Isn't this a deliberate characterization?: Moe

It should definitely be exampleless.

Very much against cutting Examples, they do serve a purpose and well its a very big focal point for a character.

edited 26th Sep '11 12:40:26 AM by Raso

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

Examples on work pages, etc. would be fine. In the main page it will be a humongous list.

The words above are to be read as if they are narrated by Morgan Freeman.

Raso, whether a character is moe is entirely up to the viewer.

If we decide this is an objective trope and a deliberate characterisation, definitely against cutting examples.

If we decide to keep it subjective, I could go either way.

The concept is objective, the result is subjective.

The result is not subjective at all, the trope has just been misused in the past. The concept has set traits which count towards it's character, just like any character trope. To the point where works have even invoked and Lamp shaded it.

It don't see Moe as all that different in it's conception than say Jerkass or Jerk with a Heart of Gold.

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Then you seem to be misinterpreting the term.

It's not wholly unreasonable to use that approach, however. Consider Jerkass. One can say that it is also subjective whether the audience will see the character as a Jerkass. A sufficiently pretty Jerkass can have no such effect on fangirls.

Moe, while at its core refers to a subjective reaction, does eventually morph into a recognisable pattern. Even if you don't feel that X is moe, you can understand that she is designed to be so, only the effect doesn't work on you because it's too banal or whatever.

For me this refers to the familiar vulnerable, youthful state. Even other flavours of the trope, for example a violent, stoic character, will regress to this state if her moe phase is being pronounced by the creators.

The words above are to be read as if they are narrated by Morgan Freeman.

Hardly.

This is an objective trope no different from any other , we have a set list of traits that are used to create a certain character type like any other character trope.

Perhaps the trope was just created on a misconception it hasn't not happened before (Na Ka Ma much).

Everything is subjective to an extent*

but that doesn't mean the trope is entirely subjective.

edited 26th Sep '11 2:58:47 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Oh don't compare this to Nakama, the situation could not be more different.

The problem with trying to label specific characters as "moe" or not is you will get edit wars over it. Guaranteed.

I don't see Moe as all that different from Adorkable which had it's subjectiveness shot down in flames. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1310265980041293000&page=1

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

I think that what we have here is more than one trope using the same word as a name. I believe Moe ought to be a disambigious page linking to Moe Reaction for the audience reaction, Moe Character for the character archetype, and maybe Moe Series to explain series style.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:02:15 AM by GameGuruGG

Wizard Needs Food Badly

That works

Also I used Nakama because it was the first example that popped into my head and Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment is not a reason for a trope to be subjective.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:09:05 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

There is no such thing as a "moe series", can we not perpetuate that, please?

This argument was from the Adorkable argument but I say it works just the same for Moe so I'm copying it over and replacing the terms.

*

edited 26th Sep '11 3:13:36 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Alternatively, we can have Moe as an example-less page referring to the reaction, and from there links to the derivations: Moe Style, which will have that list of tropes, and (probably) Moe Series, which is a pseudo-genre akin to Rated M for Manly or Chick Flick.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:18:50 AM by Catalogue

The words above are to be read as if they are narrated by Morgan Freeman.

We'd still need a trope for the list of character traits when not based on the audience reaction.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:25:44 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Moe Series isnt right, A series running off Rule of Cute but aimed probably at adults would probably take on a different name closely related to What Do You Mean, It's Not for Little Girls?. These shows and Shōjo shows overlap a lot (but usually with more sexual subtext and Moe Pandering).

Moe Art Style is Puni Plush which is completely unrelated to this which is a characterization and Personality trope.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:26:43 AM by Raso

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

Not all Moe-character's are Puni Plush in fact I'd say most aren't and are drawn in the traditional anime style, as many many moe style traits are in the personality.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:32:36 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

Why not? It is derisive, yes, but certainly there are series where a large amount of the appeal comes from moe aesthetics?

Both Chick Flick and Rated M for Manly are also nebulously defined and, especially in case of the former, pejorative.

The words above are to be read as if they are narrated by Morgan Freeman.

I view this as an objective trope because I generally don't find Moe character's cute I find them generally pretty annoying but I am able to easily recognize when a show has a character that would clearly be the moe-trope due to the factors and traits within the character, regardless of how insufferable I find them, though there are some that I like generally cause the overlap with what I consider more likable tropes, to me.

If a character has X-traits, then they usually are X-trope. This isn't a case where x-traits are 100% debatable on taste.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:34:47 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

because I generally don't find Moe character's cute I find them generally pretty annoying

*facepalm*

So you are completely missing the point.

how? I don't think I'm missing anything. Your the one who is misunderstanding something here.

I argued for how this is an objective trope outside of the view of it just solely being audience reaction.

Also your dramatic face-palming was unneeded.

edited 26th Sep '11 3:37:42 AM by Vyctorian

Rarely active, try DA/Tumblr Avatar by pippanaffie.deviantart.com

But if we define "moe" as a completely subjective experience then the whole cultural thing needs to go and it will be just plain old "cute". There is indeed a set of those "x-traits" and even if we don't feel the effect we can recognise them.

The words above are to be read as if they are narrated by Morgan Freeman.