Complaining: So Beautiful Its A Curse

Deadlock Clock: 24th May 2013 11:59:00 PM
Total posts: [64]
1 2 3
Half of the description for this trope is about how this trope can be used poorly and trying a little too hard to hard to make this a Mary Sue trait. This could definitely use a more neutral rewrite.
In uffish thought
Here we have the Trope Description Improvement Drive, and here we have the Removing Complaining, Bashing, and Negativity Drive. This issue can probably be sorted out in the first thread.
3 SeptimusHeap12th Feb 2013 08:24:07 AM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
Yeah, this has its own threads.

We really need this proposal up and running.
Actually, reading it more, the problem might be a little bit more than the description. This trope seems to be about a character claiming that their beauty causes problems for them, whether or not that claim is true seems unimportant.

I think this would make more sense if it's was just about a character beauty being a source of problems, whether or not they make the claim or remark.

edited 12th Feb '13 12:36:13 PM by captainpat

5 SeptimusHeap12th Feb 2013 12:40:25 PM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
There is probably some misuse for the latter, so I would go ahead and expand the definition in that sense.
6 SeptimusHeap15th Feb 2013 08:04:08 AM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
Anybody opposed towards rewriting the description as proposed?
Dragon Writer
What proposal?
8 SeptimusHeap15th Feb 2013 02:03:34 PM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
Rewrite the description so this trope is about a characters beauty being a source of problems not just, as it's defined current, a character claiming so.
10 AnotherDuck15th Feb 2013 03:01:43 PM from Stockholm , Relationship Status: In season
No, the other one.
Technically, if changed that way, a character claiming so would be one trying to invoke the trope, or something like that. Or blame it, at least.

Anyway, that's what I thought the trope was about: an actual source of problems.
Check out my fanfiction!
I think a character complaining about the effects of their beauty should count as valid example, whether or not the reader agrees that the problems the character cites are actual problems.

The issue with the trope isn't so much the definition, but the fact that large parts of the description goes out of its way to make it sound like this trope is indicative of Bad Writing.

In the short term, I'm cutting the following bits, given that it is downright insulting to many authors (and fans of their works) that use the trope, and given that objective tropes should not be describe in terms of Flame Bait YMMV terms.

I'm also cutting the Male Gaze sinkhole as misuse.

However, more work still needs to be done. This whole thing needs to be rewritten in a simple, brief, descriptive and neutral tone.

edited 15th Feb '13 3:19:21 PM by Catbert

[up][up] Pretty much. A character claiming so would just be invoking this trope.
I think it's both about the character complaining about her beauty and having her beauty being a problem. Take the quote for example. Jessica Rabbit looks very sexy but she's married to Roger Rabbit, whom she loves, so she doesn't want other people finding her attractive getting in the way of her marriage. Complaining can make a character sound vain but in her case it's true.
There's no an argument that character complaining about their beauty isn't part of this trope. The point is, well should be, that a characters beauty is causing them some kind of trouble whether that's actual case or just in their head.
15 AnotherDuck16th Feb 2013 08:25:10 AM from Stockholm , Relationship Status: In season
No, the other one.
Well, technically, if it is causing them trouble, then the narrative says as much (which means not specifically the character herself). It probably has to be directly stated, though, or less it's going to get subjective very quickly.

edited 16th Feb '13 8:25:28 AM by AnotherDuck

Check out my fanfiction!
16 SeptimusHeap16th Feb 2013 08:32:20 AM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
Yes, I agree on expanding the description. I also agree with Catbert that the Mary Sue reference can die in a nuclear fire.
17 SeptimusHeap20th Feb 2013 01:22:18 PM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
So, any dissent to the change proposed in @5?
18 Xtifr20th Feb 2013 06:04:04 PM , Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
World's Toughest Milkman
Makes sense to me.

eta: that is, no dissent here. :)

edited 20th Feb '13 6:04:37 PM by Xtifr

Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.
The heavy Mary Sue references alone is a pretty good indication that this needs to be rewritten.
A very specific form of Blessed with Suck that comes up regularly where a character's beauty is a source of problems. This is usually because of its effect on other characters, often times inspiring jealousy, intimidation, suspicion, unwanted attention, or the character only noticed because of their looks and not their personal merits. In cases where character does complain about their beauty expect their complaints to be dismissed or add more resentment from other characters.

How's this for a start?

edited 26th Feb '13 3:05:12 PM by captainpat

21 SeptimusHeap26th Feb 2013 02:25:29 PM from Laniakea , Relationship Status: Mu
Can't see anything to object there.
[up][up] "Its," not "it's". tongue

edited 26th Feb '13 2:44:20 PM by Leaper

[up]Nope. "Its" is possessive. "It's" is a contraction. ;)
Rule of fanworks reviews: The amount of constructive criticism a work receives is in inverse proportion to the amount it needs.
Yes, that's because the poster corrected it (based on my pointing it out, of course). Note the little "edited" line. :)

edited 27th Feb '13 10:58:05 AM by Leaper

D'oh. Sorry about that, then.

As for the edit, that looks great to me.
Rule of fanworks reviews: The amount of constructive criticism a work receives is in inverse proportion to the amount it needs.

Total posts: 64
1 2 3