For a list of bad laconics, see Sandbox.Pages Needing Better Laconics.
For generally accepted guidelines for laconics, see Sandbox.Laconic Wiki Template.
Today I found out an interesting fact from troper Ironeye:
Don't ever make the mistake of using the Laconic version as the canonical trope meaning—the laconics are often written by people who don't actually understand the drop. In this case, the laconic only corresponds to one possible cause of Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy.
The Laconic Description for DIAA states as follows:
The thing is, these descriptions are supposed to make it easier to understand what the page is about. If they can't be accurate as well as short and sweet, then there's a problem.
So for starters, what would be a better description for DIAA?
Edited by MacronNotes on Jan 29th 2023 at 6:23:45 AM
The Unknown
I agree on the second sentence being unnecessary.
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
What is Everythings Better With Princesses?
Is it just Princesses Exist?
Laconic.Everythings Better With Princesses is:
"If we can have a princess in the show, we will."
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
The Basic trope, summarized in the Playing With subpage, says: "Princesses make any given series that much better just by the virtue of being princesses." Which isn't that much better than the laconic, to be honest.
- So, it does seem like it's just "Princess Appears", right?
...
Laconic.Bargain With Heaven seems to remove the conditions that Main.Bargain With Heaven lists for the trope?
"Making deals with gods, angels, and other benevolent/neutral Cosmic Entities."
Where the trope itself says:
"A Bargain with Heaven can usually be distinguished from its more wicked Sister Trope by certain key elements:"
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
I'm helping!
Laconic.ACME Products currently reads "A Company that Makes Everything. note "
If you actually read that link to the other wiki hidden inside a note, it straight-up says "It is a misconception that Acme is an acronym standing for such things as "A Company Making Everything", "American Companies Make Everything" or "American Company that Manufactures Everything".[5][6]"
So, like. The laconic is just wrong?
Instead of playing apocryphal Fun with Acronyms, can we just change the description to something like "Company that makes anything the plot requires the characters to buy." ?
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.
Well, that Origins section has changed since two years ago...
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acme_Corporation&diff=next&oldid=797184519
...
How about:
"A Company that Makes Everything needed for the plot."
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
I see no reason why "something" must be included. There have been posts on ATT and Too-long page repair about the overly long quotes page, and this is contributing to them. And at the risk of being labeled a Bluenose Bowdlerizer, is "shit" really necessary?
God. I think there's more wrong there than just the laconic. That long blue-linked sentence at the beginning needs to be fixed (especially that particular pothole, which gets abused too much). All those examples hidden behind folders need to be turned into an Analysis page. The real trope description is languishing at the bottom and it needs to be right at the top, easily seen and read.
It might be worth taking that one to the Trope Description clean-up thread.
As for the laconic itself, the basis of the trope appears to be that the speech has to be making a legitimate point about the faults of the target of the speech, so the laconic is basically the first sentence that's blue-linked. Something like...
One character delivers a speech to a second character that is designed to dissect that second character's flaws, weaknesses or failures.
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
The entry in Laconic.Power Creep Power Seep says that "Strength and abilities vary Depending on the Writer.", but the trope description and Playing With seem to suggest that this is a crossover-specific trope, where characters whose Power Level stand on different tiers of the Super Weight scale is able to stand toe-to-toe against each other. Should the Laconic description be narrowed down, or should the one in the Playing With be broadened?
I wouldn't suggest either of them. The point of the trope appears to be about balancing the power levels of otherwise incompatible works so that ta crossover story can be told in a way that makes all the characters relevant.
You'd be looking at a laconic that might be something like...
Crossover stories that require the power levels of otherwise incompatible works to be rebalanced in a way that allows characters from both works to function effectively in the crossover setting.
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
I wonder if Everything Is Better With Princesses is a "Princesses Exist" trope along the lines of the Our Monsters Are Different tropes.
Lol in how that sorta makes Princesses, a species by themselves.
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
That might need a TRS.
It looks to me like it's supposed to be a 'female's status as princess acts as a driver of either plot or characterisation that's important to the plot'.
- Ooh! That's good! Could it be the Laconic?
Really? Because I read a lot of examples that says the exact opposite. The character's status as a princess doesn't really matter, but the narrative calls her a princess anyway because apparently being a princess is perceived as an inherently desirable quality that the character has.
Well, I wasn't looking at examples. I was just looking at the trope description.
The reason I don't look at examples to try and understand a trope is because examples that are engaging in trope misuse will skew understanding of the trope's purpose and lead to even more trope misuse.
Your comment about the examples suggests this trope may have a wider issue that simply the laconic. It's possible we might need to put the trope through a full clean-up to lock in the trope's purpose first, and then decide which examples are accurate and what the laconic should be.
Like you originally said: TRS might be the place for this trope, not here.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Aug 22nd 2019 at 9:57:00 AM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
I made a TRS thread for Everythings Better With Princesses if anyone else want to weigh in.
I'm helping!
Laconic.Barehanded Blade Block currently reads "With hands like mine, who needs a shield?", which is more of a quip than a description.
I'm thinking something more like "Skilled martial artists can harmlessly stop pointy weapons with their bare hands."
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.
I'm helping!
Laconic.Adaptation Induced Plot Hole currently reads "An adaptation adds a plot hole." which is just repeating the title.
... Any suggestions for improvement?
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.
I wouldn't limit the laconic to 'skilled martial artists' as sometimes it happens for comedy purposes, too, done by characters with no fighting skill at all. Maybe something along the lines of the following?
Adaptation-Induced Plot Hole suggestion:
Edited by Wyldchyld on Aug 26th 2019 at 6:06:39 PM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
I'm helping!
Laconic.Holy Hand Grenade currently reads "Crystal Dragon Jesus weaponized". This is, at the least, a misuse of Crystal Dragon Jesus.
I'm having trouble coming up with a fix, though...
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
The recently launched Foxy Vixen's laconic reads "Fox Folk for Fanservice." That only describes one out of many possible manifestations of the trope, as it can equally apply to actual foxes and fox-themed human characters as long as they fit the other criteria.
Any suggestions for an alternative?
Edited by MarqFJA on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:25:24 PM
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Laconic.Love Actually is a violation of "Don't Write Reviews" on How to Write an Example. Can anyone provide an actual laconic that describes what the film is about?
I have re-written Laconic.Holy Hand Grenade. Is it any better?
Laconic.Not A Morning Person:
I think I can just cut that sentence and it'll be fine?
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.