Unclear Description (titles crowner 11/9/13): In Its Hour Of Need get usage counts
edited 12th Sep '13 6:24:28 PM by NativeJovian
edited 5th Oct '13 10:18:47 PM by troacctid
Yeah. That's more about tradition, and in my experience, it's almost always expected that the captain would go down with his ship and any captain who felt otherwise was a gutless coward. Furthermore, there is nothing for him to lead anymore. His ship is sinking, so he now has no responsibilities, and he is almost honour-bound to accompany his ship. This one is about how a country's leadership is in serious danger of being decapitated, yet the leader refuses to flee even so. Maybe out of honour, maybe because he crossed the Despair Event Horizon. He has responsibilities elsewhere, or at least a responsibility to stay alive and continue doing his job, but he ignores them, for better (if they survive) or for worse (if they don't). We definitely need a rename, but I think we should define the trope first. As in, we come to a consensus about what exactly the trope is, someone writes up a description, and then we come up with a name.
And maybe it's just me, but I don't think Leadership Before Reason really fits. As that title is just a Snowclone of Honour Before Reason* , the word "Leadership" is emphasized. But the thing is, a good leader would leave because he's needed elsewhere, a pigheaded leader would stay and die, leaving his people leaderless, so he's actually being a very poor leader. A Father to His Men, maybe, if they're the reason he's staying, but unless the men are the only thing he's in charge of, and not, say, a country, he's a poor leader, which makes Leadership Before Reason a bit misleading. I personally prefer "Leader's Refusal To Flee."
edited 8th Oct '13 6:39:14 AM by Xavier1161
- Scope: The trope refers specifically to the Leader's refusal to flee. Not the consequences, or what the now leaderless country/organization/what-have-you does in their leader's absence, although the nature of the consequences can be touched up on.
- Type of danger: Could be anything (war, natural disaster, etc.)
- Leader has other responsibilities outside of those in the immediate danger zone, which makes his death a big potential problem: A must.
- The Leader refuses to flee: A must.
- Why he refuses to flee: We haven't really talked about this, but I think it could be for any reason, really. Honour Before Reason, crossing the Despair Event Horizon, maybe even Revenge Before Reason in certain situations, end result is the same: he doesn't want to go.
- How is his decision portrayed by the narrative (or public opinion, in the case of Real Life examples) — Good (ie. Noble, Brave) or Bad (ie. Foolish, irresponsible)?
- I think that this point can be either or as far as this trope is concerned, but what do you guys think?
- Can he be convinced/forced to leave, and it still be this trope?
- Is this trope specifically about a pigheaded leader refusing to flee bringing about negative consequences, or is it just the leader refusing to flee, for better or for ill?note
- Personally, I think that leaving it open is better, as a lot of examples yield few negative consequences (like death), and one even states that the leader's refusal to flee was what kept morale high enough for his men to achieve victory, even when common sense dictated that he should get to safety. However, the resulting definition may be too broad.
- On a related note, to what extent do we go into the consequences? Just maybe a sentence or two about how it could turn out (good, bad, worse, etc.), or do we go into a bit more detail about hypothetical situations (the king is taken captive, for one. Or the king's status is unknown, and nobody can confirm whether he's actually dead, which could open up problems with succession)
- Can we allow for the leader to take some measures to address his responsibilities, such as sending out his heir, or something, and still be this trope?
- For the record, I think this is fine.
- Something I just thought of: can this trope include an old leader, well past his time, going out in a blaze of glory for the purpose of getting himself killed to pave the way for a successor, one who, by the time this trope occurs, everyone knows is more suited to the job? Or is that something else, as it could easily be interpreted that he's not really shirking any responsibility by this point, and maybe even taking responsibility for the state of his country's leadership by killing off someone who is no longer competent yet still stuck in his position (in situations like a strict monarchy, or something, where he can't just put up his hands and retire)?
- For the record, I think this is fine.
edited 23rd Oct '13 8:15:27 AM by Xavier1161
edited 8th Oct '13 2:11:17 PM by troacctid
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Alternative Titles: In Its Hour Of Need
9th Nov '13 7:34:31 AM