Zzzzzzzzzz
Tragic Monster is already about the monster, not the fight. "This isn't just Brainwashed And Crazy, this is forcing the unlucky character to become a terrible beast or other nasty critter with no means of changing them back."
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
Is that "no means of changing back" part essential? I always thought the "being the monster" bit was more important than whether or not somewhere down the line the condition might be cured.
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
At Madrugada: Respectfully I disagree. Tragic Monster is not only about a person becoming a monster without any means of changing them back, the monster also has to be killed by someone who loves them to be this trope.
edited 12th Nov '10 10:19:15 PM by fawn
^Not actually my favorite animal.
Bump. I don't want this to die like the other thread.
edited 15th Nov '10 12:52:59 PM by fawn
^Not actually my favorite animal.
They aren't the same trope at all.
- A Tragic Monster can be tragic for many other reasons than just because someone loves it and it isn't required to be killed.
- Staking the Loved One is about killing someone you cared about because they've become a monster.
- Kill the Ones You Love is a trope for whenever anyone you care about dies. It could be a supertrope to Staking the Loved One, but it doesn't work as a supertrope for Tragic Monster.
Really, the big issue is that the two tropes you want to merge don't really have much in common. You're trying to merge a character type with a plot device. They just don't fit together. They're related certainly, but they aren't the same trope.
A good example of a Tragic Monster who isn't Staking the Loved One is Shaun Of The Dead. When his best friend is turned into a zombie and can't be turned back, Shaun instead locks him up in the storage shed and plays Play Station with him. He's still a Tragic Monster. He's just not Staking the Loved One. I do think the definition of Tragic Monster could be rewritten a bit to make this a little more clear though.
edited 15th Nov '10 1:02:55 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
"A Tragic Monster can be tragic for many other reasons than just because someone loves it and it isn't required to be killed."
Except, the description, (before you changed it) the laconic, and the original YKTTW all say it is killed by a loved one. Read the examples, in the majority the monster is killed.
How you describe Tragic Monster is basically what I want to change Tragic Monster into. A monster tragic for any reason.
"Really, the big issue is that the two tropes you want to merge don't really have much in common."
They are getting confused at the very least. Also, like I said, in the majority of the examples the monster is killed. As is, even if the tropes are supposed to be different, by all appearances they look the same now.
edited 15th Nov '10 1:46:19 PM by fawn
^Not actually my favorite animal.
The Tragic Monster does tend to die in the end. There is going to always be some overlap since it's hard to have Staking the Loved One without a Tragic Monster to stake. I think cleaning up Tragic Monster is really the better option than merging them. Especially since the tragic monster doesn't have to be killed by the person who loves it.
If the tropes are getting confused then the definitions on both need to be clearer and we can try to clean up Tragic Monster and make it more about becoming a monster and less about how they're killed.
edited 15th Nov '10 1:51:48 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Sounds like a good idea to me.
Edit: If there are no objections then I might just do that.
edited 15th Nov '10 2:06:57 PM by fawn
^Not actually my favorite animal.
Go ahead. I'll help you. I think clean up and clarification are always good things. They're a far less drastic step.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
This thread expired after 60 days of inactivity.
Zzzzzzzzzz
Was this one resolved at all?
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
Yes, we cleaned it up. Sorry. Forgot to holler for a lock.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Tragic Monster and Staking the Loved One, in my opinion are about the same trope: a person being forced to kill a loved one because they have been turned into a hostile being. In fact I have brought this up before, [1]
but the thread was forgotten, and a clear consensus was not reached.
Kill the Ones You Love Seems like a Super-Trope of Tragic Monster / Staking the Loved One, in fact looking at the examples shows It has been confused with them, as at least eight of the examples are about a person being turned into a hostile creature and being killed by their loved one.
I think we should merge Tragic Monster and Staking the Loved One, adding any non-duplicates examples from Kill the Ones You Love that apply, and make Kill the Ones You Love a Super-Trope. Also make Tragic Monster Exactly What It Says on the Tin, a trope about Tragic Monsters.
What do you think?
edited 9th Nov '10 7:58:37 PM by fawn
^Not actually my favorite animal.