Markup View

Author: Aielyn

Mar 13th 2012 at 9:43:06 PM

Wow, I'm starting to think that none of you are even ''reading'' what I say.

I never said that all tropes should be split into subtropes. I said that tropes that are so common that one would use the term "too common" should be split into subtropes, with the main trope becoming a supertrope for those cases. I used King Zeal's example to demonstrate the process of splitting into subtropes for a situation where something is "too common", and to demonstrate the point that this is really only possible when it ''isn't'' PSOC.

Think of it as a categorisation of possible tropes into four groups:

* Group 1 - Those that are defined fairly narrowly, so that they're not exceptionally common.
* Group 2 - Those that are OmnipresentTropes, because they're essentially necessary or inherent to human perceptions.
* Group 3 - Those that aren't tropes, because PeopleSitOnChairs.
* Group 4 - Those that are broad and common, and need to be refined into a set of tropes, for which the broad and common one is a supertrope.

Group 1 contains all the "regular" tropes - for instance, IndyPloy. Group 2 are, obviously, the OmnipresentTropes. Group 3 aren't tropes at all, and should be discarded. Then there's Group 4.

Using King Zeal's example again, let me show you why it doesn't fit into any of the other three groups. It has a purpose, so it's not in Group 3 (note: this isn't "Humans walk on two legs, animals four", this is "Walking on two legs makes a character more human/humanised"). It's definitely an extremely broad trope with so many examples that it would be infeasible to list them all against the trope itself, so it's not in Group 1.

But it's also not Omnipresent - consider {{Bambi}}, for instance. Bambi is definitely strongly humanised in the movie, but never walks on two legs. Another example is most of the young dinosaurs in TheLandBeforeTime. Then there's TheLionKing and {{Babe}}. And a case of the reverse effect can be seen in, for instance, TheHulk. It is vastly more common for two legs to be used for humanisation, etc... but there are also quite a few well-known exceptions, meaning there are almost certainly many more lesser-known ones. So it's definitely not Omnipresent.

That puts it squarely into Group 4. And as I pointed out, I can rapidly list off distinct categories within the trope - Using four legs to represent when the character is being bestial, animals retaining four-leggedness even when turned into something else (including when turned human), scavenger humans (who have basically been dehumanised) scamper on all-fours, two-legged animals are given more human qualities, animals impersonating people go to two legs (think ScoobyDoo), and evolution tends towards fewer legs (in preference towards arms instead). Each of these is distinct, and worthy of a trope of its own. Trying to treat the main trope as a singular case would fail to pick up all of these different variations.

And I assert, once again, that if the term "too common" can be used at all, and it's not PSOC or Omnipresent, then it ''almost certainly'' (there is potential for the occasional exception) should be separated into subtropes.

But all of this is sidebar to my main point - making a PredefinedMessage to explain a PredefinedMessage is nonsensical. Fix up the message that is confusing people, don't make an extra one to explain it. Just tell the person to actually ''read'' PeopleSitOnChairs, with emphasis on the fact that it doesn't mean what they think it means. How to actually handle "Too Common" tropes is a separate issue to this one.