Main Authors Saving Throw Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

06:33:32 AM Sep 25th 2015
If I understand correctly, this trope is about an author (or authors) changing something, with the intention of keeping it that way, and then it turns out to be an extremely unpopular change, and due to fan backlash the author recants and changes it back. It is not so much about the author having planned the retcon all along, ie. the change being intentionally temporary all along.

Some of the examples given in the main page do not seem to conform to this (for example, the Naruto example sounds a lot like it was planned to be like that from the start of the arc, rather than it being a haphazard solution in response to fandom backlash. Of course I don't know if this is the case, but it just sounds heavily like it.)

Of course one could also argue that the trope works either way. The author made a "saving throw" in the eyes of his or her fans, even if it was planned all along. (The story could have gone to the unpopular direction, but the author never even intended for it to go there, and was only temporarily stirring the water a bit. The effect of the "saving throw" when things go back is still effectively the same.)
07:42:31 AM Sep 25th 2015
That's because the trope is not exclusive to that format. The trope is, basically, Aspect X of a work makes fans mad; Aspect Y is introduced and either A. adds context that justifies X in a satisfactory way; B. overwrites X and removes it as a factor; or C. acts in suitable contrast to X.

It doesn't matter whether Aspect X was a change to something previous or not.
03:02:32 PM Oct 13th 2014
edited by
Do you have to have confirmation that this is what the creator intended or is it kind of a Wild Mass Guessing thing? I have a few possible examples but I'm not sure if they were intentional.

The early Tintin books were widely considered to be racist. In one of the last books, Gypsies (one of the most maligned ethnic groups in Europe who also have a reputation for stealing) are accused of theft. Tintin believes in their innocence and is eventually proven right. It seemed like the creator was delibrately being as unracist as he could to apologize for his previous works.

An early book in the Alice Series has a girl falsely accuse a teacher of sexual harrasment. A later book has another girl actually be sexually harrased by a teacher. I wonder if the author was worried that she was sending the message that girls who claim they are sexually assaulted are lying so she used the second example to counteract it.

In Student Bodies Romeo has to ask his friend Cody's permission before dating Cody's ex-girlfriend Emily. When the girls find out about it they think it's the stupidest thing they've ever heard. Cody even dates Emily's friend Grace without any problems. I've heard complains that the show made it seem like that was only a guy thing. Later in the show, Cody falls for his girlfriend's friend and has to find a way to get around the "rules" so he can be with her.
02:26:46 AM Jul 15th 2012
Does this count?
09:11:35 AM Mar 6th 2011
A possible better example for Sonic the Hedgehog is an arc that sums up several (admittedly minor) issues with Tails' actions, relationship with the other characters, and overall attitude by claiming that for the past several months the real Tails was being held hostage by Mammoth Mogul (in his god-like Turbo mode to boot) and the one that we've seen was a clone created by Mogul's Chaos energy. The whole thing felt shoddy (the entire thing was explained and resolved in one issue; Sonic and Fake Tails wait for Mogul to explain everything then beat him in less than a page) and was never hinted at before or mentioned again
10:05:56 PM Jan 10th 2011
Oftentimes, Michael Scott is a bumbling idiot but when things have really gotten serious at episode's end, he often has come through and we see that a trait like loyalty or perseverance really comes through

Is this Office example really valid? I'm not entirely sure I understand what it's talking about, but I suspect that the spirit of the trope is being misunderstood here. This trope seems to be about backpedaling in the face of a regrettable error, while this example seems to be more about a character having multiple facets.
Collapse/Expand Topics