TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Wiki Headlines
It's time for the second TV Tropes Halloween Avatar Contest, theme: cute monsters! Details and voting here.
Total posts: [43]
1
2

Unclear Description: Girl Notices First get usage counts

:(
The description for Girl Notices First is a big, multi-paragraph description of a trope and then a paragraph saying "this is the subversion of that." Can I rewrite this as a description rather than a negation?
First key to interpreting a work: Things mean things.
 2 Madrugada, Mon, 24th Sep '12 7:39:24 AM Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
Please do.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
I'm not sure this is even really a subversion of anything. I'm not really sure it's actually a trope either unless it's one of those really broad tropes that are essentially meaningless. I mean, at its core, it's just 'girl falls for guy before he does with her and a relationship forms later.'

edited 24th Sep '12 8:15:43 AM by Arha

:(
I'm wondering about that too. Here's my rewrite, and see if it ends up too broad:


There is a double standard at work in dealing with one-sided attraction. So often a story will feature a male hero who sees a beautiful woman from afar and falls in Love at First Sight, while she remains oblivious. He spends the rest of the story persuing her while she does very little, and in the climax he finally wins her heart.

Sometimes, however, the hero finds out that his beloved already loves him and has been waiting for him to come around. He never expected that the girl could notice first! Reasons for why she doesn't start pursuing the hero are varied: maybe she's a Shrinking Violet and Cannot Spit It Out; maybe she knows that No Guy Wants to Be Chased and decides to wait. Or maybe she does get tired of waiting and starts chasing him...

Compare Victorious Childhood Friend; contrast Unrequited Tragic Maiden.

First key to interpreting a work: Things mean things.
So basically you're saying the trope would be when he starts pursuing a girl that it turned out already liked him? Now that sounds more like a trope, but then I think it doesn't need to be gender specific. It's also not this trope so far as I can tell.

Edit: And Victorious Childhood Friend is just a redirect.

edited 24th Sep '12 8:32:44 AM by Arha

 6 Another Duck, Mon, 24th Sep '12 11:43:11 AM from Stockholm Relationship Status: Chocolate!
No, the other one.
I can see this happening in basically any harem anime, plenty of Shoujo and Shōnen romance-involved stories, and lots more. There's one Anime & Manga example. I think it's also decently common with action heroes in American films. They're badass and don't care much about silly things like emotions, but the girl they will inevitable save somewhere along the road will fall for them, and then they say, "Hey, why not? She's hot."

I don't see a trope in this. At most, a YKTTW project.

Victorious Childhood Friend should probably have been cleaned when the trope got reworked to not feature a spoiler in its nature.

edited 24th Sep '12 11:46:34 AM by AnotherDuck

Check out my fanfiction!
 7 DRCEQ, Mon, 24th Sep '12 8:36:19 PM Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
MOVE, B****! GET OUT THE WAY!
The trope needs more than a rewrite. The good majority of the examples are X Just X.
3DS FC: 2981-6375-5798
Ecce Homo Superior
Maybe I just don't consume enough works with love stories in them, but I don't see how "girl falls in love first" is a trope (any more than "guy falls in love first"). Either of the two has to happen, right?
(it's David Bowie)
[up]I'm with him.

Maybe it's because I used to watch a lot of anime, but seems to me like either member of a relationship (or, in fact, BOTH) can be attracted right away and not acknowledge it to the other party for some time, and we already have (non-gender-specific) tropes for that.

I'm really having a hard time locating the trope in this.

edited 25th Sep '12 7:00:49 AM by Escher

 
For the sake of argument, I'll note that both your opinions and mine are based off of media all coming from one source and one country, but I honestly kind of doubt it's that different in Western media.

As is, this seems like chairs to me. We had a proposed definition above that does seem like a trope to me, but I don't think it has much to do with what we already have here.

 11 lu 127, Wed, 7th Nov '12 7:36:01 AM from the Forest of Thorns Relationship Status: Loves me...loves me not
Pro-Pinkist
How does jargon like this gain inbounds? Redirect it somewhere. Not a Trope.
 13 lu 127, Wed, 7th Nov '12 9:29:49 AM from the Forest of Thorns Relationship Status: Loves me...loves me not
 14 shimaspawn, Wed, 7th Nov '12 9:53:54 AM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
Not finding a trope here either. I'm pro-cut.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
 15 Septimus Heap, Wed, 7th Nov '12 10:11:28 AM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
Another Wizard boy
With 114, redirect it's going to be. Where to?

That's the thing. I have no idea what this non trope could redirect to. It seems to be under the impression that it's playing with gender roles, so Masculine Girl, Feminine Boy might cover that. Honestly, though, I don't think that's what people are looking for when they check the link or whatever.

 17 Septimus Heap, Wed, 7th Nov '12 11:52:25 AM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
Another Wizard boy
If all else fails, there's still the Home Page.

 18 lu 127, Wed, 7th Nov '12 12:04:59 PM from the Forest of Thorns Relationship Status: Loves me...loves me not
Pro-Pinkist
Judging from the inbounds coming from this board people were looking for stuff on The Legend of Korra romance.
 19 Septimus Heap, Wed, 7th Nov '12 12:05:42 PM from Zurich, Switzerland Relationship Status: Mu
Another Wizard boy
So redirect to YMMV.The Legend Of Korra?

Or possibly something like double standard or unfortunate implications.

Okay, this was a terrible crowner. Cut should never have been listed as an option if it was never going to be considered, and redirect shouldn't have been suggested if there wasn't a good target available. I almost think Page Action would have been a better choice than Single Prop.

The point is just that the page goes away. Cut, redirect, whatever, it's not a trope.

We're not going to be able to cut it, apparently, so it's just a matter of where we want to send those inbounds.

edited 7th Nov '12 8:06:21 PM by Arha

 23 nrjxll, Wed, 7th Nov '12 10:08:16 PM Relationship Status: Not war
How in the world did something like this get 114 inbounds anyway?

The point is just that the page goes away. Cut, redirect, whatever, it's not a trope.

We're not going to be able to cut it, apparently, so it's just a matter of where we want to send those inbounds.

But that's the thing: we have no idea where to send those inbounds. There isn't really an appropriate place to send them that's close enough to the existing page. We're going to end up needing a crowner that's not really that different from what we might have started with.

This is why I hate crowners as a way to decide things. It's entirely possible that the best outcome would have been to fix this up into a proper trope, but the fact that the idea of redirecting has been approved is now going to be seen as shutting out the idea of fixing it, even though the crowner didn't actually explain the issue and thus might have invited some lazy votes from people who didn't actually understand what they were voting for, and those that did may have felt they were only voting to do something.

 25 shimaspawn, Thu, 8th Nov '12 10:15:20 AM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
The name is so vague and the lack of trope here is so severe that there's no possible way to fix this page up into something.

I'm also fairly certain that the inbound thing is about redirects.

edited 8th Nov '12 10:17:05 AM by shimaspawn

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

-Philip K. Dick

Single Proposition: Girl Notices First
7th Nov '12 8:50:57 AM
Vote up for yes, down for no.
At issue:
Total posts: 43
1
2


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