Misused: Peggy Sue

That's basically it in my book as well. Groundhog Peggy Sue only applies when when they end up having to do it more than once, in order to solve the same problem or set of problems.

Yes. Agreed on that, as well. So I'm with Sal Fish Fin. And Groundhog Peggy Sue is not a subtrope of Peggy Sue, it's a sibling trope.

edited 9th Jul '17 4:55:47 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Basically, if it's once it's Peggy Sue, if it's twice or more it's Groundhog Peggy Sue?

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

Or just "Groundhog Day" Loop. Or just Time Travel... But yes. More than one chance makes it Not A Peggy Sue Plot.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

But they are still three separate tropes, right? Because I'm going for that as well.

There's plenty of other tropes such an example could be; this thread is for working out just Peggy Sue. It looks like consensus is strongly with me. Should I write a single proposition crowner for the record?

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Anything that affects the definition of Peggy Sue also affects the other two tropes by proxy.

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

Yes, They're three very distinct tropes. Well, a high-level supertrope and two lower level subtropes to it that are also sibling tropes to each other.

The two sibling tropes are mutually exclusive — if a story arc uses one it can't also use the other for the same character. And per wiki policy, it the example is either of the subtropes, it shouldn't be listed on the super trope.

So an example should only be on one of the pages, ever.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Madrugada, with all due respect, I think it would be preferable if you actually explain the rationale behind each of the criteria you listed as integral to the definition of Peggy Sue here — particularly the one about it being only once, and why Groundhog Peggy Sue cannot be a subtrope even though the only real difference between them is on that last criterion.

edited 10th Jul '17 6:07:03 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

If a Peggy Sue can be more than once, it's just "Mental Time Travel to fix something". That's not a sufficient difference from Mental Time Travel to be a separate trope.

If a Peggy Sue can be more than once and a Peggy Sue Groundhog Day is "over and over", then there's no difference at all between them.

edited 10th Jul '17 6:45:50 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

So we're back to defining the word "subtrope", then?

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

Sub-Trope has not changed significantly since I joined this site. The entire time, a Sub-Trope has been required to qualify as an example of the Super-Trope.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

No, we do not have to redefine "subtrope". S subtrope is, and always has been, "a variant of a trope that has become well enough established in its own right to no longer be considered simply a variant of the original." The variation may be a limitation or it may be an expansion, or it may simply be a variation. I'm not sure where the idea that it has to be "Trope But More Specific" to be a subtrope came from.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Well I would say that Groundhog Peggy Sue as in 'Mentally going back in time to set right what once went wrong repeatedly till you get it right' is established enough to be a thing on its own though.

But it can't be a Sub-Trope to Peggy Sue, because that trope only features a single instance of time travel per character.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

It shouldn't, I can think of at least one Peggy Sue plot where they do it more than once but not repeating and occasionally to different ages till they find the thread they want to change. Once is usually all the story time will allow, which is certainly not true for gaming or more tropey works that can explore the concept better. And Tropes Are Flexible.

Edit: Peggy Sue needs some cleanup, a few examples are not mentally but physically like Back To The Future which is not Peggy Sue but a sister trope really.

The work I am thinking of is a Hentai so it wouldn't actually go on the trope listing though.

edited 10th Jul '17 10:05:13 AM by Memers

It isn't a subtrope of Peggy Sue. It's a Sister Trope to it. They're both subtropes of Mental Time Travel.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

That's why I opened this thread. The first step is establishing consensus on what the trope definition is. You seem to have a different definition than what I use. Can you clarify your version of the definition? All I understand from you is "Mental Time Travel in the work".

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

So we're back to the subtrope question.

Groundhog Peggy Sue is basically a "fusion" of Peggy Sue and "Groundhog Day" Loop, but does that necessarily mean it must have the same relation to both? I'm fairly certain it can simultaneously be a subtrope of GDL and a sister of Peggy Sue at the same time... but it doesn't need to be.

You're all focused on the idea that no example on the Peggy Sue page has multiple repeats. If Peggy Sue does not define repeats, but GPS does, then all multiple-repeat cases go on GPS anyway...

edited 10th Jul '17 9:40:23 PM by bwburke94

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

Why are "reversing time once to fix a problem" and "reversing time multiple times to fix a problem" separate tropes, though? It seems like a distinction that's not really significant enough to merit a trope split.

"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko

Because there's a narrative difference between, "You get one more try," and, "You get to try until you succeed."

Check out my fanfiction!

Most of them tend to be horrific consequences if you fail the Peggy Sue trip and the narrative clearly pushes that doing it again is bad but many times forced into it.

IE you have to watch as your friends and family are murdered, you are murdered, the world ends, etc. over and over again.

edited 11th Jul '17 5:10:57 AM by Memers

So multiple people are arguing the trope definitions are as follows, presenting Groundhog Peggy Sue as a subtrope to both "Groundhog Day" Loop and Peggy Sue:

• Mental Time Travel: "going back in time once or more to an earlier point in your timeline"
  • (Not troped, but a component of the three following tropes) "taking possession of your younger body"
    • "Groundhog Day" Loop: "multiple time loops"
    1. Groundhog Peggy Sue: "multiple time loops" plus "single time loop".
    • Peggy Sue: "single time loop".
    1. Groundhog Peggy Sue: "multiple time loops" plus "single time loop".

I, and several others, present these as the definitions, presenting the three as sister tropes:

• Mental Time Travel: "going back in time once or more to an earlier point in your timeline"
  • (Not troped, but a component of the three following tropes) "taking possession of your younger body"
    • "Groundhog Day" Loop: "multiple time loops"
    • Groundhog Peggy Sue: "multiple time loops"
    • Peggy Sue: "single time loop"

I'm only trying to define/change Peggy Sue here, and have been actively avoiding Groundhog Peggy Sue except to prevent "multiple loops of time travel" from being an example of the Peggy Sue Got Married trope.

edited 11th Jul '17 7:02:55 AM by crazysamaritan

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Mental Time Travel does not have to be 'your' timeline or past self, Quantum Leap was an entire series based on Mental Time Travel into different people's pasts in various points of history.

edited 11th Jul '17 7:17:37 AM by Memers

Correct; "taking possession of your younger body" is not an integral component of Mental Time Travel, but it is an integral component of the other three tropes.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.