Sandbox runs way too long.
Actors usually have several roles, in a number of different works. When a later work gives a Shout-Out to an actor's earlier work, that is a Celebrity Paradox. The "paradox" is that the actor-as-character exists separately from the actor-as-actor, but then the reference conflates the two people, so do they exist separately or not? If not, what does that mean for the other works the actor was in?
For the most part, works include this for a bit of meta-humour, like in Casting Gag and Actor Allusion. It's important to note that the actor needs to be playing a different character role in each work. This disqualifies Sequels and the like even if they reference each other. It also disqualifies works set in the same universe where one actor plays the same role. There's nothing strange about such an example; it makes sense for an actor to reprise their roles.
In modern updates of a work, the original may be unheard of. Writers get a li'l kick out of toying around with the concept, such as having the character meet the actor/actress playing them or giving a Shout-Out to the original source. Cameos of famous actors or artists may either be in the form of Recursive Canon or Richard Nixon, the Used Car Salesman.
Contrast Your Costume Needs Work and compare Recursive Canon, see also Different World, Different Movies.
edited 3rd Feb '18 8:57:38 PM by crazysamaritan
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.^^ I like that, with one edit: instead of saying "conflates" in the second paragraph (suggesting someone mistook the character for their actor, which is what I thought it was discussing for a moment — though those are a kind of example) you could say "relies on the existence of [both]", or something that fits well, making the sentence something like:
Also, I'm going to start purging some of the non-examples since there's over 1000 wicks
.
edited 4th Feb '18 7:37:14 PM by lakingsif
OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!Dubious examples:
I guess this alludes to the actor existing both as himself and as the character, though it's as a narrator and a guy in a reconstruction so it's a little less solid.
Can examples be justified, since this write-up basically says "this actor exists within the universe, proven by the existence of a real work of his and another work of his made up just for the show", which isn't an example.
Other notes:
- After reading the following example, could we add something about prominent pop-cultural icons (e.g. Superman) being unlikely as Celebrity Paradoxes given the many iterations and real-world fictionality.
- Beyond some dubious comment-out examples, I have done all of the 'A' wicks, including CelebrityParadox.Arrowverse. Also done Grey's Anatomy (well duh), CelebrityParadox.How I Met Your Mother and all of the How I Met Your Mother pages on the related list, and CelebrityParadox.Glee and all of the Glee pages on the related list.
edited 4th Feb '18 10:38:46 PM by lakingsif
OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!Air Crash Investigation I would say
to. "Weird" example makes me think it's a shoehorn off the bat and I'm not sure if there's this experience when it's a voice acted role such as a narrator and a physically acted role as described.
The second one looks like misuse unless the comic uses the actor's likeness. Just being the same character doesn't seem to fit the heart of the trope.
I'm going to suggest further edits later today when I'm on a laptop.
Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyThe Air Crash Investigation example sounds like someone playing two roles in the same work. That's not what it's about.
Not sure I understand the American Horror Story Cult example. To begin with, a comic doesn't have actors. But on the other hand, it doesn't matter if an actor appears in the show proper or in a Show Within a Show, since that still means the actor shows up in the work as an actor. In other words, either it's just not an example, or it's not justified. Besides, an actual justification would mean it's not an example in the first place, since it's not a paradox if it's justified.
When it comes to a character like Superman who has several iterations, they'd have to specify which iteration it's about, since the character himself doesn't have a specific actor attached.
Check out my fanfiction!I'm not particularly sure I see how Recursive Canon and Richard Nixon, the Used Car Salesman relate to Celebrity Paradox exactly. And the description suggests that there's a CP in play when there's a specific kind of cameo, as though there's a subtrope relation that's unspecified. I think we should hash those relationships out and make it more explicit, since an issue with this trope is that it's confusing editors.
I also see no relation between this and Your Costume Needs Work as that's wholy in-universe and doesn't have anything to do with the actor-as-actor...?
I added a paragraph about same-actor-different-roles-same-work, as lakingsif brought up.
Another suggestion (based on crazysamaritan's suggestion):
When two separate works exist and an actor is in both of them and the later work makes a Shout-Out to the older one, that is a Celebrity Paradox. The paradox is that the actor-as-character exists separately from the actor-as-actor but the reference conflates the two people. This leads to questions like whether the character and actor exist separately and what it means for the other works the actor was in.
It's important to note that the actor needs to be playing a different character role in each work. This disqualifies Sequels and the like even if they reference each other. It also disqualifies works set in the same universe where an actor plays the same role. There's nothing strange about such an example; it makes sense for an actor to reprise their roles.
Something else important to note is that the characters need to be in different works, even if the actor plays multiple roles in the same franchise or shared universe. This disqualifies cases where one actor plays significantly different roles in the same work and other forms of Acting for Two.
There are various methods that creators could use to create a Celebrity Paradox, but the nature of the Shout-Out is the same. For example, in modern updates of a work, the character — played by a new actor — might meet their orignal actor, whereas in other cases an advertisement in the background might be slightly different from a Real Life advertisment for the referenced work. This is because, at the heart of it, this trope is about when the actor — as an actor — exists separately from that same actor — as different characters they have played.
Subtrope of Shout-Out. Compare Casting Gag, Actor Allusion, Recursive Canon.
I included other tropes in the compare/contrast section just to keep them together. I still think they need to be actually explained.
Also, I'm not sure if we need to specify anything special about iconic characters like Superman who don't have specific actors attached. If there isn't the "same actor" involved, then it isn't this sort of shout-out. Like, Henry Cavill is in a work and superman is referenced, that's just a Shout-Out or Actor Allusion (etc.), but if Cavill is in a work and something Superman does in Man of Steel, Batman V Superman (2016), Justice League (2017), or Shazam (2019) is referenced (or the movies themselves are referenced), then it'd be a Celebrity Paradox. If there are a bunch of examples with that problem, then I think we should add it but otherwise it may be a bit too cautious...
At the risk of this getting way too long, I do think it's worth asking if this can include characters-as-actors-as-characters. It's a bit confusing, but in the current description, there's a paragraph about a character who is an actor. Personally I think such a situation is trying to be confusing and Too Rare To Trope.
edited 5th Feb '18 8:59:09 AM by WaterBlap
Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty
agree with the last paragraph on Too Rare To Trope, and certainly too confusing to write a cohesive entry.
I’ve seen, recently, maybe 3 Superman non-entries. More often, though, there’s been a lot that rely on Real-Life Relative (eg Creator X was in show X, which referenced show Y, which was directed/starring/whatever Creator X’s brother’s ex-wife’s uncle). The worst was a repeated Arrowverse entry where Thea’s former stepdad was mentioned about 5 times.
OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!- Most of the time, an Acting for Two situation will lack the Shout-Out requirement.
- The Wizard of Oz has the same actor playing the man with the carriage, the gate guardian, and the Wizard. Nobody comments on that; there's no Shout-Out.
- Quantum Leap has a finale episode. The actor who played the Commanding Officer of Sam's first Leap is cast as the bartender named "Al" (the same name as Sam's companion), and Sam encounters several other familiar faces and situations throughout the episode. I think this, and a couple other actors from that episode, should qualify as an example.
Should we mention Remake Cameo somewhere? (Actor X plays a big part in Work Y, when Work Y is remade they play a different role, some cases make explicit references to the original that suggests they're aware of it existing, which would suggest the actor does, too)
OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!The description hasn't been changed and the wicks haven't been cleaned.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.Courtesy link
in case someone wants to help out.
Crown Description:
What would be the best way to fix the page?

Yeah.
Join the Five-Man Band cleanup project!