10:30:58 PM Feb 14th 2016
edited by BURGINABC
edited by BURGINABC
This is currently classified as a YMMV item, but its description is still written as though it were considered a trope. A) It directly refers to it as a a trope. B) It refers to ways in which it can be played with, such as Deconstructing it C) It has a pothole to Tropes Are Tools in it. Should something be done about this?
06:45:40 PM Jul 17th 2014
Someone should add that "Many people who repress emotion displaying a lack of angst for long periods of time will still have all that angst buried somewhere inside ready to explode. This is why the straw can break the camels back."
02:39:38 PM Dec 5th 2012
I've removed this example:
07:20:05 AM Oct 21st 2010
About the page picture, most of it is perfectly readable, except for the second-to-last panel. Can anyone explain what it says, or possibly fix the image to make it easier to see?
08:34:43 PM Oct 7th 2010
Shouldn't it be "Angst? What Angst?" Or even just a comma. I had to read a bit before I understood the title.
04:49:19 PM Oct 4th 2010
Why is this marked subjective? It's not; a character has no angst when they should. I mean, I understand why the other end of the scale is subjective, but why this one?
11:08:06 AM Nov 1st 2011
Maybe the moments on when one should angst and when one shouldn't is subjective? I don't get it either!
05:52:30 AM Jun 5th 2012
Seems pretty subjective to me. Where is the line between caring too much and not enough? Plus if you're already suffering from hype aversion you're more likely to inflate minor incidents of this trope (and Wangst) to be a bigger deal than they are.
06:45:59 PM Nov 30th 2013
I don't know. It just seems to be more of an actual emotional state (the character may have too much of an iron will and optimistic outlook to not give in). It doesn't mean they don't feel any angst; they may just choose to focus on the here and now, since thinking too much about the pain would bring their spirits down.