Series Glee Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics
 

LargoQuagmire
Topic
05:56:19 PM Jan 2nd 2012
I know this might be a bit presumptuous, but given that significant critical and fan backlash has occurred in both seasons two and three of Glee, would it be safe to assume that we should start a Dethroning Moment of Suck page for Glee? (This is coming from a fan of the show.)
marluxiakynaston
01:08:37 AM Jan 13th 2014
I'd like to see that, actually. I loved seasons 1 and 2, and my reaction to Season 3 was basically "Wait... what— what the hell is even happening?!"
AMMC
Topic
11:18:54 AM Sep 9th 2011
Would it be legitimate to add the trope 'Spotlight Stealing Squad' in regard to Blaine 'Warbler' Anderson and the warblers, who, despite being a guest star, got around 9 solos, second only to Rachel *the designated star of the glee club* who had 12? This is, of course, in comparison to the little solos that some other characters.
voodoochild
11:24:30 AM Sep 9th 2011
I think it's pretty valid. Blaine was a guest star with 9 solos, Tina is a regular, "main" character and got 2, barely.
InkyMcInkerson
Topic
04:03:32 AM Aug 17th 2011
Okay, this is getting a bit out of hand - as a non-fan of the series (I'm indifferent to the show, I don't hate it), I find it incredibly difficult to follow anything on this page - episodes are referred to by name, by number, by season and number, by words such as "the third episode of the third season" or something - not to mention there is a large abundance of Square Peg Round Trope, which I've tried to expunge but I'm just one troper. There needs to be a serious overhaul on the quality of this page before it's too late - non-explanatory examples, Natter, Square Peg Round Trope, removing the examples if they aren't actually in the series, all that jazz, needs to be removed.
Windsong12
Topic
12:41:41 AM Jun 8th 2011
Pretty sure Mean Character, Nice Actor only applies if it's in-universe. So should we root out the examples on the character sheets?
InkyMcInkerson
04:01:41 AM Aug 17th 2011
I'd be all for that.
Wexi99
Topic
06:13:44 PM May 25th 2011
Can we change/stop/tone down the blatant Kurt/Blaine favoritism, please? Some people just don't ship it and wish that TV Tropes could remain an unbiased place in which they aren't forced to read things they would otherwise intentionally avoid.

This also works the other way, to a lesser extent, but still: my OTP seems obviously hated and unwanted here. For fear of being hated further, I won't mention which pairing that is.

I don't see favoritism toward any other couple here, so why should this one be an exception?

I just wish everything could be fair.

I know "everyone ships Klaine" in these Tropers' minds, so this message will most likely be ignored, but if you bother to consider my feelings on the subject, I thank you.
Windsong12
12:44:05 AM Jun 8th 2011
Don't necessarily ship Klaine, but I don't get what's so "blatant" about it. Sure, all the "the entire LGBT world rejoiced" stuff could be rooted out as it's pretty obviously so exaggerated, but it's not so bad.
SparkyYoungUpstart
Topic
09:48:23 PM May 16th 2011
So apparently al the Kurt ships have their own actual ships. As in, you're not just a Kurtofsky shipper; you're on the Kurtofsky Pirate Ship. And there are several!

Klaine Train Kinn Dolphin Puckurt Centaur Kum Canoe Kurke Enterprise And the aforemtioned Kurtofsky Pirate Ship.

Is there a trope for this? Please tell me there is.
Nimmy
Topic
03:48:31 PM May 11th 2011
Does anyone else laugh uncontrollably whenever anyone but Rachel (who pronounces the choir's name as "New Dy-rections") says the name "New Directions"? If you didn't before, I may ruin your life with my next sentence, so I apologize in advance.

I never noticed it before, but when I was watching the regionals episode, I heard how much the name sounds like "Nude Erections," and I have never been able to go back. I laugh every time someone says it.
Windsong12
11:50:53 PM May 23rd 2011
edited by Windsong12
The Problem with Pen Island, only spoken. Mondegreen, only spoken. Lovely tropes, aren't they?

Chris Colfer lampshaded that in an interview (which I can't seem to find).
Windsong12
Topic
09:54:22 PM May 9th 2011
Wait, since when was the official spelling "Jessie" (aside from "Jessie's Girl", but it's a song)?
Nimmy
04:29:21 PM May 11th 2011
The song's title is "Jesse's Girl", and the spelling for a boy is usually "Jesse." Where does it say "Jessie?"
Windsong12
11:46:27 PM May 13th 2011
edited by Windsong12
Somebody presumably Ctrl+F'd all the pages and changed the spelling from "Jesse" to "Jessie" (the reason given was that it's the official spelling).

My guess is that it's a case of Spell My Name with an "S" as the Glee wiki, Wikipedia, creator's twitters, etc. list his name as Jesse St. James, but things such as the Behind the Glee videos and sneak peeks spell his name as "Jessie."

And the song title is in fact [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessie's_Girl Jessie's Girl]].
RTanker
Topic
07:29:33 AM May 5th 2011
I noticed this trope listed:
Real Life Writes The Plot: A future plot concerning Brittany being mistaken for a spy after Dianna Agron was mistaken for one.

I thought that was pretty interesting, so I looked it up, and found nothing in the press on any such thing. Can we get a source for this? Otherwise, I'm going to remove it.
TehLaser
09:37:41 AM Jun 6th 2011
There are still a bunch of orphaned references to this: "see below" and the like. Should they be deleted as well?
RTanker
11:56:28 PM Sep 26th 2011
Probably yes.
woolworker
Topic
05:21:13 PM May 1st 2011
Does anyone know to what extent Lea Michelle was aware of the Barbra-vention? 'Cos if she knew how that madness was gonna go down, her shocked reaction was some damned fine acting. However, I suspect a little enforced method acting going on here.
alcockell
Topic
01:36:10 PM Apr 23rd 2011
Anyone commented on the numerous shoutouts to Grease in series 2?

Xylophone sting on PA announcements by Sue Sylvester? In "Sexy" - Brittany's possible pregnancy being yelled out by Santana = Marty/Rizzo - "COMING THROUGH, COMING THROUGH, LADY WITH A BABY!!"

Gargoylesama
Topic
07:48:36 PM Feb 12th 2011
Curious if it would be a Continuity Nod when Brittany in an earlier episode asked Artie 'Can you feel your feet' when he said he was getting cold feet, then in Duet she said that for a while she thought he was a robot. As in the earlier episode not that he couldn't feel his feet because he was paralyzed, but because he was a robot.
20thcenturyvole
Topic
02:29:05 PM Feb 11th 2011
Why is 'unsubtle sex jokes' a reason to delete stuff from the Getting Crap Past the Radar section? I mean, I know YMMV on a few of these, but the one about Rachel's gag reflex or Brittany getting pantsed seem to fit the definition of that trope beautifully.
SparkyYoungUpstart
Topic
06:08:32 AM Jan 21st 2011
Should we move Ho Yay to it's own page? It's pretty big and will probably just keep getting bigger.
Ameyal
Topic
12:28:56 PM Dec 18th 2010
While I agree that Natter is bad and should be deleted on sight... what's wrong with adding VALID points of view that completely change the validity of the examples? Worst is that, while in other works pages the Natter are deleted, but their main "essence" so to speak is added in the example with a "YMMV" or "You also have to consider that" or something that expresses both points of view. Here is just deleted without a second though. Instead of "Deleting Natter" it comes more as "Only I am allowed to have an opinion/Onl my opinions are worth of this site"
Andrew
12:19:19 PM Dec 19th 2010
edited by Andrew
Natter does not become OK just because it's "valid." This is not a forum. It's not a chat room. It's not a place to discuss the show or argue about the show or debate popular takes on the show. That's not what we do.

If an example is wrong, delete it. If an example is of an iffy nature, re-write it so that it's accurate; do not add a bullet point disagreeing with the point, and do not try to get around the Natter prohibition by tacking on your disagreement at the end of the paragraph. If an example is pure YMMV, move it to the appropriate tab.
Ameyal
05:38:54 PM Dec 20th 2010
That's the point. If something is wrong or has multiple points of view, either put the whole thing in perspective or delete it completely. Deleting just one part while leaving others, as I already addressed, comes as "I think this one is right and everything else is wrong and must be deleted" instead of "I'm deleting Natter"
Andrew
12:10:51 PM Dec 21st 2010
I frankly don't care how it comes across. "Don't turn the page into a conversation" is one of the few rules we actually have, and if people can't be bothered to follow it, well, that's too bad. In short, when you (collective "you," in this case, not referring to you specifically) throw Natter on the page, you lose the moral high ground. You don't get to complain when someone deletes your edit.

If the Nattering individual can't put in the effort, don't expect the guy cleaning up after the rule breaker to do it for him. I try occasionally to re-write the entry, but it's exhausting just keeping this page free of Natter, let alone making sense of the insane Flame Wars the Glee fandom wages on a near-daily basis.

I delete Natter where I find it, whether it's "Kurt is totally in the wrong" or "Kurt is just misunderstood."
Sylar2
Topic
03:32:07 PM Dec 12th 2010
In the "Not Too Gay" trope, it says "Kurt has yet to receive a boyfriend or even verbal details on what people 'like him' would do."

Could someone explain the 'verbal details' part? Did Kurt mention this in an episode?
BlueDude2
Topic
08:39:28 AM Nov 22nd 2010
edited by BlueDude2
During Substitute there was a quickly said and quickly passed over line referring to Prop 8 and how they should "just outlaw divorce". Kind of witty, actually, though YMMV.

I was wondering where this would fall in the spectrum of tropes. It's sort of Anvilicious / An Aesop (though not really) meets Getting Crap Past the Radar or Getting Crap Past The Censor. Since it's only one line, maybe it's an Author trope?

On a side note, they live in Ohio and Prop 8 was a California proposition. Justified in that the entire debacle is a national reaching issue as a precedent for gay rights everywhere.
Glazed
Topic
12:35:10 AM Nov 21st 2010
edited by Glazed
Mind me asking if it's really good? I know I possibly shouldn't even ask due to the high chance someone a lot of people saying it rocks, but I guess I'm stubborn.

First of all, I hate musicals. I just can't stand them. I'm pretty sure it's nothing like and is much better than Highschool Musical, but still.

Second, it doesn't look like the type of show that I would like. I don't really want to watch it if it's...how do I put this...if it's just some stupid and sometimes offensive comedy, yet I don't want to watch it if it's like [[Degrassi Degrassi]]. Also, though it's a minor thing that shouldn't matter, but if it has any hot girls and they actually hook up with some dude, especially if it's a character I can't stand, I'm not sure if I would want to watch it. Don't ask why not, I just don't.

Should I really give it a try?
Luzerne
02:54:49 PM Nov 21st 2010
You won't like it.
Glazed
05:17:20 PM Nov 28th 2010
edited by Glazed
I didn't think so.

Actually...I just read some things on the fetish fuel page...creepy things...offensive things...pregnancy...hot asian perky goth...musical...definitely not gonna watch it now.
Antheia
11:15:58 AM Nov 30th 2010
I've watched most of the first season. There are offensive things in Glee? Where?
LoopyChew
12:46:34 AM Dec 1st 2010
In the "things that could be TAKEN as offensive" category is Sue Sylvester. I'm certain there are people who take the things she says as real.
cheeseypoofs
Topic
11:31:23 AM Nov 13th 2010
Let's be frank. The folder system on the just bugs me page is not working. It works great on the WMG page, but the just bugs me page is such a mess that I'd honestly rather just go with standard post-adding conventions (Latest at the bottom) than deal with that mess.
Anaheyla
Topic
10:30:03 PM Oct 17th 2010
Big Damn Villains: Sue. Just Sue.

Maybe it's just me, but I think that the entry could use a little padding. For starters, an example of when she did something that actually applied. I don't think her usual nastiness qualifies.
Antheia
04:48:53 AM Oct 18th 2010
X Just X examples always need more padding. Pulling the link until someone comes up with a concrete example; I can't think of anything.
Technic.Giraffe
Topic
10:13:41 PM Oct 12th 2010
Why was "With You I'm Born Again" so offensive and "rude"? I've looked it up and there doesn't seem to be anything too damning about it...
tricksterson
11:23:21 AM Oct 15th 2010
They were dressed as a priest and a nun from the top up.
76.193.164.2
Topic
02:58:25 AM Oct 7th 2010
What say to you guys about "Grilled Cheezus" as a Wham Episode? I want to know if it's just me or not. Favorite punch-in-the-gut episode yet.
BlueDude2
07:59:53 AM Oct 16th 2010
More like JumpingTheShark for me. Then again, following up Britney with Gaga with... three episodes and counting of forced musical numbers... Yeah, I'm only watching 'cause I can stream it online, but I don't think I'll buy season 2 on DVD. Maybe I'll get a couple albums for select singles or just select singles of the songs I want.
Moxy
Topic
09:29:43 PM Oct 6th 2010
edited by Moxy
Why is Beiste listed as the "Cool Old Lady" trope? She's not even 50 yet. It seems rather cruel to label her an "old lady" just because she's not a hot young thing.
Antheia
Topic
11:12:32 AM Oct 4th 2010
edited by Antheia
I pulled every Subjective or Audience Reaction Trope I could find, as those aren't supposed to be on work pages any more. Listing the pulled examples below:

Audience reactions

  • And the Fandom Rejoiced: The recent news that Darren Criss had bagged a role on Glee.
  • Base Breaker: Rachel, Finn, Will, Kurt, Puck and Mercedes are all divisive characters to some degree.
  • Die for Our Ship: Shockingly, this already exists for the upcoming character of Kurt's boyfriend.
  • Draco in Leather Pants: Puck is the most obvious example of this (he was already Mr. Fanservice even with just the first few episodes out, when he was nothing more than a bully), but the fandom of almost every character tends to ignore their vices. The exception is Sue, of course, who is a fan favorite because of her evilness.
  • Fanon: Somehow it became fanon that Rachel and Puck refer to each other as Berry and Noah... even though we can clearly see that he calls her Rachel and she calls him Puck aside from the episode where they dated.
  • Fan-Preferred Couple:
    • Pretty much Puck/anyone.
    • And anyone who hangs around the Glee forums knows there's a group of hardcore Quinn/Rachel fans out there.
    • Pretty much everyone is looking for Kurt to hook up with somebody soon. Much disappointment from the Kurt/Mike (Other Asian) and Puck/Kurt shippers with the news that the show was casting for a boyfriend for Kurt.
    • Fans have always heavily preferred Finn/Rachel to any pairing involving the two other than Rachel/Puck (and arguably, Finn/Kurt).
  • Hype Backlash: Considering the size and enthusiasm of the Glee fandom, this was inevitably going to happen after a while. However, it did take a longer time coming than one would expect.
  • Love It or Hate It:
    • While it's quite possible to be lukewarm about the show itself, most people agree that Kurt's performance of Defying Gravity was either a Crowning Moment of Heartwarming and Crowning Music of Awesome for him or a general butchering of the song. Kurt's voice in general. People generally either think his voice is shrill and annoying or that he has a great voice and amazing range.
    • Musicians in particular seem to either love this show to pieces or despise it.
    • Certain characters - Rachel, for example - seem to get this reaction from fans.

Subjectives

  • Crosses the Line Twice:
    • Almost anything Sue does or says; tripping the elderly school nurse down a flight of stairs and putting her into a coma is among the worst/best. Comedy-wise, the glee kids performing a ridiculously raunchy version of "Push It".
    • 2.02 "Britney/Brittany" tries for this with Jacob and far too many masturbation jokes but fails so that it just comes off as gross. One case where it would have worked as one or two jokes instead of overdoing to the point where his orgasming seems to have more screentime than the performers during the "Toxic" number.
  • Some Anvils Need to Be Dropped:
    • Kendra, Terri's evil sister, proclaims that she thinks vaccinations caused her three hellion sons to be born stupid and tells Terri to discourage Quinn from getting her baby vaccinated as well. A total Take That at the anti-vaccination camp!
    • The celibacy club scene, as well as the fact that their president, Quinn, ends up pregnant after she breaks her vow. Both very obvious Take Thats at the abstinence-until-marriage movement.
    • One episode treating people with disabilities differently because of it, from Sue Of all people.
    • Sue's campaign to divide the Glee club by winning over the minority students fails, but ultimately makes Will realize the Unfortunate Implications of his casting thus far, until three minutes later when Finn and Rachel are the leads in the episode's closing number. "Wheels," "Ballads," and "Hairography" have all featured Artie, Mercedes, and Tina heavily in the club's chorale numbers though, so this lesson may actually have been learned.
    • Will chewing out the rest of the club for how insensitive they can be toward Artie:

Will: I don't know if you guys really understand how much harder Artie had to work just to keep up.
Artie: Preach!

  • Suzie Pepper's speech to Rachel in the bathroom, and Will's speech to her later after she apologizes for her crush on him and how she acted about it, were probably partially intended for the real-life Rachels in the audience.
  • Bryan Ryan and Sue's argument over which should get more school funding has some Truth in Television. Both the arts and athletics can teach kids confidence and build skills in academics, and the athletics helps with physical fitness.
  • Using a Lady Gaga themed episode to teach tolerance of gays? You betcha.
  • The motivation for Principal Figgins's ban on goth clothing was either a clear Take That at the Twilight phenomenon or a shot at strict dress code policies. Your Mileage May Vary on how necessary it was that the anti-Twilight one be dropped, given the series' already quite rabid Hatedom.
  • Tear Jerker:
    • "Keep Holding On" during the finale of Throwdown. Quinn makes the whole thing shine, and we feel absolute pity for the girl we despised at the beginning of the season. Especially moving in that several of the characters themselves are moved to tears.
    • When Finn comes to Will after he learns Quinn is pregnant.
    • Will starting to cry when he sees his baby girl, especially since we in the audience know there isn't a baby since Terri is lying.
    • Happy tears when Kurt comes out to his dad and he says he's okay with it.
    • When Kurt decides to throw his audition for the solo in "Defying Gravity" to spare his father harassment for having a flamboyant gay son. Watch his face during his audition: Rachel merely looks determined, but Kurt looks heartbroken. He knows what he's putting his dad through, and he just can't do it. "I'm just saying that I love you more than I love being a star."
    • Sue reading Little Red Riding Hood to her mentally disabled sister.
    • Rachel crying when Will informs her that there's someone out there who will love her for who she is and for her faults.
    • Quinn's parents find out about the pregnancy, and proceed to throw her out.

Quinn: I needed my mom.

  • Chris Colfer's (aka Kurt's) "heartbroken" face is almost guaranteed to evoke this.
  • The glee kids finally getting enough confidence to pose for their yearbook photo... only for the jocks to completely deface it. In the same episode, a decidedly different type of Tear Jerker when Will discovers that Terri's been lying to him. Think about all the dramatic irony witnessed when Will is excited over becoming a father.
  • Everything involving Emma after sectionals in the fall finale. Ken dumped Emma at the altar because he was tired of watching her choose Will over him. Emma confesses her feelings to Will and admits that she was just settling for Ken. Emma declares that she's going to resign as the guidance counselor because it's too heartbreaking for her to see Will every day and she's ashamed of what she did to Ken. Emma starts crying. Then, later in the episode, to the backdrop of "My Life Would Suck Without You," Will runs after Emma and kisses her.
  • 01x16, "Home." Also known as, "How many times can the writers bring the viewers to tears in a single hour?"
  • "Total Eclipse of the Heart" in 01x17, particularly the end when the entire glee club walks out on Rachel.
  • Kurt singing "Rose's Turn," edited for his own purposes.
  • Artie's big moment in "Dream On". Later on, when he sings the last number, "Dream a Little Dream," wishing he could dance with Tina and knowing he never will. If you listen to the song he sounds kind of happy. One look at his face assures us he is not.
  • Shelby telling Jesse about how she became Rachel's birth mother, followed by her singing 'I Dreamed a Dream' alone in the car.
  • Perhaps more tear jerker-ish is Shelby and Rachel singing it together onstage in an Imagine Spot.
  • Puck singing to Quinn and asking to be there for the baby's birth, as well as naming her.
  • Burt Hummel's devotion to his son is heartwarmingly tear-inducing every single time it comes up, but particularly in 01x20 - his 'I thought you were different' line in the middle of that verbal spanking he gives Finn smacks of self-reproach. It's pretty clear that even if he was never a bigoted bully, he used to throw around thoughtless slurs himself and now that he knows better the guilt just KILLS him.
  • The entirety of "Journey". Finn loves Rachel. New Directions loses Regionals to Vocal Adrenaline. Sue shows some heart and gives them another year, despite the fact Figgins tries to kick them out. Sue VOTED for New Directions. Will loves Emma. Quinn has her baby, who gets adopted by Shelby. Not to mention every single piece of music that New Directions performs in the episode makes you want to cry.
  • The bit right before they sing "To Sir With Love" when Finn says he didn't have a father before glee club, and whether you want to say he's talking about Mr. Schue or about Mr. Hummel, it doesn't matter: neither would have happened without Glee.
  • The juxaposition of the birth of Beth with Vocal Adrenaline's performance of "Bohemian Rhapsody" (a song whose lyrics are told from the perspective of a person who's about to die) as the contrast of their lives and experiences.
  • The promotion alone for Glee's Season 2 Episode 3 "Grilled Cheesus" induced tears for some fans.
  • I Want To Hold Your Hand. Good God.
SparkyYoungUpstart
Topic
10:56:33 PM Sep 30th 2010
I think we should add quotes to the character pages for each character, but I'm not sure what specific quotes would best exemplify them.
MacPhisto
Topic
03:47:48 PM Sep 30th 2010
when does the first episode featuring Darren Criss premeire?
SparkyYoungUpstart
10:54:26 PM Sep 30th 2010
Somewhere it said that Blaine/Blair (whoever he is) appears in episode 6, which we have no info on yet plot wise.
Anaheyla
Topic
12:39:43 AM Sep 22nd 2010
A minor nitpick. Under Hey, It's That Guy! "ifs" is misspelled. I can't edit it myself because I am not able to edit this page(for reasons that were never really explained to me...) Also is Tina faking her stutter really spoiler-worthy?

In any event, whenever someone gets around to it, these are just a few changes I suggest. :)
99.189.254.94
03:41:00 PM Oct 20th 2010
Unless you were being really rude on the page and got banned, I think it's just a bug. Try editing the page again and see if you can do it this time.
Chwoka
Topic
01:33:54 PM Sep 2nd 2010
I hate Glee, I just don't understand the appeal.
tricksterson
09:13:34 AM Sep 7th 2010
That statement would be better put in the forum topic than here I think.
cheeseypoofs
Topic
04:44:24 PM Aug 25th 2010
OK, so people mentioned on the WMG that the new character is going to be conservative. Any sources on this?
geesuz
Topic
02:17:22 PM Aug 11th 2010
In the Informed Judaism section you have this - Quinn mentions in Episode 18 that Puck's mother won't let him eat pork. This, of course, runs contrary to the very episode the fact that Puck's a Jew is introduced. His mother tells him to date a Jewish girl as they eat Sweet and Sour Pork together, watching Schindler's List.

Mrs. Puckerman won't let Quinn eat bacon, nothing is said about Puck not being allowed to eat pork. Obviously since we already know she lets her son eat treyf/pork, I'd gather that she just doesn't like Quinn. It's a little joke basically

Also Puck is first mentioned as being Jewish in Throwdown, the episode just Prior to Mash-up. It isn't made a big deal of in general, but his name is a somewhat obvious clue.
WhimsicalCircles
Topic
06:34:01 PM Jun 19th 2010
I have to admit that I'm somewhat confused as to what precisely the second page quote and its caption are trying to get across. Is it suggesting that the fans are awful for liking show tunes, or that (making the quote from the perspective of the fans) they flame 'others' for liking show tunes, or is it something else? I'm admittedly a little unsure as to why it's there; it's a funny quote, but considering how it labels itself as "summing up the fans" it comes across as a little mean-spirited.
BonSequitur
09:11:19 PM Jun 19th 2010
It points out that Glee is show choir taken to Serious Business levels, and also that it's about making fun of how seriously it takes show choir.
WhimsicalCircles
09:52:36 PM Jun 19th 2010
Isn't that the first quote? I was talking about the second one.
Yoshi
07:27:32 PM Aug 29th 2010
My addenum of "describing the show" and "describing the fans" has been removed, so now I'm curious too.
SevenOfDiamonds
Topic
07:04:10 PM Jun 11th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
Can I argue that most of the stuff listed under "Deconstruction" doesn't really fit?

*Much of the show can be seen as a deconstruction of musicals but especially Episode 10 "Ballads" which seemed intent on showing how the classic "sing your feelings" trope of musicals could never work in real life. Kurt's advice for Finn to sing while thinking of "his" unborn daughter causes his mother to find out that Quinn is pregnant. Also, Kurt tells Finn to tell Quinn's parents through song about her pregnancy, resulting in a painfully awkward rendition of "You're Having My Baby." Finally, when Will is trying to shake Rachel's crush on him, Emma gives him the idea of letting her know through song that he's not available to her, resulting in a rendition of a mash-up of "Young Girl" and "Don't Stand So Close to Me..." which is so animated and sexy that it only makes Rachel (and Emma) swoon even more.

The songs in musicals? Are for the most part an artistic representation and not literally happening. "Singing your feelings" and making everything better is not a musical trope, so Glee cannot be deconstructing it. Glee plays the musical tropes pretty straight.

*Glee can also be read as something of a send-up of the similar-at-first-glance High School Musical, with Glee serving as a lesson on how the High School Musical scenario would play out in a real-life high school, where, at the end of the day, the popular kids don't care how great your performance at invitationals was glee kids are still geeks, and they're still going to get beaten up and shoved into lockers when they come back on Monday. Whole storylines are devoted to teen pregnancy, homophobia (or just homosexuals), drug abuse, and other things which are daily realities in many high schools but which are dusted under the rug in the kid-friendly Disney Channel vision of high school.

Glee is not a realistic deconstruction of musicals, playing out tropes how they would happen in real life. Glee isn't realistic at all. If anything it's more ridiculous than High School Musical. The sex, pregnancy, bullying, and other "edgy" elements of Glee aren't there to enhance the "realism". They are there to add soap opera dramatics which are then tossed aside, ignored, neglected, or forgotten Depending on the Writer and (with a few exceptions) never handled in any way resembling real life. And as many people have pointed out, not all Glee kids are geeks in real life (even within the show, where the majority of the club is jocks and cheerleaders) and the bullying on this show is not how it goes down in real high schools.

*In real life, makeovers aren't so miraculous.

The "makeover" was sabotage on Kurt's part and in no way meant as a deconstruction.

*Certain storylines can be seen as a send-up of or commentary on the After-School Special. The whole episode "Wheels" is like this, along with the celibacy club scene in "Showmance" (and subsequent revelation two episodes later that its president is pregnant), and the "Imagine" number with the deaf choir in "Hairography." (It's hard to tell if "Home" is this or is playing the trope straight.)

Those examples were played straight, not deconstructions at all. Glee does more Very Special Episodes than the Disney Channel nowadays.

*Episode 14 comes across as a major deconstruction of Dating Do Si Do, pointing out that you can't get over your ex immediately or automatically be ready for a relationship when the person you're interested in is available. Finn and Rachel, and Will and Emma fail right out of the gate, and Puck and Quinn are already having problems.

That was just keeping the main couples apart for drama. Tropes that play that trope straight usually do go into the details of getting over your ex and being ready for a relationship. Not a deconstruction.

*A subplot of Episode 15 deals with virginity. Losing it isn't all it's cracked up to be and sometimes, it's okay to say "No."

There's not even a trope here to deconstruct.

*Emma comes across as a modern day deconstruction of The Ingenue and why such a person can't exist. She's so pure and clean she's a mysophobe, she holds onto her chastity so much that she's a virgin way into her adult years, she's so kind that she's an Extreme Doormat, and she's so naive that she can't give functional advice to her students when she is a guidance counselor. Her trying to be a Wholesome Fifties Girl is really just an attempt to hide her major insecurities and nerousis.

She's a typical nice lady character with OCD.

*"Laryngitis" played with and deconstructed the idea of unusual shipping. The relationship has potential, but ultimately it won't work out because the characters are too different.

No, it's not. It was just a filler storyline.

*Rachel and Finn's relationship could be seen as a deconstruction of the whole 'popular guy and unpopular girl fall in love' genre. You can't expect it to be that easy dating someone from a different social circle with out some scorn from friends.

This didn't even happen. Finn didn't date Rachel long enough to get scorn from friends. And the entire trope played straight is about how the school reacts to it, so this wouldn't even fit if it happened.

Anyway, I think we're over-analyzing. You could still argue that it's playing tropes ironically, but...I'm not even sure about that.
FastEddie
03:33:28 PM Jun 12th 2010
Let's leave it in until some discussion has occurred.
Erda
08:37:30 PM Jun 12th 2010
edited by Erda
Most of the Deconstruction examples use language which implies that they are aware they are over-analyzing, such as "Glee can be read as..." and not "Glee definitely is..." They're not saying this is FOR SURE what the creators intend, but rather that these are the tropers' individual readings. I find them interesting and would prefer we keep them in.

I think the Deconstruction trope in particular lends itself to over-analysis, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. I've always thought that the fun you can have with over-analysis is the reason we have TV Tropes, what distinguishes it from The Other Wiki.
SevenOfDiamonds
04:03:45 AM Jun 13th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
Okay, I guess I could accept most of them under that label, but the After-School Special thing still absolutely does not fit because there hasn't even been so much as a wink wink on the show to make us think they're being anything but dead serious, and neither do the first two, because those aren't just overanalyzations, they're based on false ideas and false information. The first one is based on a complete lack of understanding in how musicals work, and the second is based on the idea that Glee is a realistic depiction of high school life. It's not so much the overanalyzing, but the fact that several of them do not even fit the definition of deconstruction if they were true.
74.97.180.112
08:00:53 PM Jun 13th 2010
Hey there. I wrote the first example, about the musical numbers. According to the wiki's definition of "deconstruction," it's about showing that staples of genres would be bad in real life. The presentation of the musical numbers is in fact deconstructive (by this definition) BECAUSE it abandons the Musical World Hypotheses and shows the numbers as if they existed exactly as they were portrayed. This leads to the problems outlined (awkwardness, fueling Rachel's crush, etc). I think it could use a rewrite, but I'm not convinced it needs to be deleted entirely.
SevenOfDiamonds
09:57:23 PM Jun 13th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
Okay, I guess that makes sense. I thought that it was saying that the songs in musicals are supposed to be happening within the "real world" of the musical, which is what a lot people who "don't get" musicals seem to believe.

I still feel the "realistic version of High School Musical" thing doesn't fit. It's Darker and Edgier HSM, but just as silly. In fact, wouldn't you say "Zac Efron stresses out about preparing for college" is more realistic than Tina convincing the principal she's a vampire, or either of the pregnancy storylines?

Glee is more entertaining than HSM, but it is not better written. Cheesy as it is, HSM has character consistency, continuity, and actual structure to the storylines, and in the end its exactly what it wants to be. Glee is...uneven to put it lightly. When it's good it's fantastic, but it has a lot of flaws that need to be worked out before it can really live up to its "High School Musical done right" label.

Also, there's just not enough substance for the "Popular guy dates unpopular girl" deconstruction, considering the entire storyline was told not shown and it was gone before it started.
Erda
11:49:07 PM Jun 13th 2010
edited by Erda
I noticed that you deleted all those without waiting for any discussion, which is rather concerning. As with someone else who deleted a bunch of examples he didn't like in another contentious section, I strongly suggest you look/wait around a bit more before deciding that your opinion is everyone's, or that the people adding these are just adding their particular isolated opinions. I, for one, think that the parts you deleted count under the site's definition of Deconstruction just as much as the ones you decided to leave in did.

I really think you need to spend more time on places where people discuss the show before you decide these are each only one person's whacked over-analysis of the show. There has been quite a debate across the Internet about whether the After School Special aspects are a straight playing of the trope or a deconstruction of the genre. Just because you take the former side doesn't mean that everyone does, and I think the wiki needs to acknowledge that debate. Likewise, I've read a lot of stuff comparing Glee to High School Musical and seeing the former as a more "realistic" deconstruction of the latter, which is what prompted me to add the Deconstruction example acknowledging that discussion. The fact that the latter had particular plotlines that were more true-to-life didn't undo the fact that it's giving us a high school where no one has sex, no one experiments with ANY drugs or alcohol, and where Hide Your Gays is in full effect. And those "real" plotlines are ones that Glee has given us too (most of the characters on the show are sophomores so they wouldn't be stressing too much about college yet, but there have been lines about hoping for scholarships, etc. I imagine there will be more of this in the coming seasons and Rachel, Finn et al. grow up.)

You may think Glee is silly and stupid and has terrible writing and is no better than HSM except that it's Darker and Edgier, but the mere fact that the show won a Golden Globe and a SAG award is evidence that there are plenty of people out there who disagree with you on that. Please keep that in mind when editing this wiki, which while not Wikipedia with its harsh NPV guidelines, isn't supposed to reflect just one side of a debate either.
SevenOfDiamonds
12:47:42 AM Jun 14th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
I'm sorry I was so hasty with the deletions, it just didn't seem like anyone was debating. 74.97.180.112 made good defense of theirs, but the other responses were just "It's my opinion!" and "A lot of people feel that way." rather than a rebuttal or even acknowledgment of the concerns. A lot of these are reading like "Episode 5 is a MAJOR deconstruction of bananas because there were bananas in it. Sometimes you make it into banana bread and sometimes you slip on the peel." It reminds me of the How Not To Write An Example page: "Deconstructed in Your Show: Your Show used this trope, but because it's Your Show, it's a deconstruction."

I have a problem with the "My show is edgier and more subversive than Your Show!" vibe on this page, especially when people break out the "It's ironic." defense because, however unintentional, that reads like "You're just too dumb to get it." It comes off as pretentious, especially since most of the attitude about everything this show is and is going to be was formed before the premiere of the second episode. This fandom moved really fast, and the early pilot and long hiatus did not help things.

I actually wasn't aware that the Very Special Episode episodes were considered a parody by anyone. I frequent Television Without Pity, the official Glee forums, IMDB, the After Elton recaps, and whatever other recaps I can find, and the majority opinion is that they're playing the Very Special Episode pretty straight. That part should at least be rewritten to say that there is some debate over whether it's a send up at all, because right now it just says "Home" is the only one that's even questionable.
74.97.180.112
06:22:41 PM Jun 15th 2010
While we're on the topic of deletions, I'm curious why you deleted the Beam Me Up, Scotty! on the subject of what Finn said to Kurt. Just reading the main Glee page will show you that people - intentionally or not - are getting what Finn said wrong. I agree with your assertion that it's just as insulting, but if neither is worse than the other, why do people insist on misquoting it? I plan to add it back unless I get a good reason otherwise.
SevenOfDiamonds
04:24:44 AM Jun 16th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
I won't protest if you add it back. I just thought it was another person trying to demonize Kurt, but I realize now that's not the case. There have been so many people twisting the story into "Depraved Homosexual preys on helpless teenage boy! Father boosts the homosexual agenda by taking the side of The Homosexual!" that it seemed like another entry saying "And Finn didn't even really do anything wrong at all!" It just seems like a lot of drama for a storyline that appears to be resolved and will most likely never be brought up again. There's also a lot of people saying that Finn is starving and homeless now, when Burt was probably just telling Finn he has to shape up before he can live there, not actually throwing him out permanently. It's really the writers' fault for the confusion. Like I said...uneven.
Erda
07:57:16 PM Jun 18th 2010
edited by Erda
Seven Of Diamonds - If you didn't add something I will add something about whether the Very Special Episode is a deconstruction or not, because I think there were disputes before "Home" (but "Home" is the one that seems to support the most the idea that they're playing it straight). I've seen a lot of discussion of that on the AV Club recaps, where the writer seems to see them as a deconstruction/parody but there's considerable debate about that.

On the other hand, re-reading some of them, I agree with you that the Finn/Rachel thing is not really a deconstruction, mostly because I haven't seen the show deal much with Finn losing his popularity over that. He lost his popularity for other reasons. IIRC that was just something Rachel accused him of because he was hesitant to date her (which seemed to me, just to suggest that Rachel was full of it, when the reason was obviously that he was dating someone else who he thought he had impregnanted) but in the two episodes where they were actually dating that part wasn't an issue. So unless someone disputes that I agree it should be taken out.

Also, not sure how the makeovers thing is supposed to be a deconstruction. The reason that makeover backfired was because Kurt misled Rachel about what Finn wanted. It wasn't necessarily a charge against makeovers in general.
SevenOfDiamonds
02:08:51 PM Jun 20th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
Yeah, that's why I removed them the first time. You're the only one who had a problem with those entries being removed.

Re: [Your response that you completely changed after the fact.] I'm really not anti-Glee. I wouldn't waste my time on it if it wasn't a good show. I'm just critiquing it. And as I clearly stated with many examples, I have visited plenty of Glee sites and I know the majority's opinions.

And no Glee does not win awards because it has good writing. It wins awards because it has universal appeal, funny jokes, a talented cast, good characters, occasional moments of great writing (Kurt and his dad for example), and most importantly fantastic music. Which is exactly why I watch the show in the first place. I think we're all in agreement there.

But the writing is still lacking in consistency, both external and internal. Every episode floods the forums with people fanwanking about some confusing plot point like "Why is Jesse so mad?" "Are Quinn and Puck going out or not?" "That's not what high school bullies are like" and "Mercedes' babydaddy speech made no sense what the hell?" "What are they supposed to do at regionals? Place? Show? What?" "The regionals rules make no sense! Sue shouldn't be allowed to judge!" In fact your AV Club site criticizes Glee for the same things, even going as far as calling it three shows in one Depending on the Writer. This is something that can be fixed, but it's a problem that's caused more critical viewers to stop watching the show.

And no, Glee is not realistic just because it has sex and drugs. I don't think HSM is realistic, I just think it's hypocritical to deride anything for being "unrealistic" while praising a show that featured one of the most ridiculous pregnancy plots ever written, alongside another fairly silly pregnancy plot! (Which is not a bad thing, it's just not realistic)

Also, your "Glee does 'real' topics like college" example does not hold up. When Glee did it, Finn was trying to win scholarships by dancing to single ladies to win a football game and seducing Rachel back into Glee club so that he could have money for the baby he sired in a hot tub that Quinn had told him she was giving up anyway. Zefron had it a lot easier.

I know people who want to prove they're grow up by spurning all "kiddie" things think Glee is the most edgiest, subversive, complex show on television and every episode Crosses the Line Twice with Refuge in Audacity (Omg! They made a joke about blowjobs!) but the truth is...plenty of those "kiddies"? Are also Glee fans. Some of them even see HSM as an ironic show (Homoerotic baseball dance? Bet On It? Kenny Ortega knows what he's doing...)
Erda
06:04:00 PM Jun 20th 2010
edited by Erda
Again, with the "real topics like college" thing - as I pointed out, pretty much all the characters whose age has been discussed are sophomores. Zac Efron was a senior in the third High School Musical movie which dealt with the college topic. Sophomores generally are not panicking about choosing colleges yet (and I went to a college-prep high school, and even most of my peers did not have that as a major concern in 10th grade), so I think we need to wait until the later seasons before we decide that the show doesn't address those topics. Besides, that is one topic. It's not like Glee never addresses any other issues that are realities for teenagers.

I know the writer of the AV Club has mentioned more than once that he sees Ryan Murphy's version of the show is one that's a parody or deconstruction of the After-School Special. And I don't see how the fact that the show is inconsistent negates the fact that it can be read as doing that some of the time. No one is claiming that Glee does this stuff in every episode, so your point doesn't really hold up. (Actually, there are probably a total of 3 tropes on this page which pop up every week, so if we're using that standard we have to delete the whole page.) Considering the Very Special Episode trope is usually something that's one-off rather than carried throughout an entire series, it doesn't make sense to expect Glee to play with that trope in every episode, either, or even to always play it the same way when it does.

With the High School Musical deconstruction stuff, your point doesn't really make sense about what the show is about, either, because it has less to do with the show itself than the perception of the show. The creators of Glee saw High School Musical that way from the way they've discussed the two shows in interviews. Yes, it's often Complaining about Shows You Don't Watch when people are so critical of HSM, but doesn't change the fact that people see it as an unrealistic, (literally) Disneyfied version of high school, and it misses a lot of things that Glee gets (even if Glee doesn't get things HSM does, but you're not being completely fair when you expect a show whose main characters are mostly younger high school students to go in depth about college admissions woes.) As for the idea that Glee isn't necessarily more "adult" than HSM because kids watch it - kids watch a lot of things which are not intended for kids, and adults watch a lot of stuff intended for younger people. Glee wasn't intended as a kids' show (more for teens and adults), though, while High School Musical was intended for people who are not yet in high school (e.g., what most people consider "kids").

As for your complaints that I'm the only person defending these examples, why did it only take one person in the previous examples to convince you that they needed to stay in, but somehow my perspective isn't enough? And that's ignoring the fact that you are the only one who is complaining about these examples. Deconstruction examples are always going to be subjective. My point is that deleting examples should require more than one person's input as well, and that my perspective is as valid as yours. If it's just you, then why not just add a Your Mileage May Vary bit to the example?

(And for the Golden Globes thing? Please. You really think there's some conspiracy among awards show voters to deliberately ignore lesser-known but excellent shows and reward the show that appeals most to the lowest common denominator? They pick the shows they think are the best, and yes, they generally tend to miss less-popular shows because they fly under their radar, but that doesn't necessarily mean they go for something they don't like because it's popular. Again - my point, you're missing it. I'm not saying your view is wrong. I'm saying that your view is not universal, and therefore rewriting the page to fit your particular analysis of the show is unfair and misleading. Besides, the whole idea that a work needs to prove its "seriousness" in order to merit analysis is something that anyone who truly understands deconstruction would find laughable.)
Erda
06:14:47 PM Jun 20th 2010
On another note, in terms of ideas that are deconstruction - I don't know if the virginity thing qualifies, either. The idea that it's okay to say "no" to sex is not exactly a rare one in media, when the characters in question are teenagers and especially when it's a teenage girl. So I'm not really sure what it's deconstructing. It could, arguably, deconstruct the notion that your first time is magical by showing just that during the "Like a Virgin" song, and then quickly revealing to us that that's not actually what's going on.
SevenOfDiamonds
07:09:20 PM Jun 20th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
I think you're seriously misunderstanding me here. I think Glee deserves the awards that it's gotten and I don't think it needs to be any more serious than it is. I don't want to see college applications portrayed in stark realism and I really don't want Glee to be anything like HSM. I do think the show's main flaw is its lack of consistency but that can be fixed, especially in a show that's only just finished its first season.

I'm not saying the show doesn't merit analysis. I have written analysis of the show. But people were taking tropes the show uses dead straight and claiming they're deconstructions, because deconstructions are "deep", and they were doing it to the pretentious tone of "my show is edgier than your show" that's been pervading this page since the pilot.

I don't like saying that Glee is better than HSM because it's "realistic" when it seems to me Glee is better than HSM because it's a crazy train on crack. But you have defended the example just fine, and I'm perfectly content to leave it. I don't want to take out any of the examples that people are attached to. I was just trying to explain my point in deleting it in the first place, and why I disagree with you. And I absolutely believe the Very Special Episode example needs a serious rewrite, but if I do it somebody's just going to revert it back.

I didn't make my first complaint clear enough. After this discussion was up for a while, I tried to only delete ones that there was no debate about. Nobody was defending the Rachel/Finn, virginity, and makeover ones, but you added them back in anyways and then said you agreed that they didn't actually fit. That was frustrating. But I don't have any problem with leaving in examples that you or anyone else are defending.

ETA: And I see you actually have revamped most of that section. I missed that on my watchlist, sorry. I'm still going to tweak them though.
SevenOfDiamonds
08:14:18 PM Jun 20th 2010
edited by SevenOfDiamonds
Okay, what's your problem 142.177.125.249? Seriously, there is absolutely no excuse for deleting my entry on Musical World Hypotheses. It's a quote from the creator of the show!
Erda
10:16:49 PM Jun 20th 2010
Sorry about the ones no one was defending which I added back in. I felt like with those, you didn't give someone a chance to defend them either, just like you didn't with mine (I didn't want to be a hypocrite, basically), and that's why I re-added them in. However, it's been a while since this has been up and no one has defended them, and you agreed with me about those so I thought it was okay to take them out. I just didn't want to do it too soon. Sorry if that was frustrating.
Yoshi
Topic
07:44:58 PM Jun 10th 2010
The Anvilicious section was long enough, and at the thought of a second season, I gave it it's own fancy new page. Here it is. I also have a link to it under the Anvilicious trope. I left the content unedited, with the exception of adding episode names, because even I was getting confused as to which theme went to which episode (though if you guys don't like this part, go ahead and change it back). If any good tropers would like to spruce up the new page, or somehow add it to the top bar (I have no idea how) feel free. And please don't revert it unless alot of other people complain.
jfpbookworm
08:50:31 PM Jun 10th 2010
Wait, we have a Theme namespace now?
Yoshi
08:33:15 AM Jun 11th 2010
We do now! Honestly "Theme" was just the first related word that came to mind...
Anaheyla
Topic
08:53:48 PM Jun 9th 2010
edited by Anaheyla
It seems the edit function for the page has been turned off so I'll just put this here.

Under the Too Good to Last entry is this sub-whasname:

  • And now Fox has asked for a third season already.

I had planned to edit that out and add it onto the main entry, something to this effect:

...their lesson and not only renewed Glee for a second and now ''third'' season but gave it priority over Idol next...

So if anyone capable of editing see this, I suggest this change. :P
hazzaboner
05:47:30 AM Jun 10th 2010
edited by hazzaboner
accidental post, ignore
Andrew
Topic
09:16:02 PM Jun 2nd 2010
The Anvilicious entry is getting absurdly long. Do we need to note the moral of every episode? Perhaps we can just write up language indicating that every episode contains a strongly emphasized aesop of some sort?
Erda
07:11:57 PM Jun 12th 2010
It's been given a new page.
piearty
Topic
12:03:28 PM May 12th 2010
I accidentally put a crowning music thing twice because I didn't see it was there. How do I get rid of it?!
Luzerne
01:45:45 PM May 12th 2010
Um, change it to something else? I don't think you can delete crowner posts once they're up.
piearty
07:17:48 PM May 18th 2010
Aw poo.
FastEddie
08:00:09 PM May 18th 2010
Yeah, just edit to "Double post" or something similar. It will sink down as it gets no or negative votes.
Redikolous
Topic
12:03:54 PM Mar 18th 2010
edited by Redikolous
Someone just deleted a lot of the Unfortunate Implications section. o.O

EDIT: Okay, since there was no reason given for the delete, and I've seen a lot of fandom and meta holds the same views, I'm restoring it. If there's a good reason to delete, please elaborate here. They've been up for months as well, so it looks pretty isolated.
johnnye
04:33:11 PM Mar 18th 2010
I noticed that, I assumed they'd moved it to Headscratchers. Couldn't find the exact text, but most of the same points are covered.
Redikolous
01:37:58 PM Mar 19th 2010
I think Headscratchers is more for plot details and little holes. A lot of the Unfortunate Implications deleted were discussed a lot in reviews, blogs, meta, etc., so I think it belongs.
Jonn
08:00:36 PM Apr 13th 2010
edited by Jonn
What are the "implications" in having an able-bodied actor play a disabled character? Tom Hanks faked mental disability and won an Oscar, Jamie Foxx played a blind musician and won an oscar, Sean Penn played a mentally retarded guy and—okay, "you never go full retard", but the point is that able-bodied people can play impaired people. It'd probably be a lot harder to cast for a disabled actor, much less one with musical talent, than it would be to cast an actor with musical talent and have him fake disability.

I'm fairly sure Rachel's speech about abstinence was BS in the first place. Even people who don't believe in abstinence found it off-putting, and she probably made it up on the spot to get Finn anyway.

Oh, and Puck faking disability to get a pot discount? That's not so much "unfortunate" as it is "entirely in-character".
Redikolous
06:34:08 AM Apr 14th 2010
It's called crip-drag. (There's actually a trope being worked on.) I actually googled the term, and most of the the top results involve Glee, because it's one of the biggest occurrences on television in recent years. First Google Result.

I wasn't aware that the abstinence speech was in the the Implications section. Did see it under Soapbox Sadie.

And I think the bit about Puck was a larger part about who Glee views disabilities.
Jonn
07:22:21 PM Apr 14th 2010
This reminds me of Las Vegas, which has Mitch, a quadriplegic man played by a quadriplegic actor. As one of the few such actors in Hollywood, you'll see him a lot, much like you'll see Mickey from Seinfeld or Peter Dinklage a lot if a show or film needs a little person.

On the other hand, the post doesn't seem too concerned with the question of what happens if a able-bodied actor is just plain better for the part than a disabled actor, though I don't imagine such a situation comes up often.
Redikolous
08:05:25 PM Apr 16th 2010
edited by piearty
TBH, Glee does bring that question up. Kevin McHale, the guy who plays Artie, has the best male voice in the younger cast, was in a boy band, and is the best dancer according to the rest of the cast. And there has been a few handicapped actors who said that Kevin McHale deserved the part. However, it's still a question and an implication. :)
Erda
12:45:57 AM May 20th 2010
edited by Erda
Someone deleted it again, so I re-added it.

Their faux-justification for it was "axe-grinding," but yeah - that's pretty insulting to people who think the things outlined in the Unfortunate Implications are legitimate concerns. Like disabled people or people who have survived domestic violence (since the thing about Will's actions toward Terri in Episode 12 was also deleted under the "axe-grinding" excuse).

Besides, the actual An Axe to Grind trope has nothing to do with that, and there's no TV Trope policy against that like there is with Natter - IIRC that's kind of the whole point of the Unfortunate Implications section, to read more into a show than is probably there.

I might add something in there telling people to stop deleting stuff out of that section unless you have a good reason besides "People are being too critical!" or "They're looking for stuff to hate!" or "Don't be so PC!" Yeah, um, if you have a problem with people doing that, you probably shouldn't be editing TV Tropes.
Anaheyla
02:00:48 AM May 21st 2010
edited by Anaheyla
Not that I disagree, but there's a difference between those things and the normal operations of TV Tropes. Reference Avatar which has an entire section dedicated to whining about how it's a shameless ripoff of every movie ever made for no reason whatsoever.
johnnye
01:15:48 PM May 21st 2010
edited by johnnye
"Besides, the actual An Axe To Grind trope has nothing to do with that"

Huh? that trope's name is a pun - "having an axe to grind" usually means someone is a Single-Issue Wonk.
Erda
09:57:07 PM May 26th 2010
@johnnye: I meant it wasn't related in that he referenced "axe-grinding" as though it's a trope that TV Tropes doesn't allow in articles, and failed to realize that not only do we not have a policy against that, but the trope he's referring to isn't even about that. I get that it's a pun.

@Anaheyla: I don't follow the connection. Complaining that a show isn't very respectful in its portrayal of disabilities or domestic violence is completely the sort of thing for which the Unfortunate Implications section is intended. Bitching about how something rips off other shows/movies doesn't, because the creator being unoriginal doesn't necessarily involve the Aesop.
Tokuiten
12:58:22 AM Jun 2nd 2010
I'm sorry, but making up reasons to accuse the show of supporting domestic violence isn't cool. At all.

The whole section needs to go.
FastEddie
02:46:55 AM Jun 2nd 2010
They are not accusations. They are observed oversights. Nothing in them is readable as an attack on the production staff in any way.
Erda
02:25:19 AM Jun 4th 2010
edited by Erda
Fast Eddie - Exactly. You can read problematic messages into a show/book/etc. without necessarily claiming that that's what the creator intended. Hell, in modern literary analysis/media studies the prevalent notion (in many academic circles, at least) is that the intentions of the author are essentially irrelevant; anything the audience can take out of it is valid. (See Death of the Author) From what I understand, the idea of Unfortunate Implications is that they're about how the audience perceives the show and not necessarily about the creators' intended Aesop. (Actually, direct quote from the Death of the Author page - "Also note that, while this wiki is generally critical of the concept (we do, after all, use the phrase 'Word Of God' to indicate what the author says), it is allowed in some subjects, and is actually encouraged in regard to Unfortunate Implications.") Values Dissonance and Family-Unfriendly Aesop are the tropes you use when the author's intended message is problematic, so if people wanted to make accusations they probably would have put them there.

I don't think anyone is saying that the creators of Glee are supporting domestic violence because Will's actions toward Terri in Episode 12 could arguably be considered DV. If there's any ill will toward the creators, it's at what is perceived as an oversight, not an intentional attack. And even if Will's actions were intended to seem abusive or at least ambiguous: Anyone who watches Glee regularly knows the show has a very Gray and Gray Morality - pretty much everyone on the show has been an asshole at some point by now, and Will has done other things that are more clear-cut (example: his behavior toward Sue in the more recent episode) which suggest he's hardly a role model. So I fail to see how pointing out the Unfortunate Implications of his actions in that episode is accusing Ryan Murphy et al. of promoting domestic violence. The hostility from Tokuiten toward the Unfortunate Implications section really just sounds like Complaining about Complaining to me.
Erda
12:10:43 PM Jun 4th 2010
edited by Erda
Tokuiten - I guess I just don't understand why these discussions bother you so much. If you'd rather not look at the problematic parts of the show, that's fine, but that doesn't mean the rest of us don't have a right to discuss it. You can choose not to participate in these discussions without feeling the need to censor the page by shutting those discussions down.

I re-added the warning at the beginning of the Unfortunate Implications but re-phrased it. I still think that it's ridiculous to claim that because you have the privilege of not having to deal with these issues you're free of bias - as opposed to having your own bias - but I think the issue is more that we need to clarify what this section is for because some people seem to be getting confused.
74.97.180.112
07:36:45 PM Jun 15th 2010
Does anyone see the value of the Unfortunate Implications example RE: working retail? Just from my own experience working my way through school, I'd be more offended by a show representing retail work as anything but awful; I actually think that Glee nailed it, and I'd think more retail workers would identify with the portrayal than would be offended.
Erda
02:00:12 PM Jun 20th 2010
I agree that I don't really understand that the "working retail" example. Maybe this is just my personal take on it, but I thought it was clear that the use of "Loser" was less about calling them losers and more saying that they all feel like "losers" in that job. Also, one of the people joining in is Sandy, who is a customer rather than an employee.
cheeseypoofs
04:32:33 PM Aug 11th 2010
What I don't understand is why the whole example about Rachel talking to Emma about her crush on Finn is on there. It's not that she needs a mom, probably. It's that she needs someone who isn't a parent. Maybe it's just me, but I don't talk to my parents about my crushes, so that's probably why Rachel went to Emma.
Erda
08:06:57 PM Aug 24th 2010
edited by Erda
It's because Emma specifically says to Rachel that she should talk to her mom about this, and Rachel's response is "I have two gay dads." If the show had Averted mentioning her fathers' homosexuality I would see your point, but the fact that of the matter is the dialogue directly implies that the reason Rachel needs to talk to Emma is because she doesn't have a female parent. This isn't helped by later in the season when Rachel goes to Shelby for help with her Lady Gaga outfit after her dads mess it up, saying "I need a mom."
fantinejavert
12:17:38 AM Aug 18th 2011
Well...they didn't run into the unfortunate implication of making one of Rachel's dads "the woman" and basically writing a stereotypical straight relationship with two guys? Because then I suppose people would have had a problem with that, too, haha. I do agree with you, though.
Collapse/Expand Topics