Merge or cut with part of Red Eyes Take Warning?: Kind Red Eyes

I came across the relatively new trope for Kind Red Eyes. I didn't check before, but I see that Red Eyes, Take Warning also lists subversions, which would seem to overlap in concept with Kind Red Eyes.

I guess that maybe there could be a difference- maybe a subversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning is still sinister looking whereas Kind Red Eyes is not- but if not, some kind of cutting/merger should happen.

I'd say remove the subversions from Red Eyes, Take Warning and merge them with Kind Red Eyes. There are so many subversions now that the trope has split. Red eyes no longer have to mean danger.

edited 30th Nov '10 7:53:06 PM by Gilgameshkun

I'm okay with this split. Just move all the "red eyed character is actually really nice" subversions over.

Although red eyes that are treated in story as a signal of danger or evilness, but then turn out to not be, should probably stay on Red Eyes, Take Warning because it lampshades that trope.

edited 1st Dec '10 7:29:07 AM by Sackett

Dunno, isn't that part of the subversion?

It's a subversion, but it lampshades Red Eyes, Take Warning, so it fits there.

But isn't it subverted in a way that makes it part of just Kind Red Eyes, lampshade or no?

Well it's lampshading Red Eyes, Take Warning (so it belongs on that page) and then it subverts it into Kind Red Eyes (so it belongs on that page too).

If a show lampshades a trope, how can we possibly reject it as an example for that trope?

edited 1st Dec '10 9:05:31 AM by Sackett

If Kind Red Eyes is a subtrope of Red Eyes, Take Warning defined by subverting it and possibly lampshading it, it belongs only on Kind Red Eyes because that's the trope in use. Any use of Kind Red Eyes is implicitly a subversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning, and thus doesn't need to be on both pages.

Kind Eyes explicitly states that the eyes have no negative connotation. That would have to go if the subversions are moved there, because to subvert it, it has to appear to be in play.

Perhaps there should be a third trope for where Kind Eyes and Take Warning intersect. Or either trope should contain two sections — not subverted and subverted if Warning, overt and concealed in Kind

...How can it not have connotations? Red eyes being evil is practically a Universal Trope, the whole point is that this subverts it. Other wise it's just a character with red eyes that isn't a douchebag.

Wait? No connotations? Then how is this a trope at all? it's just a list of subversion and aversion of another trope...

Subverting Red Eyes, Take Warning could be its own trope. Simply having red eyes and not being dangerous could be said to subverting the expectation. However, if the description says it's not a subversion, I'm curious as to what the goal of the trope was.

This line from the trope might be relevant. I think based on it that this is probably meant to be the subversion becoming it's own trope, just badly explained.

But as tropes mature and become subverted, you see more characters whose red eyes have no negative connotation whatsoever.

edited 3rd Dec '10 3:01:26 PM by shimaspawn

I think that page should be cut. It's just a subversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning, and it's really really common.

Furthermore, despite the fact that it's become ordinary for red-eyed characters to not necessarily be villainous, there are still many more times when "Red Eyes, Take Warning-Subverted is cited instead of Kind Red Eyes.

It's not a subversion, its an aversion. The premise of the trope is that Red Eyes, Take Warning is a Dead Horse Trope and that no one actually cares about red eyes anymore. So they can freely be used for purely aesthetic purposes along with all the other eye colors.

Clarste understands what I meant. And yes, sometimes I suck at explaining things. But red eyes very often can mean nothing these days. Red Eyes, Take Warning does feel like a Dead Horse Trope with potential Unfortunate Implications. I remember neutrally-portrayed red-eyed characters as far back as the 1980s and 1990s. When I named this trope Kind Red Eyes, I did understand that the trope is often a subversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning, but I didn't intend that all examples are necessarily subversions. In that sense, perhaps I named the trope inadequately. You see, there seemed to be a need for this trope because Red Eyes, Take Warning itself seems inadequately named if it is meant to encompass the entire meaningful concept of red eyes, because it assumes they're always a bad thing. Ever since I was young and decided I loved albino lab rats and Peppy Hare's non-albino red eyes, I have never inherently considered red eyes a bad thing since — maybe my parents do, but I certainly don't. On the contrary, when red eyes are not evil, they are not even unnervingly Ugly Cute — they are perfectly beautiful exactly the way they are, the equal of Gray Eyes or Amber Eyes. To highlight the beauty of red eyes, I like to call them "crimson eyes", but I did not call the trope Crimson Eyes because I don't know of anyone else who uses this term "crimson eyes" regularly.

edited 5th Dec '10 9:34:31 PM by Gilgameshkun

It's not meant to cover the entire concept of "red eyes mean something" it's meant to cover "red eyes=danger sign". Subverting or averting it (a lot of people get them confused), just means red eyes show up, but aren't meant to show someone as dangerous.

Subverting and averting are very different though. A subversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning would involve other characters (or the audience, but that's harder to measure) having a negative reaction to the character with the eyes before it's proven that the character is actually nice. An aversion would simply be a character with red eyes that triggers no particular in-universe or audience reaction.

Kind Red Eyes clearly can't be both, because those are different things.

edited 6th Dec '10 2:52:03 AM by Clarste

Hm, then Kind Red Eyes would be the aversion.

If a work has people expecting red eyes to mean evil (or sets the character up with evilish expectations with focus on their red eyes) but it turns out they're good, that's a subversion (presented with trope only to have expectations reversed) of Red Eyes, Take Warning, and should be on that page.

If someone just happens to have red eyes, of which nothing is ever made, and they're nice, I guess that'd be an aversion of Red Eyes, Take Warning, and a straight use of Kind Red Eyes. My problem with the latter is it implies that red eyes mean they're good, when the trope is really just "red eyed character happens to be good".

Well, how many evil characters do you know of who aren't dangerous in one way or another?

johnnye: You make a very good post. To be honest, I didn't take too much time thinking of the name. Perhaps I was too busy thinking "those red eyes are pretty", or something. XD Either way, I think we understand why this concept needed to be tropified — because not everyone assumes red eyes are a bad sign anymore. Even in villainous characters with red eyes, their eyes being red may not even be the first thing you notice. (I'd never even noticed Bowser has red eyes until I read it mentioned here on tvtropes. Peppy's red eyes were more readily noticed because they're very pretty.) Someone who said Red Eyes, Take Warning is a Dead Horse Trope is right — it's not even simply a Discredited Trope. And I'm 30 years old. Maybe people can take it more seriously if they're older than me.

I'd be perfectly alright with an appropriate rename. Even something as simple as Red Eyes. As long as Red Eyes isn't being occupied by a work...which is probably the single biggest reason I didn't call it Red Eyes in the first place.

edited 7th Dec '10 8:07:36 AM by Gilgameshkun

It's not a Dead Horse Trope. Numerous works still use "oh shit, his eyes just turned red" as a dangerous thing.

Well yeah, any eyes suddenly changing color can provoke a reaction. What I mean if someone's normally red eyes provoke reaction just for being red — authors can no longer rely on red eyes having inherent meaning. Eyes actively changing color to red may be a Discredited Trope to some degree. But normally red eyes being a necessary warning is very much a Dead Horse Trope, and may even have some Unfortunate Implications of how the audience is expected to prejudge characters by their superficial visual differences. If I met someone on the street with red eyes, they could be rare and exotic, but I'd find them fascinating, not spooky — I'd be curious what natural occurrence makes their irises refract color that way. That's how I felt the first time I saw natural yellow eyes on a human being (or on any creature that wasn't a housecat). Even my own eye color — Gray Eyes — have been rare in my surroundings for as long as I can remember, as I've never known anyone else face-to-face who has them.

edited 7th Dec '10 8:20:22 AM by Gilgameshkun