00 AM

This is my first Trope Repair Shop thread, so I hope I'm doing this right. Dawson Babies is a snowclone title of Dawson Casting that makes no sense. The trope is related to Dawson Casting but it has nothing to do with the trope namer Dawsons Creek. It makes as much sense as calling Playing Hamlet Dawson Hamlet. Plus title sounds like a Spinoff Babies show of Dawson's Creek, which is acknowledged in the article. I suggest we rename it Three-Month-Old Newborn or possibly Hollywood Newborn. The page is relatively small and it is only found in 15 other articles, so it should be easy to rename.

troacctid "µ." from California Since: Apr, 2010
#2: Feb 15th 2011 at 11:05:17 AM

I agree. The title is a Bad Snowclone that doesn't fit the trope. Either of your suggestions would be fine with me.

(Also, welcome to Trope Repair Shop.)

Rhymes with "Protracted."
Yamikuronue So Yeah Since: Aug, 2009
#3: Feb 15th 2011 at 3:09:31 PM

Dawson Casting: Someone who is 20 plays 15
Dawson Babies: Someone who is 1 plays 0

I can see the logical connection just fine...

edited 15th Feb '11 3:09:38 PM by Yamikuronue

BTW, I'm a chick.
Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#4: Feb 15th 2011 at 4:01:44 PM

I'm okay with either suggested title. Also, stats are fifteen wiks, and fifteen incoming.

It's a logical snowclone, but it depends on knowing about Dawson Casting, which isn't a very good name on it's own. Favor Hollywood Newborn a bit more.

edited 15th Feb '11 4:02:34 PM by Deboss

Fight smart, not fair.
Raso Cure Candy Since: Jul, 2009
Cure Candy
#5: Feb 15th 2011 at 4:03:52 PM

Wait 15 wicks for something that is Law anytime you show a baby on tv?

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!
billybobfred Cosine! from renamed to wingedcatgirl Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#6: Feb 15th 2011 at 4:48:05 PM

I support Three-Month-Old Newborn if we decide a rename is needed, but Dawson Babies is clear enough in my opinion.

edit: In fact, here, have a redirect. They're free, you know.

edited 15th Feb '11 4:49:00 PM by billybobfred

she her hers hOI!!! i'm tempe
djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#7: Apr 1st 2011 at 9:19:32 PM

I'm bumping this. Hopefully we can get some more input.

Routerie Since: Oct, 2011
#8: Sep 8th 2011 at 5:26:55 AM

Yes, a rename could only help.

Spark9 Gentleman Troper! from Castle Wulfenbach Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Gentleman Troper!
#10: Sep 8th 2011 at 5:37:27 AM

Concur with the rename. This is clearly not a healthy trope (21 wicks for something that's pretty common in e.g. soap TV series) and neither is it a pre-existing term (it gets only 300 google hits, all of which appear to be the literal babies of people like Nina Dawson and Janie Dawson).

Rhetorical, eh? ... Eight!
DoktorvonEurotrash Welcome, traveller, welcome to Omsk Since: Jan, 2001
Welcome, traveller, welcome to Omsk
#11: Sep 8th 2011 at 6:02:10 AM

Support.

It does not matter who I am. What matters is, who will you become? - motto of Omsk Bird
Raso Cure Candy Since: Jul, 2009
Cure Candy
#12: Sep 8th 2011 at 6:06:04 AM

The big point here though is this trope is a rule it is against SAG rules to not use this trope and pretty sure it is against the law too. As well as the whole work 15 minutes a day thing (which is why twins are usually picked to be a single kid.)

IMO rename toss up on omni-present tropes and only have lampshades of it on the page.

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!
Madrugada Zzzzzzzzzz Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
#13: Sep 8th 2011 at 6:31:34 AM

I'm for Raso's idea. Note that it's omnipresent for both practical and legal reasons, that the only time it won't be used is in documentaries and such, and limit the examples to "playing with" variants.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
LordGriffin Since: Sep, 2010
#14: Sep 8th 2011 at 7:42:06 AM

I understood the title instantly, but that's because I've visited this site enough to know Dawson Casting. So, I support the rename (don't care which). I also support Raso's "omni-present" suggestion.

djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#15: Sep 8th 2011 at 10:28:46 AM

Yay! My old thread's been brought back from the dead! I also agree with Raso's suggestion.

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#16: Sep 8th 2011 at 10:40:43 AM

I like Raso's idea. I think that the few exceptions where directors have used their own kids to get around the law should be on the page as well.

edited 8th Sep '11 10:41:09 AM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#17: Sep 8th 2011 at 10:41:46 AM

It looks like there is now enough input on this thread that I can make a crowner. Do you all think that I should make just a single prop rename crowner and we deal with Raso's suggestion separately or make a page action crowner that incorporates both the rename and the idea to make this an omnipresent trope?

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#18: Sep 8th 2011 at 10:47:31 AM

Reading through the examples, truly egregious ones like having a newborn played by a forty year old man should also count. Basically all playing withs as is common with omnipresents.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Madrugada Zzzzzzzzzz Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
#19: Sep 8th 2011 at 12:46:46 PM

Page Action. I'll make it an hook it.

Crowner made and hooked, there are 6 options.

If you want to give pros and cons, I'll add them.

edited 8th Sep '11 12:55:23 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#20: Sep 8th 2011 at 2:16:37 PM

Thanks for doing that Madrugada.

Xtifr World's Toughest Milkman Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
World's Toughest Milkman
#21: Sep 8th 2011 at 2:39:25 PM

Should we have an option for "Rename, make omnipresent, and limit to playing-with and aversions"?

Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.
djbj Since: Oct, 2010
#22: Sep 8th 2011 at 3:00:37 PM

[up] Wait, I thought aversions would be included as a "playing with" varient.

Xtifr World's Toughest Milkman Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
World's Toughest Milkman
#23: Sep 8th 2011 at 3:40:30 PM

Ok, I'll vote assuming that playing-with includes aversions. That makes sense. If anyone is unhappy with that interpretation, let them speak up before the crowner closes and we can hash it out then.

edit: [down] cool! thanks.

edited 8th Sep '11 3:57:23 PM by Xtifr

Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#24: Sep 8th 2011 at 3:54:55 PM

Averted Trope is listed on Playing With pages. I would assume it counts.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
LordGriffin Since: Sep, 2010
#25: Sep 8th 2011 at 4:06:50 PM

Okaaaay. Looking at the crowner, I think we can assume that a rename might be in order, here. So, what are the options? Hollywood Newborn and Three-Month-Old Newborn? Any others? Personally, I don't care which wins, but I'm leaning towards Hollywood Newborn, simply because the other one is kind of long and lacks any "poetry" to it. It's so accurate that you barely even need to read the description. That's ... boring.

PageAction: DawsonBabies
8th Sep '11 12:47:13 PM

Crown Description:

What would be the best way to fix the page?

Total posts: 46
Top