TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [137]  1  2  3  4
5
6

Merge and Rename (Alt Titles Crowner 2013-01-15): I Will Definitely Protect You get usage counts

 101 Fighteer, Wed, 9th Jan '13 2:39:47 PM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
Well, Zeal, aren't you asking to make it a Japanese-specific variant? That is what you've been saying all along, that the declaration of protection is in and of itself a commitment akin to a future marriage proposal, and that this only happens in Japan.

Go ahead and add it to the crowner if you want.

edited 9th Jan '13 2:40:25 PM by Fighteer

Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.
 102 Septimus Heap, Wed, 9th Jan '13 2:41:31 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Just don't add any crowner option asking for a YKTTW, please.

A subtrope of I Will Protect Her and Relationship Upgrade, where it's implied or outright stated that they are both the same.

The subtext is that it means something like, "I will always be there for you." (A very serious commitment that comes with strong romantic connotations.) In an actual romantic context, it's a very intimate promise to always be there for your partner; serious enough to be the equivalent of a marriage proposal depending on the scene.

You'll probably see it most often in classic fiction, Romance Novels, Bishoujo series, Dating Sims, or Unwanted Harem comedies. The idea that rescue equals romance is Older Than Dirt, but the key behind this trope is that it's so common that a Genre Savvy character picks up on it.

Our oblivious hero boasts, "I will definitely protect you!" Our confused heroine thinks he is confessing his life-long devotion to her. She will question, "Why would he say something like that to me?" or tell him "Don't say things that can be misunderstood!" Hilarity Ensues. It's also used more straight in series where a male lead wants to sound like both a Badass and a Knight in Shining Armor, with aims to invoke a Relationship Upgrade.

There must be an in-universe invocation or implication of the romantic context. If not, this is simply I Will Protect Her.

Well, Zeal, aren't you asking to make it a Japanese-specific variant? That is what you've been saying all along, that the declaration of protection is in and of itself a commitment akin to a future marriage proposal, and that this only happens in Japan.

No it isn't.

What I've been saying all along is that this trope is distinct because Japanese fiction uses it far more than other genres, to the point that it's taken on a completely different understanding and usage. As the line between Japanese and Western media blurs, it may not be unique to asian media, but thanks to it, it's a completely different trope. There are tons of things like that on Anime Tropes.

edited 9th Jan '13 2:53:23 PM by KingZeal

 104 Fighteer, Wed, 9th Jan '13 2:52:30 PM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
Well, for your sake, I added the option to the crowner.
Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.
 105 nrjxll, Wed, 9th Jan '13 2:56:31 PM Relationship Status: Not war
What I've been saying all along is that this trope is distinct because Japanese fiction uses it far more than other genres, to the point that it's taken on a completely different understanding and usage.

I'm not sure how this is supposed to be different from "Japanese-specific trope".

 106 Fighteer, Wed, 9th Jan '13 2:58:07 PM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
Um... yeah. That is exactly what I said. Now we have two functionally identical crowner options.

Still, it's clear what is winning, so hopefully it doesn't turn into another mess like the previous crowner.

edited 9th Jan '13 2:59:10 PM by Fighteer

Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.
Okay, look at Shy Finger Twiddling or Comical Angry Face.

Have you seen that outside of anime? Or in media that existed BEFORE anime? I have. But anime was what made it a "thing". They added their own spin to it, and that spin has become by far the most common use of it.

Does that make it a "Japan-only" trope? No. But it's something that the Japanese have significantly made use of.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:03:45 PM by KingZeal

 108 Fighteer, Wed, 9th Jan '13 3:09:17 PM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
And those don't conflict with existing tropes that are identical except for minor variations. Of course, it bothers me that they start off with, "In Anime and Manga...". Those types of lead-ins are part of why people think we are anime-centric.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:10:15 PM by Fighteer

Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.
Yeah, because they're their own tropes.

And I can agree with that. I actually argued in the Netorare Genre TRS thread that we can and should just change the name to Cuckold. As you can see, it's even a redirect.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:13:49 PM by KingZeal

 110 nrjxll, Wed, 9th Jan '13 3:14:04 PM Relationship Status: Not war
But anime was what made it a "thing". They added their own spin to it, and that spin has become by far the most common use of it.

So how is that "spin" not a Japanese-specific trope? Or at least Japanese cultural trope, which might be a better way of putting it?

I just don't see how you're arguing that the crowner is strawmanning your position when your argument throughout has been that this is a trope form which originated, was popularized, and remains common in Japan.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:16:43 PM by nrjxll

First of all, are you arguing that it is cultural or that it isn't? Because if so, you're arguing against the entire reason Fighteer and Septimus rejected the previous crowner.

If you're stating that it isn't, then why are you arguing with me? If it's culture-neutral, then it's not The Same But In Japan. I'm confused because at this point, it just seems like everyone just wants to be rid of the trope, and are making contradictory arguments.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:22:01 PM by KingZeal

 112 nrjxll, Wed, 9th Jan '13 3:22:25 PM Relationship Status: Not war
Actually, my position is that it's insufficiently distinct from I Will Protect Her to be a trope at all, regardless of cultural issues.

I'm just trying to figure out what your position is.

Okay, first of all, a question. Do you believe that Most Common Superpower is a trope?

If not, there's no need to continue any further.

If so, why? The trope is essentially "comics use a lot of busty women". The description makes it clear that the trope started in comics due to standardized artistic practices on their part (significantly, the justification that it's easier to tell an adult and teen woman apart if the adults are well-endowed). But, there exists examples that are not comics-exclusive. So is it a trope? And, more specifically, is it a comics trope? I'm pretty sure a World of Buxom exists outside of comics.

My point is that the assertion that this is "a Japanese trope" is the same as that. It's a trope that may not have been created in Japan, but the Japanese took it and turned it into something beyond what it used to be. That doesn't mean it's exclusive to that media or that culture. The crowner makes it sound as if it is.

edited 9th Jan '13 3:33:17 PM by KingZeal

 114 Septimus Heap, Wed, 9th Jan '13 3:43:18 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
I am pretty sure Most Common Superpower isn't supposed to have examples from non-comicbooks per past TRS decisions, so it's not a good example to bring up.

Now, about this trope - is there any tangible difference between the Japanese version and the normal one?

Doesn't answer my question.

 116 Septimus Heap, Wed, 9th Jan '13 3:49:48 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Pardon, but the answer to your question isn't important here (you can find it in the TRS threads - it's about an enforced trope in comic book industry, not just about any busty woman), the one to mine is. Sorry.

Yes it is. In order for me to understand the wiki policy, I need to find out what the standard is.

The reason that I am arguing is because there is a double standard at work here. If you say this page is not a unique trope, Then why didn't the same apply for that one? I was under the impression that Different media could use a trope completely differently to the point that it evolves into a different trope merely by context.

If this is untrue, then there is no point in me arguing.

edited 9th Jan '13 4:41:51 PM by KingZeal

 118 Septimus Heap, Wed, 9th Jan '13 4:06:22 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
I answered that in the parenthese in my post above.

So then, I repeat—it's basically World of Buxom but enforced?

If so, Why can't we make a note on that page stating so? Like you suggest for this one ?

Or, is it a separate trope?

 120 Septimus Heap, Wed, 9th Jan '13 4:43:47 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
a) This is about "I..." not "Most Common..." and b) I still have no idea why the Japanese concept merits its own page.

 121 Fighteer, Wed, 9th Jan '13 4:45:46 PM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
I don't agree that "big breasts as an Enforced Trope in Comic Books" is its own trope, either, but that is not relevant to this thread. Zeal, please don't push this.
Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.
Yeah, fine. I'm done. At least Fighteer gave a straight answer, so I'll go with that.

You guys need to fix this double standard you have going, though.

edited 9th Jan '13 4:48:13 PM by KingZeal

No matter which way this crowner goes (though I think it's obvious which option will win), can we please get rid of the fifty sub-types in I Will Protect Her? Completely unnecessary and makes it hard to figure out where to put examples.

Also, maybe this is a little early, but how does Protection Declaration sound for new name? I'm actually not sure about it, it just popped into my head, and I figured I'd leave it here to stew.

edited 10th Jan '13 7:38:30 AM by Discar

 124 Septimus Heap, Thu, 10th Jan '13 1:11:00 AM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
A Wizard boy
Move it off to Analysis/.

 125 Fighteer, Thu, 10th Jan '13 5:42:14 AM from the Time Vortex Relationship Status: Dancing with Captain Jack Harkness
I would go with Declaration of Protection to be grammatically consistent with similar tropes.
Ironically, the pursuit of the definition of happiness does not appear to be a happiness-maximizing behavior.

Alternative Titles: I Will Protect Her
15th Jan '13 8:12:17 AM
Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the name will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of Crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative names.
At issue:
The previous crowner voted to merge I Will Definitely Protect You and I Will Protect Her, with a new, non-dialog title. Please propose and vote for new titles to represent the combined trope, which is about a person swearing to protect another person.
Total posts: 137
 1  2  3  4
5
6


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy