Follow TV Tropes
Could've belonged under "Misused" as well, honestly.
So this trope appears to be about...well, characters who, by the standards of the work, have laughs deemed "annoying", often to make the character themselves appear more annoying. However, in practice, it appears to be used more as people Complaining About Laughs They Dont Like.
I just did a check of 70 wicks, which can be found here. A distressing amount of them are zero-context, often just typing out how the laugh sounds. Other examples are clearly how the audience feels about the character's laugh (and a lot of those ZCE examples probably fit under that category too, but it's impossible to tell). Most examples that didn't come off like someone was most likely just complaining were examples of a character having a bad laugh in-universe, intentionally, to annoy other characters.
When I brought this matter to ATT, two tropers proposed that the page should be made IUEO, and I would support that immensely. What really troubles me is that people seem to think this trope is an audience reaction, using language like "In-Universe, characters think...", when it's still an objective trope.
Now that some of the backlog has cleared up, I'll open this up.
I second making this IUEO.
IUEO is fine by me.
Finally, thanks ~
I'm just wondering how we'd handle the ZCE issue. It's impossible to tell if they're In-Universe or not.
Comment them out and wait for people more knowledgeable about those works to come along?
Yeah, I more just meant the ZCE problem. Something about the trope has to be causing it.
It's hard to describe in text what makes a laugh annoying, which results in people just saying who has the annoying laugh without any real explanation.
I think restricting to In-Universe Examples Only and/or Intended Audience Reaction examples should work.
I think the idea the trope is going for is a character who has a really bizarre laugh as a source of characterization (to show that they’re a Cloudcuckoolander or obnoxious bore). That can still be in use regardless of whether characters comment on it or not. Would this be an example of Intended Audience Reaction?
Make it IUEO, but allow for Intended Audience Reaction.
Yeah, I'm fine with Intended Audience Reaction examples so long as it's very clear the reaction was intended , as a character quirk.
My concern is that this'll just be used as a way to shoehorn those complainy examples under the insistence that the annoyance was intentional. We'll need to draw a very clear line somewhere.
In my mind, I was thinking of IAR examples backed by Word of God. It probably would have helped if I clarified.
"Backed by Word of God" seems too restrictive; an in-universe reaction to the laugh should suffice.
I think the Word of God bit is for examples claiming to be an Intended Audience Reaction.
Yeah, it is. It should be obvious if the laugh is meant to be annoying in-universe, since other characters would no doubt react to it as such, but it's harder to prove that a laugh is intended to make the audience feel annoyance.
In an effort to keep this from falling into purgatory, should I make a crowner?
What are our options, here, besides "Make IUEO" and "Allow for Intended Audience Reaction examples"?
I don't see that anything else has been suggested in the thread.
So it's those two options and a "do nothing" sort of option, I guess?
Assuming neither of those are approved, we'd just do a cleanup and close.
Here it is.
Remember everyone, these are not mutually exclusive options.
And it's hooked.
So far, everything seems pretty much unanimous. Can we call it?
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?