Stock phrase far to broad for what the trope means: And It Worked

So this trope is "Well-Intentioned Extremist winning" And It Worked problem is And It Worked could be anything from the standard Idiot Hero just pushing buttons to do something And It Worked or 100 different things.

It's a relatively new trope (under a year, I think), but it has 175 wicks and similar inbounds. I haven't seen this misused, which honestly surprised me. I think it's the extremely clear page quote we can thank for that.

Anyway, do a wick check, or at least suggest some better alternatives.

Gonna point out that this is a line-of-dialogue title, which automatically fails current naming guidelines.

Wick Check. Picked a bunch randomly.

• Anime.Wham Episode: Correct
• Armored Core From The Ashes: Correct
• Song Of Ice And Fire: Correct.
• Daemon: Correct
• Deathnote: Correct
• Enemy Mine: That damn Code Geass example again. For like the 5th time. Correct.
• In the End, You Are on Your Own: Trope Namer. Correct.
• Leon Trotsky: Correct.
• Rooting for the Empire: Correct.

• Absent Aliens: Misuse.
• Adam and Eve Plot: Misuse.
• B 2 ST: Misuse
• Black Lagoon: Misuse
• Brainwashing for the Greater Good: Misuse
• Donkey Kong: Misuse
• Dragon Quest I: Misuse
• Lynching ITP: Misuse.
• Nice Job Breaking It, Herod: Misuse.

• Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Too vague to tell.
• Emperor Augustus: Vague

Correct: 9

Misuse: 10

Vague: 2

Those are pretty sucky stats. The most common misuse I saw was "Character X did various risky action and it paid off."

edited 13th Aug '11 10:11:52 PM by Zikiel

Well that sucks. I like this title. Small sample size, but unless something crazy is going on, I think we can safely call this broken.

How's The Extremist Was Right for a rename? I'd like to preserve the trope namer, but I don't see how that will be possible.

Wulfenbach remains an example even if the title changes. The quote can stay, since it still gets the idea across. (And frankly, I think calling him the "trope namer" for such a widespread stock phrase is pushing the definition of trope namer a bit far.)

I like The Extremist Was Right. Possibly The Templar Was Right, but Extremist is probably better.

Alternatively: Utopia Really Did Justify The Means.

Might be too long or specific. Could be a redirect.

I think it's a little too specific for the main name, but it's a killer redirect.

+1 for The Extremist Was Right, with this redirect.

edited 14th Aug '11 10:25:27 PM by Nohbody

Not sure if it needs to be a Well-Intentioned Extremist per se. Tropes Are Flexible here, and I'd be inclined to include any villain whose seemingly evil plan ends up making the world a better place, e.g. Mojo Jojo in The Powerpuff Girls—he's a pretty standard Take Over the World Evil Genius who builds death rays and stuff, never voices any motivation beyond selfishness and "Destroy the Powerpuff Girls!", but in one episode he actually succeeds in conquering the Earth, and proceeds to cure all known diseases, end war and world hunger, and give everyone free puppies and kittens. He's played very straight as an evil supervillain (all of that puppy and kitten stuff basically came out of nowhere), but he should still fit in this trope.

The correct trope to reference here is definitely the supertrope, Visionary Villain, which covers all bad guys with grand plans to change the world, not just the Well-Intentioned Extremist ones.

edited 15th Aug '11 1:24:46 AM by troacctid

I'm not sure this is a subtrope of Visionary Villain. I thought one of the differences between a Well-Intentioned Extremist and a Knight Templar was that the latter is explicitly a villain, whereas the former was grayer.

I'm also not sure this trope is about "vision," as such. We aren't always dealing with a character whose goal is to make Utopia via extremist actions. The example on the page that most quickly leaps to mind, for me, is Giles from Buffy The Vampire Slayer. To summarize the incident I'm thinking of: one season's Big Bad was a Physical God named Glory who happened to share the same body as a regular human named Ben. In the finale, Buffy manages to beat Glory up, and Glory turns back into Ben. Giles kills Ben explicitly because he knows Buffy's idealism would prevent her from killing a (relative) innocent, but he does it because there's no other way to be sure Glory won't come back. (This, of course, is also Poisonous Friend material, but it fits this trope as well.) There's nothing Visionary about it, and Giles certainly isn't a Villain, but I still think it fits this trope.

That sounds like plain ol' Shoot the Dog. I don't see how it relates to this trope at all.

It feels like it fits to me, but I see your point.

To clarify, I didn't mean that Visionary Villain is the supertrope of And It Worked; it's the supertrope of Well-Intentioned Extremist.

And I agree that the Buffy scenario is a textbook Shoot the Dog—definitely not this trope. Buffy can't bring herself to do the morally ambiguous thing-that-must-be-done, so her mentor takes responsibility for it instead.

edited 15th Aug '11 2:41:45 AM by troacctid

For the sake of completionism, I added a single prop rename crowner here.

Think thats enough? can we get alt titles goin?

Single prop locked after 7 days at +11 (yeas:14 nays:3) 4.67 : 1 in favor of renaming And It Worked on the grounds that the name is far broader than the trope.

Suggrested name:

Successful Necessary Evils

As suggested above by others: The Extremist Was Right, with Utopia Really Did Justify The Means as a redirect.

There is now an alternative titles crowner for this trope here. Feel free to add names as you wish.

Hmm, I do not like The Extremist Was Right, since this trope, from my understanding, does not mean that one holds extreme ideals. For example, Wulfenbach is clearly not an extrememist, instead often muses how he prefers to just do science instead of trying to run The Empire and his Pax Wulfenbach is basicly "Don't make me come over there".

Basicly, this is when perceived villain wins and yet world turns to better. It doesn't neccesary mean someone is extrememist, his actions maybe, but he may also realise that what he is doing is wrong, yet his way actualy is only way.

I think Wulfenbach is an extremist, if judged by his actions, even if he is a reluctant brutal-conqueror/world-savior. He may not enjoy his job, but that doesn't stop him from telling everyone, "submit or die!" Which is a pretty extreme position.

edited 26th Aug '11 1:48:30 PM by Xtifr

Ozymadias from Watchmen doubts his own position and ask Doctor Manhattan if what he did was right. Yet, his plan (kill major cities) results in avoiding nuclear war.

Actions maybe extremist, but does that make extremist? It doesn't even neccesary need to be extreme action, by definition this is just "Villain wins, things turn better". It may be anything, it's just that villains who succeed in this tend to exist in Crapsack World where such actions are usualy only way.

I suppose a Knight Templar could be this too. (although its stretching it a bit) generally though its mostly extremists.