Major Injury Underreaction vs. Only A Flesh Wound?

What exactly is the difference between Major Injury Underreaction and Only a Flesh Wound? They seem to be two different pages for the same basic thing, even down to sharing a page quote (or, well, two different quotes from the same scene) and many of the same examples. The descriptions are no help either as they don't bother explaining the difference and just say "see also [the other trope]". I think they either need to be made more distinct or one of them removed. What do other people think?

edited 16th Mar '17 3:23:56 AM by Mimic1990

If you want to ask for changes to either or both pages, you need to be in Trope Repair Shop, not Trope Talk. If you're asking for clarification of the difference between the two tropes,:

Major Injury Underreaction is "characters in great pain will demonstrate this pain by making frequently deadpan statements, " It's comedy, and a reaction and a characterization trope

Only a Flesh Wound is "Being damaged in any part of the body that isn't a major organ is treated as being a minor injury in fiction." It can be comedy, but isn't usually, and it's a plot trope.

Ironically, the Trope Namer for Only a Flesh Wound is a giant joke. I honestly thought it was the comedic one because of that.

edited 16th Mar '17 3:20:36 PM by Karxrida

So in Only a Flesh Wound, it only is a flesh wound (i.e not something vital). Major Injury Underreaction says "major".

The name Only a Flesh Wound does sound like Major Injury Underreaction, tho.

Only a Flesh Wound is essentially an injury that looks bad but somehow isn't. Major Injury Underreaction is when the injury is really bad but the reaction is understated. So the hero gets shot but soldiers on with obvious pain and makes a full recovery is Only a Flesh Wound. But if the hero only seems annoyed is Major Injury Underreaction.

edited 19th Mar '17 2:07:14 PM by KJMackley