Follow TV Tropes

Following

Question about "karma" in fiction.

Go To

Robotnik Since: Aug, 2011
#1: Oct 5th 2013 at 12:05:57 PM

If it's trendy and encouraged to portray revenge as self-destructive and/or wrong in fiction (any work that doesn't do so tends to be criticized as "immature" or a "power fantasy" by at least some), then why is the Karma Houdini trope still so negatively received by audiences?

Sure, you could have an "evil" antagonist "sow the seeds of their own destruction", thus making vengeful action on the part of the protagonist unnecessary, but writing the story in such a way has always come across to me on some level as a Broken Aesop, because it's still sating the audience's desire for vengeance (which is supposed to be "bad"), just indirectly.

And you could argue that dissatisfaction with an antagonist "getting away with it" stems not from a lack of retribution so much as the possibility that they will hurt others in the future, but I'm rather skeptical. Even if an antagonist were to die of natural causes, I know that some viewers would complain of the trope being in play simply because they didn't suffer.

So, why is it that some of the same audience members who ostensibly believe "vengeance is bad" still complain when a character they don't like becomes a Karma Houdini?

edited 5th Oct '13 12:10:50 PM by Robotnik

shiro_okami ...can still bite Since: Apr, 2010 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
...can still bite
#2: Oct 5th 2013 at 12:22:14 PM

Because it naturally offends our sense of justice when bad people are not punished for the wrongs they have done, but that also begs the question of who has the authority to punish them, and it also offends the sense of justice of some people to have one person be put in a position of authority over another person without having any justification for having such power. Your question is in some senses a wish for not only the power to right all wrongs, but also having the authority/sovereignty to do so, which is beyond human capability and is essentially on the level of the divine. Fiction is often only concerned with fulfilling the first concept, irregardless of actually having the authority to do so.

DeviousRecital from New York Angeles Since: Nov, 2011
#3: Oct 5th 2013 at 12:37:17 PM

It's probably important to distinguish between audience and critical reception. I believe it's the audience that usually complains about Karma Houdini while it's the critics that complain about "revenge fantasy", more often than not, though don't quote me on that.

And it doesn't always necessarily hold true either. Just look at some of Quentin Tarantino's movies, the Rambo films, Taken and what have you. Ironically, I think it's usually children's media that portrays vengeance as a bad thing, and I believe that's because they don't want their heroes having any sort of morality in grayscale for trying to kill a bad guy for personal reasons rather than because it's the right thing to do, not to mention to avoid pissing off Moral Guardians. This strikes me as equally immature, if not moreso, than portraying vengeance as a good thing.

Add Post

Total posts: 3
Top