Misused: Mainstream Obscurity

Since I didn't do a wick check the original thread was locked.

The concept of Mainstream Obscurity is "something that is acclaimed that most people haven't seen" and quite a few examples fit it very well (Works of Charlie Chaplin, Shirley Temple, Marilyn Monroe), however, there's lots of misuse. Many examples don't fit the trope at all.

Wick Check: A Christmas Carol: "A Christmas Carol is a novella by Charles Dickens, first published in 1843, that few people have read but everyone knows the story of." First, using a YMMV trope in a main page description doesn't seem right. Secondly, "few people have read" seems kinda exaggerated. It is true many people have probably just seen an adaptation or a parody, but it seems like a book many have read.

Bridget Jones: Doesn't describe the trope at all, feels more like under Common Knowledge.

CLANNAD: Maybe a legit example, but saying "not as well-known as properties like Pokemon or Bleach" doesn't say anything. It's like saying Rush are an unsuccessful band because they aren't as well-known as The Beatles or Led Zeppelin.

Flo Rida: FAR from Obscure. "Right Round"? "Whistle"? "Club Can't Handle Me"?, "My House"?, "G.D.F.R"? He isn't obscure in the slightest.

Godzilla: Lots of people have seen the movies. I wouldn't say "few people" have seen them.

Jabberjaw: Description contradicts trope.

League of Legends: Seriously? As of September 2016 there are over 100 million active players.

Orson Welles: Many of his films have been widely seen.

Radiohead: 30 million album sales worldwide and many well-known songs (Aside from "Creep" there's "No Surprises", "Karma Police"...) doesn't strike me as obscure.

Street Fighter II: Umm... 14 million game sales, the arcade editions getting 4 BILLION dollars of gross, Capcom's best selling game until 2013... Ain't unsuccessful at all.

Super Monkey Ball: Zero Content Example.

System Shock: Says at the end "This is no longer the case", which I think is grounds for a cut

The Lord of the Rings: The second best-selling novel of all time is hardly "obscure"

2001: A Space Odyssey: Grossed 200 million unadjusted for inflation. I don't think that's an example of a film people haven't seen.

But while the misuse in wicks is pretty bad, the main page is atrocious. Countless amounts of massively seen, widely popular works are listed as being "unseen". Examples are listed for Neon Genesis Evangelion, Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Picasso, van Gogh, Andy Warhol, Citizen Kane, Old Yeller, Mad Max, E.T, King Kong, Tim Burton Batman, Friday The 13th, Robocop, Sherlock Holmes, 1984, The Catcher In The Rye, The works of Shakespeare, fairy tales, Edgar Allan Poe's work, Max And Ruby, Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Friends, The CW in General, Twin Peaks, Monty Python, Star Trek, The X-Factor, Hannah Montana, Malcolm In The Middle, Doctor Who, Bach, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Wagner, Mozart, Copland, Holst, Glen Miller, The Sex Pistols, Iron Maiden, Metallica, System Of A Down, Slipknot, Lana Del Rey, Skrillex, Aviici, Wiz Khalifa, The Spice Girls, Bob Seger, THE BIBLE, Earthbound, Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear, Chrono Trigger, video games in general, Bambi, Fantasia, and every cartoon before 2000... You might as well just list "everything".

I really think something should be done about this.

edited 20th Apr '17 8:23:27 AM by WhatArtThee

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

Opening.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

I'm afraid this is confused as "a highly acclaimed (YMMV!) work that everyone needs to see." AKA Needs More Love.

We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.

I'm concerned about works that have become so famous that "everybody knows about it" but simultaneously have gotten so old that the current generation of movie-goers (or readers, etc.) have not bothered to watch it (or read it).

For example, 2001: A Space Odyssey had a huge turnout when it was first released, but how many people would watch it nowadays given the information (and spoilers) people can find out about it? IMO, there are some works that have become so famous and so old that there's little point in bothering to watch/read them.

My concern is a combination of It Was His Sled (everybody knows the spoiler) and All There Is To Know About The Crying Game (the only thing people know is the spoiler), except my concern is more like "everybody knows the plot" and "the only thing people know is a particular plotline" and "nobody bothers to watch it because they think they already know everything there is to know."

Essentially, I'm not convinced such examples are misuse, given Tropes Are Flexible.

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

I would say "Most people haven't read A Christmas Carol but they've seen an adaptation or a parody" is precisely what this is about. Or the vast number of people who have seen the LOTR and Harry Potter movies, but not actually read the books. (Next person you hear talking about it, ask them what they thought of Tom Bombadil, or the Scouring of the Shire. Odds are, they won't know about either one, because they weren't in the movies.) Or have seen clips from Citizen Kane, (because who hasn't?) but have never watched the whole movie.

This was intended to be the things that are considered staples, but that most people have not actually experienced. They know enough about it that they can carry on a conversation about it without getting caught out as not having seen it. But they haven't read/watched/played/heard it themselves.

edited 7th May '17 6:07:25 PM by Madrugada

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

But lots of the examples listed most people today have seen/watched/read/listened to. The trope isn't about "People can talk about it without seeing it", it's "Well known and acclaimed by the general public but most haven't seen/heard/played/read it".

The works of Charlie Chaplin, Shirley Temple, and Marilyn Monroe are textbook examples. Three of the most iconic actors of all time, but who has seen any of their films?

Another example is The Velvet Underground: The album cover for The Velvet Underground And Nico is instantly recognizable and a common presence on T-shirts, and they are a highly acclaimed band whose albums are brought up in discussion for "best albums of the '60s" but the average person likely hasn't heard any of their songs. Or similarly, Lou Reed's Metal Machine Music. The amount of people who know of it and it's contents are very high, but the amount who have listened to it?

Then there's Charles Darwin's Origin Of The Species. One of the most recognizable and important scientific texts of all time, everyone knows the name, but most haven't read it, and many think it's about human evolution, which it is not.

The works listed in misuse a lot of people have seen/heard/listened to/played them, even if many know them, that's kinda true for anything! Lots of people know of Harry Potter or Star Wars without seeing them, but they aren't examples.

edited 8th May '17 7:33:23 AM by WhatArtThee

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

OK, I see your point. But I also, now, think that the core problem with this is the Myopias — Fan Myopia, Age Myopia (I'm still surprised when I meet someone who has never seen I Love Lucy. But I recognize that there's an age break-point at which more people younger than that haven't seen it than have. And it works the other way, as well, for many many types of works or creators, there's going to be an age break-point where people older than that are more like to have not experienced it that to have.) and such. I think most of the misuse that's being cited is a myopia in play

I'm not sure whether there's a solution beyond noting that that's a problem, and making it YMMV.

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

Well this is an Audience Reaction...

That's on top of the problem I already stated before.

We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.

So what should we do about it? I think we should trim out all examples that lots of people have seen/read/whatever and only include ones which many know but few really know.

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

That's simple enough, but how do we know if many people don't know deeply about the works in question?

We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.

By "really know" I mean have actually seen/read/etc. Some examples of "well-known works few people have actually seen/read/played" I listed above.

If a work is one a lot of people have actually seen or watched or read or listened to or played, than it doesn't belong under the definition.

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

Yes, it does. In fact, "a lot of people have actually experienced the work" is a necessary part of the trope. Charlie Chaplin was an internationally famous actor. Marcel Marceau was given awards in multiple countries for his ability to perform without sound. There's an entire page on the other wiki where people were debating Darwin's publication because it was topical and relevant to the advance of science. Those were all done because many people had seen or watched or read or listened to their works.

However, these works are no longer popular. That's what the trope is about; the work/artist is still famous, despite not being as popular as they once were. I admit I haven't seen the orginal L'Ultima Cena, but I've seen reproductions often enough I have a good sense of what it looks like.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

I think the main problem with this, is that it will eventually encompass everything (or at least anything that was ever remotely notable). I think there might be something that can be salvaged here, but that's going to be key to a solution.

Right now, pop culture as we know it doesn't stretch back much further than about a century, with a handful of literary or musical pieces that survived in different cultures over time. However, with modern information sharing and storage, there will eventually be more movies and books that are considered classics than one could possibly finish in a lifetime.

I feel like we're already essentially at that point in any practical sense. I remember, when I was a kid, feeling like there was a relatively small collection of classic movies that I would need to catch up on when I was older, but I wasn't really a big film person so I kept putting it off. Nowadays, I still haven't touched most of those, and I miss more than half of the movies that "everyone saw" as they come out.

It's not like I just avoid pop culture, either. There's just a ton of different things you can be interested in. You can watch every movie in the universe, but still have to feign knowledge of the most famous video game because you just don't have time for it.

edited 13th May '17 10:11:46 PM by Jokubas

That's a good point, I glossed over that. Yeah, I think that the criteria should be "work is still iconic despite the fact most people today haven't experienced it. The ones listed above are examples.

That's also a good point, and why the thread was created. If it was "popular work that people can talk about without experiencing it" than that can ecompass everything!.

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

BUMP! Anyone have any ideas how to fix it?

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

We'll need a crowner then...

What would the options be?

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

@crazysamaritan I think you nailed it here: "the work/artist is still famous, despite not being as popular as they once were."

I'm still not sure how to solve the problem of "what counts?" though. Age demographics are going to come into heavy play for what people think belongs in it.

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

What is "famous"? What is "popular"?

We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.

What counts is a work which is famous, but most people today haven't seen it. It's very tricky to judge what "most people today" is. Under 50? 40? 20? And how "obscure" does it have to be? It's really hard to judge, i'm starting to wonder if this trope even has merit.

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

That's what I'm thinking about, too.

Cut this, then?

We don't need justice when we can forgive. We don't need tolerance when we can love.

I think is a bit relevant too: https://xkcd.com/1053/

I still feel like there might be a way to do something with this idea, but I'm not sure what. It might be a case of cut and take any variation to TLP.

edited 23rd May '17 9:32:23 PM by Jokubas

Yes, this trope has merit. Citizen Kane is the quintessential example. (Everybody knows what "Rosebud" means, but nobody nowadays besides film scholars really watches the movie). The problem is getting rid of bad examples, whether of things people actually look at, because they want to or otherwise (The Catcher In The Rye is often a book people are forced to read) or stuff that's obscure in the first place (I mean, seriously, CLANNAD? That's not even that well-known in anime circles).

edited 1st Jun '17 11:25:40 AM by YasminPerry

I wouldn't say "nobody" besides film scholars watches Citizen Kane, hell, my brother watched it, and he mostly watches meme videos, but I digress.

The reason why i'm not sure if the trope has merit is, what defines "popular" and "well-watched?" How well-known should something have to be to fall under this trope, and how high should the ratio between people who know it and haven't seen it vs people who know it and have? It's very unclear.

Just another day in the life of Jimmy Nutrin

That one is more Memetic But Obscure, which could be a fully valid offshoot to this, common meme and common to know the source but few people have ever seen it and generally cant name anything else about the work but that.