Follow TV Tropes
Saying "a lot of fans think this way" is how most Audience Reactions work. Examples for The Scrappy, Broken Base, Ensemble Dark Horse, They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot are all about opinions that fans hold and don't have citations. That's kinda how YMMV pages work to my understanding. Very few Audience Reactions require reference to specific examples, they're about listing general reactions people have to media. If Audience Reactions can't be about general reactions and opinions of audiences I don't know why they've been a part of the site for so long.
I was always under the impression that RTDE was about putting down one character to boost another, usually for shipping purposes (DILP is of course the inversion). So Ron becomes a Death Eater to get Hermione with someone else.
And maybe that's how it's used, but I have seen a few examples on the page that don't have enough context to make that clear, and just look like "Adaptational Villainy but in fanfiction." Or perhaps "Adaptational Villainy but the author insists this is how they really were in the original because they hate the character."
That's a common reason why people invoke Ron the Death Eater, but the basic trope is a fan hates a character so much that they try to portray them as a villain.
And that is why it needs to apply to the fic, not in general terms: because "fans hate a character" is one thing, but that's not this trope. Someone actually has to write a story with the alteration to the character.
Your point about audience reactions is well taken, but even among those, "a lot of fans think this" is not sufficient criteria for many of them to apply. I'm also moderately of the opinion that most audience reactions shouldn't be troped at all due to how much trouble they cause, but that's a completely different topic.
Edited by Fighteer on Mar 21st 2020 at 11:28:57 AM
Main problem is, if they were fan fiction only tropes they would not be YMMV, they would be synonymous with Adaptational Jerkass and so forth. Alternatively, if they were plain YMMV tropes they would be like The Scrappy. They exist in that weird limbo between general fan response to the character and the deeper debates about the character and work.
The difference between Adaptational Villainy, Adaptational Jerkass and Ron the Death Eater is that RTDE is driven by the author's dislike of the character. Adaptational Villainy does not necessarily mean that the person doing the adapting hates the character. Now because Ron the Death Eater and Draco in Leather Pants are driven by the attitudes of fans, I don't think they can ever be objective tropes. I think we should do something similar to what was done to Unfortunate Implications, where examples on the YMMV page require some citation.
I don't think it needs to come to that point.
I thought people understood both as "when fans think of/treats this character as heroic/villainous when they're the opposite canonically". They're subtropes of Alternate Character Interpretation.
But what's the difference with that and Adaptational Villainy?
Adaptational Villainy just means a character is more villainous in the adaptation than in the original. A heroic character can be hit with Adaptational Villainy and still be a hero. You can even apply Adaptational Villainy to a character who was a villain in the original work. Ron the Death Eater is taking a heroic character and turning them into a straight up villain.
The same goes for Adaptational Heroism and Draco in Leather Pants. A villain can undergo Adaptational Heroism and still be a villain. It only becomes Draco in Leather Pants when the author tries to turn the villain into a hero.
The Same, but More? (Or less?)
I wouldn't say it's just The Same, but More, because Draco in Leather Pants and Ron the Death Eater have to do with the fan's attitude towards the character. Just because a character undergoes Adaptational Villainy doesn't mean the writer hates that character. Now if the writer took that character and turned them into a straight up villain, it would be fair to say that the writer has issues with the character.
And, again, there has to be written material in order to have the trope apply. Not "a lot of fans think this", but "a fan wrote a fic in which this attitude is expressed". Thus, RTDE and DILP are tropes that can only apply in those fics.
I am still not really seeing the issue with defining these based on fandom trends or why they need to be turned into objective tropes that exclusively apply to fanfics. DILP and RTDE aren't tropes, they are Audience Reactions and those usually don't require citations to written material except for some that have seen rampant misuse.
When a Broken Base entry is written we don't have to link to a forum thread to show that people argue about it. An entry for They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot doesn't require a link to a video essay complaining about it. I'm not really seeing why DILP and RTDE need to be treated any differently from most Audience Reactions. Noting the way fandom react to different characters seems more worthwhile and interesting to me than just cataloging fanfics where a character's alignment changes.
I agree with that sentiment. Besides, limiting RTDE and DILP to the specific fanfics runs into problems with having to speculate the author's intention of depicting the character in a different manner than Canon—since the authorial bias is pretty much the only thing that distinguishes RTDE and DILP againts Adaptational Villainy and Adaptational Heroism.
Edited by Adept on Mar 25th 2020 at 11:10:32 PM
Simple, one happens in an adaptation while the other happens in Fanon.
And "intent" behind fans whitewashing/blackpainting villains/heroes respectively need not be out of love or hate - it can also be a (popular) joke (some memes run off this).
"X trope but specifically for Y media" is kind of worthless though.
Besides, general fan attitude towards particular work or character can be documented outside of derivative works in which said attitude is expressed (e.g. forum discussion, blogs, etc.)
Otherwise, I don't see why we need to limit Draco in Leather Pants and Ron the Death Eater to the fanwork pages, while still allowing similar "fan reaction to particular characters" such as Fan-Preferred Couple, Die for Our Ship, Self-Fanservice—or, heck, even the entire Fanon entry.
There are other Audience Reaction stuffs that are allowed to be listed on YMMV pages, which I think are even less noteworthy than DILP and RTDE, but that's a whole other discussion altogether.
""X trope but specifically for Y media" is kind of worthless though."
Fanon isn't "media".
Fanworks are, and that's what we're troping.
I agree with Adept and TommyFresh. Just let it be listed on YMMV pages like other Audience Reactions; it shouldn't need to cite specific fan works.
Hmm, well, thing is, the examples claim that fanfics do this sort of thing, but that on it's own isn't context. It's different than claiming that fans think a certain way in general, as you're just describing how the audience reacted, but these tropes are things that objectively do pop up in fanworks. Because of that, not having citations makes it too general, as you're just claiming this happens with no evidence.
I think that's what the issue is, anyway...
Draco in Leather Pants should require citations like Ron the Death Eater does.
"Fanworks are, and that's what we're troping."
I thought we agree that this trope happens in Fanon in general, not just fanworks.
And even then, fanworks are a "special case" because they're not official publications.
Edited by 4tell0life4 on Mar 25th 2020 at 7:47:48 AM
No, there's been no agreement here, that's the problem.
If we're just troping what "fans think", then it's no different from tropes like Die for Our Ship or The Scrappy; if we're troping what fans do in fanworks (which shouldn't be treated inherently different from other works in the troping process), then we need actual examples of it in practice, otherwise it's a general example (saying that "lots of fanfics do this", rather than "fans think this").
I think DILP and RTDE can occur without actual needing actual fan-works. Also, dividing between "lots of fans think this" and "lots of fanfics do this" seems to be Distinction Without a Difference, as fanfics tend to mirror general fandom sentiments.
For example, I once played this game where one of the heroic characters started Jumping Off the Slippery Slope and eventually became the story's Big Bad. A number of his fans were convinced that he was Brainwashed and Crazy or was manipulated into villainy by a Greater-Scope Villain, and thus isn't truly bad. However, I've never actually seen any fanfic of this game following through those alternate scenarios, but the audience sentiment towards the character can be identified through the comments in the character's wiki page and the like.
As for specific examples of villain whitewashing/hero bashing, don't we have Paint the Hero Black and Villain Whitewashing Service?
Edited by Adept on Mar 26th 2020 at 12:35:19 AM
What was being said is that if it's a trope that happens in fanworks, it would not be ymmv because then it's based in a storytelling convention rather than being exclusively related to fan discussions. And then if it was an objective trope, limiting it to exclusively fanworks is its own problem because there is no real trope line between a story written by an amateur and one written by a professional, they're both stories. It's kind of like saying a trope is anime only and deleting any examples from western animation simply because it's not anime and therefore doesn't count, which has been an issue before (ask about the debate around nakama vs. True Companions).
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?