Apologies if this sort of bump is unwanted, but something still needs to be done about the mess that is Innuendo Tropes
has a good breakdown of the tropes in question, but I'd like to add my own analysis.
The first group of tropes is mainly about spoken innuendos delivered by a character. It's broken down roughly by who intended the innuendo and to what degree it is intended to be understood.
- Double Entendre: Intended by the author, and by the character. Not necessarily intended to be immediately understood by everyone in the audience, but always intended to be understood in at least its nonsexual meaning. Whether the characters understand the innuendo is irrelevant.
- Lampshaded Double Entendre: As above, but the additional remark makes sure the innuendo is understood by the audience (and generally the characters).
- Innocent Innuendo: Intended by the author, but not by the character making the innuendo. However, to be this trope, it must mislead either the audience or another character. Note that while the description states it covers scenes where only another character, not the audience, is misled, such examples seem to wind up in Accidental Innuendo instead.
- That Came Out Wrong: Intended by the author. Not intended by the character. Understood by the audience, and by the speaker or other characters. This trope seems problematic to me, because it seems to overlap with the in-universe version of Innocent Innuendo. In addition, the title and examples make it seem like it's trying to be about the flustered reaction, but the description doesn't really reflect that. The description states it's "different from Innocent Innuendo in that the audience isn't misled", but according to Innocent Innuendo, that trope doesn't require the audience to be misled—only another character.
- Accidental Innuendo: Unintended by the author. Note that this, as the description is written, is not a trope, but as mentioned above, it tends to gather examples intended by the author, of one character innocently saying something and another character construing it as dirty.
- Heh Heh, You Said X: The author expects the audience to understand that there is no real innuendo, but it is taken as innuendo by an immature character. Note that this has a Real Life section which is virtually indistinguishable from the Accidental Innuendo Real Life section.
The second group of tropes is mainly about visual innuendo, and are gathered under the supertrope Visual Innuendo
. These tropes seem pretty solidly defined and don't seem as problematic as the above group, so I'm not going to go into detail about them.
The odd two out are Freudian Slippery Slope
and Or Are You Just Happy to See Me?
. The former isn't really about innuendo—it's about blurting out things that are clearly sexual (no innuendo involved) but unintentionally. The latter is a Stock Phrase
, and doesn't seem problematic.
So it seems to me like our main problems are:
- There is a category of examples, namely, instances in which one character says something that misleads another character, but the audience isn't misled.
- Accidental Innuendo is written in a way that isn't a trope, but is often used instead to describe the above category.
- Innocent Innuendo is written to include that category, but in practice it's used only for situations in which the audience is misled.
- That Came Out Wrong is pretending to be an innuendo trope, when it's really about a character's reaction.
So my solution would be to make Accidental Innuendo
about one character misleading another character (possibly with a rename), more tightly define Innocent Innuendo
to be about fooling the audience, and clarify the definition of That Came Out Wrong
to square with the examples. The stuff that's just 'The author didn't mean this to be dirty, but it sounds that way to me' can be jettisoned, in my opinion. It's creepy, subjective, and not a trope.
edited 6th Jun '12 10:06:58 AM by Silverfire
Sometimes seen with a "526" after my name.