As it stands, the definition has a number of problems
1. Overreliance on Balance Of Good and Evil
Connecting evil to chaos and good to order. Evil to chaos and chaos to 'any sort of interest' and then that 'interest' to 'sin'. Good to order and order to oppression and oppression to 'killjoy'. Essentially that 'evil is fun' when the defintion latter claims that there's plenty of fun stuff that isn't evil. It takes three paragraphs just to build up the case and without it the entire article falls apart.
2. Missing the point; conflict not evil.
I think it more follow what the page quotes say 'Heaven is a place where nothing ever happens'. In a perfect place (I.E. Heaven) there is no trouble and no conflict and thus no story. THAT'S why its boring. There are no villains in Heaven and so there's nothing for heroes to do and so the only story can be what a great time they're having. It would be boring for the audience
. Its not that evil is fun(which is what the definition says now) but that ''conflict is fun'. Like the Order of the Stick example says 'monsters just strong enough to challenge you', because there's no fun in pushover monsters.
3. Other tropes can strengthen it
Why isn't The Villain Makes the Plot
mentioned? It comes up in the examples like the Charles Dickens one. Villains Act, Heroes React
is another one and goes along with the page quote. There are no villains in Heaven and so no plot.
Examples like Chocolat should go to Writer on Board
or some Aseop trope. The Charmed example, which already has fridge logic written in, should goo to Balance Between Good and Evil
because that's what the example states it is an example of. At no point does it say either world was more fun or more boring.
edited 22nd May '11 3:50:03 PM by ChaoticNovelist