When do GenreMashup or GenreRoulette become GenreBusting?

Genre-Busting seems very vaguely-defined. It seems to want works that dabble that somehow they transcend traditional genre classification, but (tl;dr)...what does that even mean lol

It differentiates itself from Genre Mashup by...actually it doesn't really do that.

It differentiates itself from Genre Roulette apparently by having multiple genres at once rather than switching between them:

In practice, however, what is the difference between Mashup or Roulette and Busting^note to clarify, I think Genre Mashup and Genre Roulette are reasonably distinct, and that I can reasonably identify an example of either; I'm asking how to separate a Busting example from either of them? Several of the examples on Genre-Busting seem like misplaced Genre Mashup examples in that they list combinations of genres rather than how the work "busts" genre classification/doesn't fit into any genre:

Like Tiger and Bunny is undoubtedly a superhero show. Dunkirk is a historical war film 1000%. These works incorporate other genres but are not unclassifiable or anything.

I think media as a whole is getting more and more complex anyway, to the point that we already have pages for certain established combinations of genres (eg. Fantastic Comedy, Action Horror).

Food for thought:

1. Are there legitimate examples of Genre-Busting that don't go under Genre Mashup and Genre Roulette?
2. Are said examples things tropers can actually identify and not things that can only be said in retrospect (eg. about genre codifiers)
3. Is Genre-Busting actually being misused (as a badge of honor, maybe) for works that should be under Genre Roulette and Genre Mashup?
4. Is it a gush / Fan Myopia magnet? (This work is SO special because it DEFIES genres [not really] and ORIGINATED a whole bunch of TROPES)

ETA: Not the first to ask these questions, old TRS that stalled.

Edited by Synchronicity on May 8th 2022 at 8:38:05 AM

Part of the issues is that genres themselves are vaguely and ad-hockily defined.

According to this thread, Genre-Busting was supposed to be a work that "broke new ground".

My understanding would be that:

• A "Genre Mashup" would indicate a work in which multiple genres can be distinctly identified, simply operating side-by-side.
  • A hypothetical example might be a story that is primarily an Occult Detective work, but that also features a Paranormal Romance B-plot.
• "Genre Busting" would indicate a work in which distinct genres can no longer be identified: the work has taken on a new genre, distinct from any inspirations that it might draw from. One can no longer say that this bit is from this genre and that bit is from that genre—it's all a single, cohesive genre, just one that didn't exist before.

As to an example of "Genre Busting", one example from the trope-page is Thief: The Dark Project:

It was a game that played in first person, but that wasn't a shooter; that was focussed around stealth; that included puzzle elements, but that wasn't a point-and-click or RPG—and all this at a time in which such a blend was pretty unusual, I think.

And I wouldn't say that one could pick out individual genres from it: there are no elements of which one might say: "this bit here is a first-person shooter", or "that sequence was a point-and-click adventure". All of the above traits combined to form a single, cohesive experience—a single genre. Thus it wouldn't be a "Genre Mashup".

It drew from other genres, but the result was something not recognisable as any of them; was something (pretty much) new.

I'd very much agree, I believe: the boundaries of genres are subjective things, and thus so too is the point at which new genres are formed.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on May 8th 2022 at 5:22:54 PM

The whole system is complex because we are limited by definitions, but individual examples may fall into any of them. Tropes are descriptive, not proscriptive. They are also prone to evolution, and what was once simply Genre-Busting may become a Genre Launch.

• Genre-Busting: The work is difficult to categorize as a specific genre.
• Genre Mashup: The work combines elements of two or three distinctive genres.
• Genre Roulette: The work alternates between genres depending on what is happening in the moment.

But then, of course, a mashup may go on to become a genre if it proves popular enough.

Take Occult Detective and Paranormal Romance, the genres Ars brought up. Both of those are themselves genre mashups - Occult Detective combines Urban Fantasy and a Detective Story, while Paranormal Romance combines Fantasy and Romance.

Heck, considering Romance is usually considered a distinct genre, any story that is primarily one genre but has a romantic subplot could plausibly be called a genre mashup.

True, but not generally within a single work, I imagine. Rather, one work may be a Genre Mashup, and a following work may refine the mix further to become a Genre Buster.

My question is less what Genre-Busting wants to be and how to actually apply it to works and examples. Take the four quoted examples in the OP. Can any of them be considered Genre-Busting, even generously? Because I have an inkling based on the OPE’s and how I’ve seen it wicked that much of the usage is like that.

The thing is, saying that a work is difficult to classify is subjective. I'd argue that very few works are difficult to classify. A work that combines elements from other genres or goes against genre convention can still be classified.

It does seem like a real magnet for gushing and Fan Myopia like you mentioned, since part of the definition seems to be that it has to "break new ground". Take that Monsters, Inc. example: Love the movie, but it's not very "genre-busting" as the trope seems to be describing. Hell, being a "monster movie/kid flick/invasion movie/sci-fi/family drama/comedy" can also apply to, say, Aliens in the Attic.

This sounds like a possible TRS issue. Should I add Genre-Busting to Tropes Needing TRS?

EDIT: Nevermind it's apparently already there.

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on May 9th 2022 at 8:58:02 AM

Hmm... I don't feel like I know those examples well enough to comment on them, specifically.

(I've seen Monsters Inc., as I recall, but it's been a long time since I did.)

That is tricky!

I would say that a work counts if one might look at it and say: "It looks like X—but not entirely, and it has bits of Y in it—but not enough to really call it Y..."

And, as RustBeard said above, this is subjective. Some people apply genres broadly, and some narrowly.

For example, consider the "roguelike" genre: To some, I gather, a game only fits if it conforms to the "Berlin Interpretation"; to others, I believe, anything with permadeath and randomised levels counts.

Which means, then, that whether a work "busts" genres will depend on just how broadly a given observer applies genres. (Or perhaps on how much specificity they include in genre-definitions.)

So... Perhaps this should be an Audience Reaction?

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on May 9th 2022 at 6:50:32 PM

The "break new ground and becomes practically a new genre on its own" part of the definition is probably covered by Trope Maker (which seems to be more about genres more than actual tropes), so that leaves Genre-Busting in an odd limbo for works that doesn't fit an established artistic/literary/musical/gaming/media category yet.

And I agree with @2's post that "genre"s are very loosely defined, and I highly doubt that any work that's placed in one category in bookstores/libraries (e.g. fantasy, romance, horror, etc.) is going to exclusively contain elements from that one "genre", and smaller stores usually forgo those distinctions altogether and simply divide the works by media (anime & manga, comics, novels, non-fiction) and age demographics (kids, teens, young adults, etc.).

As I mentioned in the "badge of honors" discussion, though, in practice, this page seems to be an excuse to shoehorn some troper's favorite work to make it seem unique and one of a kind and therefore "better".

I don't remember what TRS thread I argued it in, but I basically made the claim that works that mash/bust/create genres are all essentially the same concept: works defying existing genre norms. Whether they are imitated or not is irrelevant to the original work because they are still breaking normal genre boundaries.

Giving this a bump. I think there are two ways we could define this:

• A work that "breaks new ground and gives rise to new tropes". If we go with that definition, we might want to institute a waiting period to add examples so we can see if it really did have an impact.

• A work that "is defies classification". If we go this way, we should make the trope YMMV. As I said earlier, I don't think a work can defy genre classification and it really comes down to subjective opinions.