Markup View

Author: Huo

Jun 17th 2012 at 10:54:37 PM

1) Once again, it is both. Just because you fail to get it doesn't mean it isn't. In fact not being able to make heads nor tails of either (whatever either is since you insist on it not being a trope) should be the first sign to yourself that maybe your judgement that it is not a trope is wrong because you already admit you don't know what the hell this is.

Once again: A little bit less of me vs. you attitude and more "help improve this article" would have gone a long way of solving this misconception so that I don't have to spell it out.

2) Observation leads to a reaction.

Example:

The actress who played Serena Southerlyn on Law and Order observed that the partner to Jack McCoy tends to act like his lover. Her observation led her to changing the element of fiction by portraying her character as a lesbian without the notice of the producers, writers, directors, staff memebrs. Later on they caught on and suddenly before she was fired, she was given a dialogue that suddenly made her blurt out that she was a lesbian.

Does it really need to be spelled out this way to make sense?

I'm not saying you're dumb but give yourself a little bit of credit here. An observation about fiction can't lead to a change in the element of fiction? The point of any element begins with an observation to begin with. No one suddenly wakes up and declares, "this is an element of fiction". Especially not with tropes.

The issue is when an observation stays as an observation and this is less of a problem for this than the other True Art is... tropes because this is a double attribute adjective where as the others as singular attribute adjectives that can easily be interpreted as Art is Angsty rather than True Art is Angsty and get away with it. You can't do it with this. If you try to paint it as True Art is Freaky. It won't make sense for it to be predictable. Paint it as True Art becomes Predictable doesn't make it fit the freaky attribute. I's a trope where you can't cheat on the vagueness that is True Art.

Not only this, how is it a thesis? The actual article isn't lengthy. It's when you have to treat the replier like a toddler and add simple truths like "See Little Timmy? When you observed something then there might just be a good chance that you'd do something different based on that observation. Just remember that when you do, it's no longer just an observation, it's an element of what you did."

I'd be less harsh towards you if your attempt to paint this as a mere article to introduce complaints or "literary criticism" wasn't so obvious and contradictory. Worse, since when should TV Tropes stoop less to being a site full of tropes that literary criticism sites shouldn't be proud of? What manner of user inflicted flanderization are you trying to pass off here where a trope that is notable for a literary criticism site is suddenly "too good" for TV Tropes?