Trope is much narrower than the name implies.: Blasphemous Boast

One or two gray points does not make this not work either. All that does is show some examples have to be looked at more carefully.

As for "power", it's hard to say one has more power than God, and mean that in the context of "this is hyperbole for giving you an impression of great scale".

Actually, that is the basic definition of the Non Serious trope. Anyway, most instances of proclaiming power is different, since while God likely wouldn't have money or material possessions, God has power, so using that term is very likely to be more of a direct brag.

That's easier said than done. In practice, if plenty of examples are going to exist in shades of gray, most editors won't be likely to pore over two separate trope descriptions and take the time to figure out which page their example best fits on; in all likelihood, they'll probably just put their example on whichever page they find first as long as there's any sort of detail in the example that can be found relevant to the trope description.

Even if someone does give a gray example a lot of contemplation, there's no guarantee that, given the nature of gray examples, they would ultimately put it on the "correct" page. The example may even wind up on both pages (or even get listed on one trope page, while being referred to by the other trope on a work page).

At the very least, if the "serious/not serious" distinction is too difficult for others to figure out, it would be better to try to come up with a different distinction that is easier to understand (or just leave everything lumped on one page).

edited 20th Jan '12 9:35:49 AM by SeanMurrayI

Honestly, my biggest issue with the distinction is that I think DQZ's explanations and sorting have come off as completely arbitrary. A similar statement in a similar situation and he's dividing it entirely on his own views of god and what he's capable of which don't even entirely make sense to me as a pagan.

, Well the basic difference is hyperbole and hubris.

That seems tough to sort out, but that just means this is going to need more work.

For one thing, do we even have a general hyperbole trope? If not, then the hyperbole version could be expanded to that.

And for that matter, do we have a general hubris trope?

It would be better to split those off into things that have a better distinction, and do a Trope Transplant with a trope that properly fits the title.

Hyperbole being a broad language concept, you'd be better off making another narrow trope that makes use of hypberbole in some way and an index for all the tropes that use the convention (Romantic Hyperbole, Not Hyperbole, etc.). I mean, we wouldn't be making general Simile trope pages or a general Metaphor and Preposition trope pages, too, would we?

As for a "general hubris trope", I believe the one that comes closest is Small Name, Big Ego.

edited 20th Jan '12 9:58:39 AM by SeanMurrayI

Well in this case, it would be hyperbole in the sense of making something look grand. Comparing it to a deity would simply be one form of it. Another example would be Luke in A New Hope trying to do some form of this, and not quite succeeding.

As for hubris, it seems we do need a trope for that.

edited 20th Jan '12 10:13:39 AM by DragonQuestZ

As I see it, if anything is inviting misuse it's the "more X than God" in the trope's description. The name is fine. Spruce up the definition.

The problem is that was the original intent of the trope. This wasn't a point shoehorned in later.

I still don't see how this means that the name is problematic, though.

On a sidenote, would the current page image be more fitting as a page quote? The visuals don't seem to add much.

Both definitions are narrower than the name. Many types of boasts can be blasphemous that aren't about topping deities in some way (like claiming one is above commandments, for one thing, or claiming being a favorite of God).

edited 20th Jan '12 12:39:10 PM by DragonQuestZ

I think that's a rather pedantic distinction. For all intents and purposes, theologically, placing yourself above a commandment is challenging God's domain. We could expand the trope, if anything.

Challenging=/=topping.

Besides, the intent is what matters. A lot of these are hyperbole, not actually trying to claim that one seriously is topping God.

How about I just make a ykttw for hyperbole (and I already found a couple sub tropes), move those examples to there, and we just redefine this to be about outright blasphemous boasts?

And considering Wonderella, the page picture would still fit.

Because there's no clear line between the hyperbole and the serious ones, and no difference in meaning. It's an unclear and arbitrary distinction. You seem to be the only one who has some separate category for these in your head and no one else agrees they should be split. In light of that lack of agreement, I'm am going to lock this thread unless anyone besides you has an argument.

edited 4th Feb '12 1:39:10 PM by shimaspawn

I see no reason for a split. I kind of get what the difference is supposed to be as DQZ is defining it, but it's not big enough to split the page. Splitting it will likely just cause further misuse.

I'm not really suggesting a split anymore (especially now that I realize the "more X than God" format is effectively a stock phrase). I'm stating that examples that merely mention "more X than God" aren't really this trope. Who when saying "I have more ammunition than God" actually means "If God and I got in a firefight, I'd pwn him"? Again, it's just for effect, and falls under hyperbole.

And guess what, we don't seem to have a trope for hyperbole in general. So I now think we could just make that trope, and move the hyperbolic examples to there.

But boasting that is genuinely blasphemous, that would be fine for this page. There are plenty of those.

edited 4th Feb '12 1:48:47 PM by DragonQuestZ

And we're not ever going to have a trope for "hyperbole in general" as long as there aren't pages for "similes in general", "metaphors in general", "preposition phrases in general", "nouns in general", and any number of other "broad language constructs in general".

edited 4th Feb '12 1:59:32 PM by SeanMurrayI

Except hyperbole is an actual literary device. You can see it in prose and poetry that are centuries old.

That makes it a trope.

Furthermore, the lack of pages for other literary devices only prove we haven't made them. It does not mean they are not actual tropes.

edited 4th Feb '12 2:32:42 PM by DragonQuestZ

Same can be said for metaphors, similes, preposition phrases, and nouns "in general".

No, it doesn't, or else you'd have to concede that "preposition phrases in general" has equal right to be a trope page.

Romantic Hyperbole is a trope; it takes a broad, way-too-general category and narrows the focus on a more specific occurrence that is of note. Hyperbole by itself doesn't tell anybody anything; it would be like using Dialogue as a trope page, instead of an index.

edited 4th Feb '12 2:55:02 PM by SeanMurrayI

Prepositional phrases are not literary devices. It's just a linguistic tool The others are actual literary tools.

Seriously, have you actually looked at what those things mean?

And last I checked devices in mediums are part of what we count as tropes.

The only replies are from people willing to argue.

Um, discussing things is still the point of threads. As long as it doesn't get out of hand, it's silly to say that this kind of discussion is bad for a thread (at least that seems to be what you are implying).

And I get back to my point. A lot of the examples are hyperbole, not blasphemy. We can make a trope for hyperbole (and others for similes and metaphors), and move them, while making this trope about what it's turned into already (okay that sentence was awkward).

edited 4th Feb '12 3:20:55 PM by DragonQuestZ

I am not implying anything. I am explicitly saying: nobody agrees with making any such distinction about the "intent" of a Blasphemous Boast. Any bragging that involves comparison to gods is a Blasphemous Boast, whether it's truly offensive or merely whimsical. That's a bad and ill-defined idea. This thread should be locked unless there is a single other person who thinks that.

edited 4th Feb '12 3:24:59 PM by rodneyAnonymous

How? Has there been a crowner showing this? Or are you just basing replies on a few posters as though it was a representative sample?

And agreeing isn't the same as proving there isn't a difference. Tropes as tools have objective distinctions (a necessity to avoid Trope Decay), not distinctions that people just agree happen or not.

That means I'd like to see someone prove that "I have more money than God" would actually be a genuine boast about topping God, and not hyperbole, rather than just going "I don't see the distinction". And it CAN be proven to be that way. Don't act like I don't want to be wrong either, as there is a difference between proving a point and just insisting it.

edited 4th Feb '12 3:27:52 PM by DragonQuestZ

I'm locking this in favour of doing nothing. Current page is fine. No reason to split. Do not make a page for hyperbole in general.