Splitting: My Name Is Not Durwood

I don't think a split is necessary, the slightly different motivations in a character's use of this trope are not enough IMO.

I don't think we should rename either, with 913 wicks, but I if we do I'll suggest Name Constantly Gotten Wrong.

It isn't just the motivations but what what those motivations mean about a character and how it establishes/shapes a character's traits.

Characters who are simply incapable of learning or using a person's a correct name tend to be absent-minded, frazzled, eccentric, or are otherwise quirky and peculiar in a way (and are more likely endeared for it by a viewing audience).

Characters who deliberately call someone else by a wrong name or just don't bother to remember what the correct name is tend to be dickheads who are abrasive with others and may have an overinflated ego (even if such characters have other traits that may make them likable or sympathetic, they're still usually some variant of the Jerkass trope, pretty much, by default).

Even if the two distinctions don't get separate pages, I do feel that this is good enough to push for a soft split (and, given the page in its present form, these are really the only two subtypes that I'd say are worth mentioning).

edited 18th Feb '12 9:07:10 AM by SeanMurrayI

Bumping

I'm with Sean here, this trope as it is right now covers 2 completely different intentions, and leads to different character traits depending on its use. I'm not sure if it should be a hard or soft split though.

edited 6th Mar '12 7:44:41 PM by Elbruno

Hard split. I think some of the "don't seem to notice enough to learn the name" examples might be hard to sort, but they still need to be sorted.

Bumping again. Seriously, we need to get a consensus here.

In that case, put up a crowner for whether this should be renamed.

Split, rather than "renamed".

OK, then maybe we need a Page Action crowner: split, rename, something else?

That sounds good. People can always add more options if they feel the need.

No, just split. If a split passes, the new pages would need new names, anyway. A soft/hard split has been the biggest issue discussed in this thread, by far

edited 13th Mar '12 11:51:43 AM by SeanMurrayI

Single prop hooked as requested.

Isn't there a potential third category? It's one thing if someone calls someone the wrong name as an insult, or if a person might simply be flaky enough to get someone's name consistently wrong.

But what about examples of people where no one gets their name right? I'm looking at things like Butch from Pokemon here, and it's hard to assign him to either of the other two categories when multiple well-meaning people get it wrong. Do we put it in the "flaky" category (Lyra's treatment of Dawn fits snugly there), or do we assign it as something else along the lines of Phrase Catcher?

Bumping for votes.

Calling crowner. Split trope into 1) misnaming a character accidentally and 2) misnaming a character maliciously.

edited 18th May '12 8:14:30 AM by ccoa

Okay, let's brainstorm for some names.

Accidental Misnaming and Intentional Misnaming? Cant Remember Her Name vs Wont Remember Her Name? ... something else?

There is nothing wrong with the original name for this trope to describe the trope wherein someone calls another person by the wrong name deliberately.

Agreed, I don't know if there was consensus on two new names. The problem the trope was having was that it described two subtly things; splitting will solve that and only one needs to be renamed.

Nobody's saying that there is. I recommend just suggesting a bunch of names and then putting them in a crowner with the original too.

The new trope needs to have a new name, of course. But My Name Is Not Durwood, connoting a deliberate refusal to address someone by their correct name, is good.

I don't know... My Name Is Not Durwood doesn't seem to indicate that the use of the wrong is intentional or mean spirited. When I first saw the trope name, I was thinking of it more along the lines of Character A getting Character B's name wrong, and Character B stating politely that the name is incorrect. It seems that the character's response to the wrong name is more negative than the trope name would suggest.

Really? Hm. Because I think of the name as being perfect for deliberate misuse. Maybe it comes from knowing the trope namer

"I was thinking of it more along the lines of Character A getting Character B's name wrong, and Character B stating politely that the name is incorrect." That is the same trope anyway, right? The other one is "incapable of saying it correctly."

Dammit, as the creator of this trope it kills me to see my named tropes being picked apart. But I'll admit I have massive bias (well there are some exceptions I'd never liked Are You My Mummy?). But anyway. How about Please Stop Calling Me Durwood keeping the Bewitched reference without having people having to know the reference to get it (because Durwood is generally considered a silly sounding name) but making the trope more obvious?

Bad name. Sounds very much like it violates No New Stock Phrases.

For the record, mate, 1) references are not witty and only matter to people who are in the show and 2) Naming A Trope is a help to you.

Bump.