TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Trope Description Improvement Drive

Go To

What it says in the title. EDIT: Link to auxiliary sandbox page

Some trope descriptions suffer from problems. Some possible ones:

  1. Attention Deficit... Ooh, Shiny!. A paragraph starts explaining element X of the trope, then it wanders off to explain element Y. Two paragraphs after that we're back at element X again. Nary a conjunction is in sight.
  2. Too long. Stuff that should go in analysis, or maybe in another trope, or maybe nowhere, going in the main space. Too much scrolling required before you can get to the examples.
  3. Fan Myopia. Some "this is how it happens in WRESTLING!" dissertation is taking up half of the page on a trope about white t-shirts. We already have a thread on that one - discussion about the general phenomenon goes there, specific candidates to deal with go here.
  4. General lack of balance and order. Something is emphasized at the expense of the other aspects of the trope, even though it has no right to be. Consequences of the trope come first, then related tropes, then a mention of the Trope Codifier, then common scenarios where it comes into play...
  5. Failure to answer the fundamental question up front: What is this trope? Not what it "might" be or what can "possibly" happen - what is it?
  6. Not enough meat. Juicy stuff is missing, like: When is the trope likely to turn up? Why would an author use it? In what ways does the audience often react? Which tropes are related to it and how?
  7. Spelling and grammar issues.
  8. The first line which makes honest-to-god sense is below the fold. e.g. Example as a Thesis that makes you go "huh?" instead of "ooooh".
  9. Bad Writing. Purple Prose, pitching the trope, Wanton Cruelty to the Common Comma.
  10. Egregiously Fan-Myopic quote.
  11. Jaywalking.

Bring up trope pages here so we can work on them. If no one does in a while, I'll try to dig something up.

edited 22nd Sep '11 10:48:59 AM by TripleElation

MyFinalEdits Delete message from Parts Unknown (Spin-off Series) Relationship Status: Cast away
Delete message
#6076: Aug 12th 2025 at 5:48:30 PM

I support the suggested revision as well.

135 -> 180 -> 273 -> 191 -> 188 -> 230 -> 300 -> 311
Malady (X-Troper)
#6077: Aug 12th 2025 at 6:28:21 PM

Me 3

Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Nen_desharu Nintendo Fanatic Extraordinaire from Greater Smash Bros. Universe or Toronto Since: Aug, 2020 Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Nintendo Fanatic Extraordinaire
#6078: Aug 12th 2025 at 6:33:27 PM

I concur.

Kirby is awesome.
Theriocephalus Amateur Veteran from gimme a map and a moment and I can tell you Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: I made a point to burn all of the photographs
Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6080: Aug 14th 2025 at 8:54:55 PM

So, a while ago, Fashionable Evil was brought to the Trope Repair Shop because it's not thriving and has a rather nebulous description. The mods rejected the thread on the basis that it can be solved by crosswicking, which is true. However, the misleading description is still an issue, because it doesn't really explain anything about why a creator might want to dress their villains fashionably; instead, it rambles incoherently about the trope's relation with others.

Since it's just improving the description, I don't believe this needs the TRS (I'll croswick the trope once this is cleared up), so here's my proposal:

    New Description 

The fashionable villain is more than a well-dressed antagonist; they are a walking cipher for cultural anxieties about power, identity, and order. Their clothes can signal forbidden ambition, mark them as an outsider, or seduce suggestible characters into complicity. Though fabrics, colors, and styles differ, the impulse to wrap danger in beauty is nearly universal. As global media continues to blend costume traditions, modern villains may wear a patchwork of signals—each piece familiar to someone, yet the whole unsettling to everyone.

Take Sumptuary Laws, for example. Historically, clothing has not merely been a personal choice but a regulated social marker. For royalty and nobility, expensive materials are readily linked with ruling-class privilege and, thus, a visible reminder of their exploitative governance. When subverted, it signals a disdain for preordained social hierarchies or an intent to usurp rightful rulers.

Ming China restricted the imperial yellow to the emperor and his household. In Tokugawa Japan, merchants were legally barred from wearing luxurious silks, yet kabuki villains flaunted such fabrics as a mark of their defiance and corruption. Gold and silver threading were only applied to the garments of religious figures and royalty in the Inca empire due to each metal's respective association with the Killa and the Inti. Post-colonial folktales paint Spaniards as having stolen those precious metals for their own rings and jewels as unrepentant thieves. Malicious or self-absorbed kings in Medieval Europe might be more preoccupied with furnishing their wardrobes with ermine, scarlet, or ornate armor than with alleviating famine.

Across cultures, villains weaponize elegance differently depending on gender. The Vamp, scheming and cunning, dresses herself in silk brocade or velvet to further weaponize her womanly charms. The Dandy, dashingly donning expensive suits with intricate patterns, uses refinement and wit to mask manipulation. Or it can be used to disrupt gender expectations. Male villains exaggerate femininity to an unsettling effect. Layered, gender-ambiguous costumes signal supernatural status, creating an otherworldly menace. This rings truer the more heteronormative-conforming and strict a society is.

Costume can also mark villains as outsiders; when particularly ornate, exotic/foreign outfits stick like sore thumbs against the local fashion standards. In Qing-era dramas, Manchu antagonists stand apart from Han protagonists through dress. Colonial-era works often exoticized non-Western attire to signal danger or moral difference. Conversely, postcolonial African cinema sometimes casts the corrupt elite in Western suits, contrasting them with virtuous characters in traditional dress. Because of this, costuming cues do not always travel well, especially when people migrate. What is a sign of sophistication in one culture can be the evil minority's hallmark in another.

My main focus was to explore the ubiquity of the trope across cultures, even when what the clothes are made of signifies different things. So, thoughts?

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#6081: Aug 15th 2025 at 1:56:05 AM

Hmm. Bit long (alas, Real Life examples for villain tropes are not allowed, if I'm not mistaken, so - no idea how to solve this) and I'm not sure about the social marker thing. But I'm no historian, so find one to consult (sumptuary laws were needed, far as I know, because poor people went by the "get into debt but look good" rule, which is socially destructive in the long term). We have an entire Villainous Fashion Sense index, though, so I'm not sure whether a separate trope isn't doubling something.

Then again, compared to the original, this is a huge improvement. It's informative and discusses things, and - while wordy - it's clear.

DoktorvonEurotrash Lex et Veritas from Not a place of honour (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#6082: Aug 15th 2025 at 10:34:32 AM

[up][up]I feel the second and third paragraph could be trimmed to alleviate the wordiness, since the "meat" of the trope is in the other paragraphs. But all over, it's good: well-written and in-depth.

That said (and this isn't a knock on you at all), this is essentially a new definition of the trope, taking its cue from the name and ignoring the current description. But hell, if that's what it takes (since the TRS was shut down without action), I'll take it. What you have here is definitely a workable trope.

EDIT: I do see that the new definition is also based on the examples. Wasn't meaning to imply anything else.

Edited by DoktorvonEurotrash on Aug 15th 2025 at 12:52:27 PM

Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6083: Aug 15th 2025 at 10:59:58 AM

I think the TRS was shut down because it went straight to cutting the trope, which is an extreme solution that the mods no longer like. But, anyway, I'm basing the proposed description not only on the trope's title but also on what the examples (both on- and off-page) seem to suggest.

I'll try to trim down the second and third paragraphs. I'll try to reduce the number of examples provided. I'll also check my terminology (sumptuary laws and social marker). That said, I don't believe I added any Real Life example? I mean, the cross-cultural examples I gave have two parts—1) the culture's high fashion and what it means, and 2) how that is used in fictional stories (folktales are included here) in regard to villains.

Edit: About that index, well, it doesn't allow examples and also includes villains dressing garishly. This would be more like the Super-Trope to tropes like Shabby Heroes, Well-Dressed Villains and Man of Wealth and Taste). So, it wouldn't be duplicating anything, I believe.

Thanks for the input.

[down]That's why I said "straight to cutting".

Edited by Asterlix on Aug 17th 2025 at 4:54:36 AM

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
WarJay77 It's NaNo, Bay-beeee! (8,356/50,000) from My Writing Cave (Troper Knight) Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
It's NaNo, Bay-beeee! (8,356/50,000)
#6084: Aug 15th 2025 at 11:15:24 AM

I believe it was actually because a trope "not thriving" isn't seen as grounds to cut it; salvage attempts should be made if the only issue is "no wicks". Other tropes have been cut recently.

Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall
Reymma RJ Savoy from Edinburgh Since: Feb, 2015 Relationship Status: Wanna dance with somebody
RJ Savoy
#6085: Aug 15th 2025 at 3:27:37 PM

I feel it goes on too long about sumptuary laws. On thing to remember is that these laws were temporary things, emergency measures that usually wound up unenforceable within a generation. The norm was that the nobility dressed better because they could afford it more than anyone else, and only when the merchant class was surpassing them or fine clothes suddenly became more affordable did they push through these. They are more telling of what used to be a privilege of the upper class at any one time.

(Also I don't think the Emperor having exclusive colours is considered a sumptuary law, that's more like a royal family's coat of arms.)

Stories don't tell us monsters exist; we knew that already. They show us that monsters can be trademarked and milked for years.
Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6086: Aug 15th 2025 at 3:31:09 PM

So, here's the revised description.

    New Description 2. 0 

The fashionable villain is more than a well-dressed antagonist; they are a walking cipher for cultural anxieties about power, identity, and order. Their clothes can betray forbidden ambition, mark them as an outsider, or seduce suggestible characters into complicity. Though fabrics, colors, and styles differ, the impulse to wrap danger in beauty is nearly universal.

Historically, certain materials and dyes have been used as societal clues about one's position in the hierarchy (e.g., Ming China's imperial yellow; the Incas' ceremonial gold/silver threading). For royalty and nobility, expensive materials are readily linked with ruling-class privilege and, thus, a visible reminder of their exploitative governance. Self-absorbed Medieval kings might be more preoccupied with furnishing their wardrobes with ermine than with alleviating famine. On the other hand, these conventions can be subverted by someone full of disdain for preordained social hierarchies or with the intent to usurp rightful rulers.

Across cultures, villains weaponize elegance differently depending on gender. The Vamp, scheming and cunning, dresses herself in silk brocade or velvet to further weaponize her womanly charms. Maybe it's her use of makeup and revealing clothing that gives her away. The Dandy, donning expensive suits with intricate patterns, uses refinement to mask manipulation. Or, it can be used to disrupt gender expectations. Male villains can exaggerate femininity to an unsettling effect. Layered, gender-ambiguous costumes indicate supernatural status, creating an otherworldly menace. This rings truer the more heteronormative-conforming and strict a society is.

Fashion can also flag villains as outsiders; exotic/foreign outfits tend to stick out like sore thumbs against the local fashion standards (e.g., the Dragon Lady). Colonial-era works often exoticized non-Western attire to highlight moral difference. Conversely, postcolonial African cinema sometimes casts the corrupt elite in Western suits, contrasting them with virtuous characters in traditional dress.

Because of this, costuming cues do not always travel well, especially when people migrate. What is a sign of sophistication in one culture can be the evil minority's hallmark in another. As global media continues to blend costume traditions, modern villains may wear a patchwork of signals—each piece familiar to someone, yet the whole unsettling to everyone.

Super-Trope of Shabby Heroes, Well-Dressed Villains and Man of Wealth and Tastenote . The opposite is, of course, Fashion-Victim Villain.

I tried to tone it down with the examples so it's shorter overall.

Edited by Asterlix on Aug 17th 2025 at 4:52:34 AM

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
Veanne Since: Jul, 2012
#6087: Aug 16th 2025 at 1:24:37 AM

I think this looks good. (BTW, the "Real Life examples" were a shortcut, sorry. I meant that you could move the historical examples to this section, if it were allowed. But historical examples you gave were not specific people, and more about fashion than about villainy, so I guess I just strayed off topic a bit here).

Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6088: Aug 16th 2025 at 10:06:09 PM

Huh, that makes more sense. Anyway, does anyone else have any input? Or is this ready to be swapped?

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
naturalironist from The Information Superhighway Since: Jul, 2016 Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
#6089: Aug 17th 2025 at 2:02:15 PM

The rewrite of Fashionable Evil could use more references to related tropes. Sensible Heroes, Skimpy Villains seems related to the underlying concept of villains reveling in excess in contrast to the virtuous modesty of the heroes, as does Slobs vs. Snobs when the slobs are the good guys. Vain Sorceress, Makeup Is Evil, and Evil Is Cool are also related.

Wick to Dragon Lady where you talk about western works exoticizing foreign clothing, and wick to Aristocrats Are Evil somewhere in the 2nd paragraph.

I would argue this is a subtrope of Beauty Is Bad.

The Compare section on the current page should be retained in the new one:


Unrelated, intentional examples of Visible Boom Mic are often a form of Proscenium Reveal. Should that be noted in the description of Proscenium Reveal?

"It's just a show; I should really just relax"
Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6090: Aug 17th 2025 at 2:51:40 PM

I've updated the 2.0 description with some of what you suggested. However, I'm a bit skeptical about adding the beauty tropes you mention and the Slobs vs. Snobs, and Evil Is Cool. Hear me out.

For the former, well, I see it that the villain themself can be ugly on appearance but still dress to kill. So, not sure how well they'd fit in a comparison or as a sub-trope. As sister tropes, maybe.

Slobs vs. Snobs would be best served by being included in Fashionable Evil's sub-trope, Shabby Heroes, Well-Dressed Villains. It's not that it doesn't fit here, but placing it in a sub-trope that is already about that kind of contrast.

Evil Is Cool doesn't seem particularly connected to Fashionable Evil. I mean, they overlap as often as they don't. Not seeing a strong connection there, so I didn't include it.


Yeah, it seems that Visible Boom Mic is a sub-trope of Proscenium Reveal, so go for it.

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
naturalironist from The Information Superhighway Since: Jul, 2016 Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
#6091: Aug 17th 2025 at 3:13:37 PM

[up] Beauty Is Bad is maybe not a supertrope (due to the potential for ugly but fashionable characters) but is definitely closely related. At its core it's about the larger concept that being concerned with your appearance makes you morally suspect. Many of the examples on Beauty Is Bad are not just naturally beautiful, but vain and obsessed with maintaining their appearance at any cost. Dressing stylishly is one aspect of of beauty and the one that is most achievable through wealth and other morally questionable means. I think Makeup Is Evil is something of a sister trope to Fashionable Evil -they're both forms of making yourself look good that are resource-intensive and considered "deceptive", but are different types and may or may not overlap.

Being fashionable is often about being cool in a social sense, and a villain's sick outfits could be one reason the audience takes a shine to them. Evil Is Cool wouldn't be a subtrope as it is an audience reaction, but it definitely seems relevant, and the description is quite broad as to what can make a villain cool.

Slobs vs. Snobs and some of the other beauty tropes are more specific and don't strictly need to be mentioned, I suppose, but having more tropes referenced in the description helps with crosswicking and getting the trope out of the Not Thriving zone.

"It's just a show; I should really just relax"
Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6092: Aug 17th 2025 at 4:07:31 PM

I see your point with Beauty Is Bad and Evil Is Cool, so I have added them to the description.

Regarding Slobs Versus Snobs, as I said, it might be better placed in the sub-trope that already contrasts slobby heroes versus snobby villains. It fits here, you're right, but it fits better in the sub-trope description. And this proposal was already flagged for being too wordy.

Also, I did include Makeup Is Evil as a pothole in the third paragraph.

    Fashionably Evil: Description 3. 0 

The fashionable villain is more than a well-dressed antagonist; they are a walking cipher for cultural anxieties about power, identity, and order. Their clothes can betray forbidden ambition, mark them as an outsider, or seduce suggestible characters into complicity. Though fabrics, colors, and styles differ, the impulse to wrap danger in beauty is nearly universal.

Historically, certain materials and dyes have been used as societal clues about one's position in the hierarchy (e.g., Ming China's imperial yellow; the Incas' ceremonial gold/silver threading). For royalty and nobility, expensive materials are readily linked with ruling-class privilege and, thus, a visible reminder of their exploitative governance. Self-absorbed Medieval kings might be more preoccupied with furnishing their wardrobes with ermine than with alleviating famine. On the other hand, these conventions can be subverted by someone full of disdain for preordained social hierarchies or with the intent to usurp rightful rulers.

Across cultures, villains weaponize elegance differently depending on gender. The Vamp, scheming and cunning, dresses herself in silk brocade or velvet to further weaponize her womanly charms. Maybe it's her use of makeup and revealing clothing that gives her away. The Dandy, donning expensive suits with intricate patterns, uses refinement to mask manipulation. Or, it can be used to disrupt gender expectations. Male villains can exaggerate femininity to an unsettling effect. Layered, gender-ambiguous costumes indicate supernatural status, creating an otherworldly menace. This rings truer the more heteronormative-conforming and strict a society is.

Fashion can also flag villains as outsiders; exotic/foreign outfits tend to stick out like sore thumbs against the local fashion standards (e.g., the Dragon Lady). Colonial-era works often exoticized non-Western attire to highlight moral difference. Conversely, postcolonial African cinema sometimes casts the corrupt elite in Western suits, contrasting them with virtuous characters in traditional dress.

Because of this, costuming cues do not always travel well, especially when people migrate. What is a sign of sophistication in one culture can be the evil minority's hallmark in another. As global media continues to blend costume traditions, modern villains may wear a patchwork of signals—each piece familiar to someone, yet the whole unsettling to everyone.

This is a Sister Trope of Beauty Is Bad because both tropes allude to the concept that being concerned with your appearance makes you morally suspect. Dressing stylishly is one aspect of beauty and the one that is most achievable through wealth and other morally questionable means. Similarly, with Makeup Is Evil.

Super-Trope of Shabby Heroes, Well-Dressed Villains and Man of Wealth and Tastenote . The opposite is, of course, Fashion-Victim Villain. Might overlap with Evil Is Cool, as striking fashion can add to a villain's perceived coolness.

Anyway, thanks for the input, it was really valuable. Am I forgetting anything else?

Edit: I swapped the improved description.

Edited by Asterlix on Aug 18th 2025 at 6:37:49 AM

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
Tylerbear12 What you see is what you get, just a guy. from The Green Hills. Since: Apr, 2015 Relationship Status: Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free
What you see is what you get, just a guy.
#6093: Aug 18th 2025 at 7:43:50 AM


This post was thumped by the Shillelagh of Whackingness

GenericGuy2000 I’m here, I guess. from a generic place. Since: Jul, 2021 Relationship Status: Cast away
I’m here, I guess.
#6094: Aug 18th 2025 at 9:20:11 AM

So in the past I brought up this paragraph on the Cry for the Devil page but didn't get much response in terms of what to actually do with it.

That being said, a writer should be very careful with this trope - if the villain is particularly, abhorrently evil and has already crossed the Moral Event Horizon, the attempt at woobification, and any subsequent attempts at a Heel–Face Turn, can end up feeling forced. In fact, if the reason for the villain's popularity was that the audience actively enjoyed hating them, then woobifying them can backfire because it removes what made the villain so beloved in the first place and, in turn, makes them feel like less of a threat. In addition, this trope tends to invoke A Million Is a Statistic for the sympathy accorded to their victims; it can feel frustrating when the author is chastising you for "judging" a character who just got finished nuking a city full of innocent people, gleefully cackling all the while.

This trope is classified as YMMV. It's for when the audience feels sympathy for a villain, but this part describes it like it's an intentionally written trope (in a complaining tone to boot, especially the last sentence). It also looks like it was originally added unilaterally as well. It seems safe to cut in my opinion.

Edited by GenericGuy2000 on Aug 18th 2025 at 4:02:08 AM

I’m gonna put some Gloom in your eye.
DoktorvonEurotrash Lex et Veritas from Not a place of honour (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#6095: Aug 18th 2025 at 11:48:26 AM

[up]Agree with cutting, for the reasons you stated.

Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6096: Aug 18th 2025 at 4:37:16 PM

[up][up]Yeah to cut it. It feels like it would fit Heel–Face Turn better. It has no place in a subjective trope.

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
Malady (X-Troper)
#6097: Aug 19th 2025 at 9:44:32 AM

Anyone against changing the "Related Tropes" section of Action Girl into Sub Tropes as it's currently potholed to?

Or are they not all subtropes and the pothole is a lie?

Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
Asterlix Waffle Cat (she/her) from Ooo (Trinitroper) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Waffle Cat (she/her)
#6098: Aug 19th 2025 at 1:21:18 PM

The cake is a lie, but the pothole is not, I believe. So change it, it'd be clearer that way.

Trailblazer of old tropes. (She/her)
Amonimus the "Retromancer" from <<|Wiki Talk|>> (Sergeant) Relationship Status: In another castle
the "Retromancer"
#6099: Aug 19th 2025 at 11:03:32 PM

[up][up]I don't think half or most tropes in that list are a Sub-Trope. "A girl with this attribute is sometimes an Action Girl" is not "A girl with this attribute is always an Action Girl", which is what Sub-Trope means.

Edited by Amonimus on Aug 19th 2025 at 9:03:50 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
Malady (X-Troper)
#6100: Aug 21st 2025 at 10:15:42 AM

So, which ones are a subtrope, so we can make accurate list(s)?

Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576

Total posts: 6,234
Top