Wick cleanup: Reptiles Are Abhorrent

This trope has a bit of a messy description/example relationship. The description says at one point that this is Always Chaotic Evil applied to reptiles, and some examples take that fairly literally.

But other examples are "an evil reptile" in a work where reptiles in general are not Always Chaotic Evil. The serpent Apophis in Egyptian Mythology is the example that I first noticed: he's probably the most evil, inimical, dangerous character in the myths, but there are also benevolent snake deities and snakey-dragons that are guardians, and a motherly snake goddess of the harvest. So snakes are hardly Always Chaotic Evil in ancient Egyptian religion and myth.

I'm of the opinion that this should be a subtrope of Always Chaotic Evil. I can't see how "evil + also a reptile" is by itself a valid trope, and I'd like to trim out such examples.

edited 3rd Jan '12 10:31:53 PM by ArcadesSabboth

So does anyone else have an opinion about this at all? I already tried discussing it at Trope Talk and was just told to take it here, so I assume I can't redefine it unilaterally.

This seems to be "snake motif = evil/disgusting".

I'm not sure about the Always Chaotic Evil part, though. I don't think there should be Character Alignment commentary on this. Can't they be other kinds of evil?

edited 20th Feb '12 10:34:34 AM by lu127

Delete the comment about Always Chaotic Evil, but otherwise, I don't see an issue. There is very much a strong cultural association between reptiles and evil or icky.

edited 20th Feb '12 10:41:49 AM by Catbert

We did an example clean-up on it back here, or at least talked about doing one, but it appears that we didn't really address the definition.

I'd say that the definition needs to be clarified, and that it's not a subtrope of Always Chaotic Evil. Bringing in Always Chaotic Evil seems to be a part of the problem that was causing all the bad examples, since that trope is "the notion of not an organization, not a clan, not a city, but an entire race of bad guys who brag about how Evil they are. All of the racial members behave evilly,...".

Reptiles Are Abhorrent is more "In a work with anthropomorphic animals, making a character a reptile is used to indicate that he's not one of the Good Guys." It's not about reptiles in general, it's about reptile-characters in contraposition to mammal-characters or bird-characters

edited 20th Feb '12 10:53:46 AM by Madrugada

But many of the examples are "snake or lizard character is icky or evil" even when the work in question has plenty of snake or lizard characters that are good/virtuous. It's become "any character that is both reptilian and bad," which isn't a trope.

It should only count if it is a repeated pattern in the work, with few or no counter-examples. "Sometimes work X has evil reptiles, sometimes it has good reptiles" isn't any more an example than "Sometimes work Y has bad mammals, sometimes it has good mammals."

edited 20th Feb '12 10:55:08 AM by ArcadesSabboth

Those are bad examples. For instance, in Rango, this trope doesn't apply. Many of the characters are reptiles, including the hero. Being a reptile in that work doesn't automatically mark the character as a villain, evil or even 'not a Good Guy'.

So the desctiption needs cleaning up to make it clear that it has to be a pattern in the work, not one isolated character.

If that one character has a snake motif in order to indicate his evilness, then it counts in my book. For instance, Orochimaru of Naruto is the only one with a snake motif, but it's quite clear the intended effect is this trope.

Actually, Rango does count because the main villain is snake. Specifically associating snakes more so than other reptiles with evil is a trope, whether or on the page as written reflects that or not.

Looking at the old history, it looks the last TRS was a cleanup of excessive aversions and subversions and a definition that spent half the time complaining about the trope and going on about how great and wonderful reptiles really are.

Also, I don't think this is just about anthropomorphic reptiles. Having the badguys use lots of reptilian imagery or have lots of reptilian pets would also count. Cobra in GI Joe comes to mind.

edited 20th Feb '12 11:04:52 AM by Catbert

Edit delete

edited 20th Feb '12 11:03:37 AM by Catbert

@lu 127: does it still count in your book if a bunch of good guys are also snakes or have snake motifs? Because several examples are exactly that bad.

Motifs that apply to both good and evil characters stop being motifs about a specific alignment. Ergo, no. Zap those.

It's not limited to snakes, first off. It's Reptiles Are Abhorrent, not Snakes are Abhorrent.

Second, it's a general comparison between the characters within a single work, "The reptiles and snakes are bad, the mammals and birds and fishes can be good" not just "This one character is evil and a reptile".

Rango is not an example: Within that work, being a reptile as opposed to a mammal or bird or bug does not indicate that the character is evil.

You aren't reading the entire definition. You are stopping at the first line. This isn't just about mammals are good guys and reptiles are badguys. This is any use of a reptilian theme by the badguys.

• ...the villains will often be reptiles, reptiles with Applied Phlebotinum to make them more frightening, or reptile-evolved or reptile-themed. Snakes are especially popular in this department, and the Big Bad may have a whole snake obsession going on.
• The trope even turns up, if only by metaphor, in non-fiction; saying that someone is "a snake" or "cold blooded" is enough to get across that you're dealing with a nasty character.

So yeah, if the badguy has a reptile motif going on, it is this trope, irregardless of whether or not the badguy is a reptile himself.

• This trope is fairly consistent, but it's far from omnipresent. Many people think turtles are cute. They have a reputation for wisdom as well, therefore, turtles can be good guys. In addition, Frilled Lizards, with their cute habit of scampering around on their hind legs with their frill extended, and a handful of other cute lizards

So, some reptiles can be good guys, but they tend to be based on more popular varieties of lizards and turtles and such.

So, if the badguy is a snake but all the good guys are turtles or cute lizards, it is a variant of trope. Chameleons like in Rango would fall under the cute lizard category.

BTW, Snakes Are Evil is an alternate name to this trope.

Also, looking at the oldest version of this trope: Always Chaotic Evil was not part of the original trope. It was added latter. That can be cut without changing the core meaning of the trope.

edited 20th Feb '12 2:18:18 PM by Catbert

This trope is about how reptiles are associated with bad. It is similar in application to Dark Is Evil.

*shrug*

If I were to define this trope in a sentence, it would be "Typical reptilian traits are seen as undesirable."

Look at the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Yes, they're an example of reptiles being the good guys, but they're still an example of this trope because all of their reptilian attributes are downplayed. The makers of the cartoon realized that if they gave the turtles noticeable scales and claws and tails, they wouldn't seem as friendly.

Or look at geckos in fiction. Geckos can actually be really mean in real life, but because they don't look scaly or have claws, they're usually treated like cute little critters.

I would really say that turtles and tortoises don't count at all for the trope. If they're used, it's generally for one of their own attributes, like longevity, wisdom, lack of speed, or defence. I've never seen them be used as evil as the trope describes. I didn't see a single example where those are described as evil with any relation to them being reptiles. At most it's incidental, but mostly they're not actually evil in the first place.

Possibly chameleons too, as they're almost always used because of their colourshifting.

edited 20th Feb '12 4:18:36 PM by Feather7603

But whenever it's a snapping turtle, they're evil. I think the Ninja Turtles fought one in one of the move, and of course there's Bowser.

Bowser is based on a kappa more than a tortoise, I believe. And some (western) dragon as well.

But yeah, snapping turtles are probably the evil version of turtles. More for the snapping part than the reptile part, though.

There's a trope for that.

Which is basically why I don't see the point of including any in this trope. They're not notable aversions, just not part of the trope.

So does this need to be redefined to exclude the examples that don't show a clear pattern/motif, or does it just need a description face-lift and example cleanup?

The current description says "In works of fiction starring animals, mammals tend to be cast as the heroes while reptiles tend to be the villains."

I'd rather that be something like "Traits associated with reptiles tend to also be associated with evil characters."

That way, it's obvious that the characters like the Ninja Turtles don't count, since, even though they're reptiles, they don't actually have the usual reptilian traits (no scales, no claws, no tails)

edited 29th Feb '12 1:58:42 PM by abk0100

That's probably a better definition than simply being a reptile. Reptilian traits are evil.