Complaining: The Vamp

This trope precludes the possibility that a character could be seductive for heroic purposes.

Yeah, Evil Is Sexy and all that, but there are plenty of characters I can think of who are sexually imposing and domineering, but utilize their sexiness for noble, altruistic and heroic purposes, and in doing so, do exactly what a typical Vamp would do.

Suggest either creating a new trope for these "heroic Vamp" characters, or re-configuring the current page to include those examples.

A few examples off the top of my head:

• Inara Serra
• The girls of Old Town
• Bayonetta
• Black Widow
• Morrigan Aensland
• Half-human, half-lizard sex slave, Xev
• Yael, Judith, Esther

edited 23rd Aug '12 2:25:10 AM by ginsengaddict

"Get me a gun, I'm a soldier; but put me in that suit and I'm a superhero." - Gunnery Sgt Roberta "Bobbie" Draper MMC

Yeah, there are plenty of women out there who aren't examples of this trope. So?

So, there are enough examples of characters who fit the description of The Vamp without being immoral or morally repugnant, and in some cases being virtuous in their actions, to merit their own trope or expanding the current trope to include them.

edited 23rd Aug '12 2:57:37 AM by ginsengaddict

"Get me a gun, I'm a soldier; but put me in that suit and I'm a superhero." - Gunnery Sgt Roberta "Bobbie" Draper MMC

I think the thing to do here would be checking Lost And Found to see if we have this elsewhere, or taking it to YKTTW if we don't. Proposing expanding The Vamp, a distinct trope in its own right - and under a tag of "complaining", no less - is not what I'd do first.

"Trope Too Narrow" wasn't in the available tags.

And this is already on YKTTW. If The Vamp is a distinct trope, then fine, the other option is a new trope for the good seductresses.

On that note, how does one change the tag?

edited 23rd Aug '12 3:18:12 AM by ginsengaddict

"Get me a gun, I'm a soldier; but put me in that suit and I'm a superhero." - Gunnery Sgt Roberta "Bobbie" Draper MMC

The excluded examples have their own YKTTW. So close this thread?

I haven't seen the YKTTW in question, but I would have thought Femme Fatale covered the "good" variant.

Also, I would have tagged this "Unclear Description" or even left it at "Needs Help".

Here's the YKTTW: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=wp83a0dq6kjezkby6r7eqw56

Actually, after reading the description, I'm finding it hard to imagine a heroic Vamp character. It's not just "a character who uses seduction to get what she wants", unless "seduction" means, to quote the trope description, "us[ing] the...guy's sympathy against him, often with a sob story about her mother and some hospital bills or a Wounded Gazelle Gambit", and one who practices it is by definition "a liar and a sneak". (None of which has anything to do with sex!) Even discounting the anti-sex tone the OP finds in the trope, it seems to me that a "heroic" character who did those things would be an anti-hero at best.

edited 29th Aug '12 5:42:11 AM by MorganWick

I agree with Morgan Wick. There can't be such a thing as a Heroic Vamp. I think that should be discarded and this should be closed. If the OP wants sexual character who can be good, he should check under Hooker with a Heart of Gold, Street Walker, and High-Class Call Girl to start with.

Actually, I think this shouldn't be closed just yet. The OP may have been incorrect, but the fact that s/he was confused in the first place suggests that some clarification/example cleanup might be necessary.

If there's enough confusion to do anything about it, there should be significant misuse. That's not been brought up.

Check out my fanfiction!

A trope cannot "preclude a possibility". Like the existence of lolcats or Angels Pose cannot preclude a possibility of anything.

Tropes, however, get inverted, subverted and generally messed with all the time.

edited 13th Oct '12 7:33:41 AM by TBeholder

...And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense - R.W.Wood

"This trope precludes the possibility that a character could be seductive for heroic purposes," because because The Vamp (short for vampire because she's like a vampire) is not a heroic character but villainous by nature. "Unlike the Femme Fatale and the Mad Scientist's Beautiful Daughter, she is rotten to the core, and will never be swayed from the path of darkness by love."

Edit: What confusion is there on the page?

edited 13th Oct '12 11:48:01 PM by lexicon

I'm not sure there's any confusion on the page itself, but maybe more with the idea of "vamp" the OP had from outside the wiki.

I thought the OP listed a bunch of "good" examples of The Vamp - if those are on the page, then there is a problem.

None of those are good examples of The Vamp. Instead they miss the point of the trope entirely and none of them should be on the page. It's not just anyone who uses sexuality as a weapon. It's just the OP isn't grasping most of the trope.

The Vamp is the idea of an evil sexual woman who corrupts a good and noble man. It's an old archetype and one of the oldest ones in the books. The Vamp is a temptress and a corrupter at her core. That's why for the vamp to lose she has to fall in love and become pure and chaste. That's her purpose and her moral.

What the OPs examples are of is a much more modern trope where a woman is confident in her sexuality and wields it as a weapon, but because people are no longer so terrified of sex it doesn't have the corruption themes in the work and sexual women are allowed to be more rounded. This trope is not The Vamp, but it is a modern sister of it.

edited 14th Oct '12 3:25:36 AM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

I agree - my point was that if they are listed, then unless the OP added all of them singlehandedly, the trope may need some clarification and cleanup as it's being misunderstood by more than one person.

Ah, none of them are listed on the page. Problem seems confined to the OP. Should we lock this?

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

The same could be said of Femme Fatale though, per its own description. Specifically, "[w]hat separates the Femme Fatale from The Vamp is that the Femme Fatale uses femininity and sensuality instead of upfront sexual advances." It seems we are missing a trope for general weaponization of sexuality as a means to an end, regardless of hero-villain moral alignment.

On another note, I personally think that the trope's focus on requiring that the character to be villainous, rather than on the seduction being for evil or at least malicious purposes, is too restrictive, and ignores the fact that there can be Sociopathic Heroines, Unscrupulous Heroines and Nominal Heroines who would otherwise fit the mold.

Also, "a completely evil seductress" is a bad laconic even for the current definition of "evil woman who uses sex as a means to an evil end", as it automatically includes any villainess who is a Lady Casanova — seducing men purely for carnal enjoyment, and dropping them immediately after "using" them.

edited 1st Nov '12 2:41:46 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Vamps are villains, Marq. They may be a protagonist (Sadie Thompson in Somerset Maugham's Rain is the protagonist, but she's still a villain.) but they are never not a villain. It's part of what defines "Vamp". It's not about her intent. It's about who she is.

edited 1st Nov '12 3:23:03 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Then we're missing a trope for when the focus is on the intent, then.

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

But just because other tropes are missing doesn't mean there's something wrong with this trope.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

So starting (or executing) one or two YKTTWs for missing trope(s) and removing bad examples is the only thing to do here?

edited 1st Nov '12 3:32:29 PM by SeptimusHeap

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

And fixing the laconic. "Completely evil seductress" does not accurately reflect the description. A villainess who seduces men for mere carnal fun (which fits the laconic) is not The Vamp, but rather an villainess who is The Hedonist or Lady Casanova; a villainess who seduces men to gain information, to provide a weak point in the organization/group that they belong to (e.g. via blackmailing), to purposefully corrupt said men (and possibly incude a Face–Heel Turn), or any such "sex as a means to an end" plot, however, is The Vamp.

edited 1st Nov '12 3:37:54 PM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.