Am I a weirdo?
I just came across How's Your British Accent?, which seems to be about characters adopting a fake accent that is actually the actor's real accent (e.g., a British actor plays an American character who has to pretend to be British). That seems like a fairly textbook example of trivia to me.
Bigotry will NEVER be welcome on TV Tropes.
No, the other one.
Except that the accent is clearly present in the work. It's a joke or nod to the audience about the actor. It's a trope.
Check out my fanfiction!
I'm helping!
The character's accents, both fake and real, are clearly present in the work. Spotting that the character's fake accent is the actor's real accent requires outside knowledge.
Trouble Cube continues to be a general-purpose forum for those who desire such a thing.
No, the other one.
Yes, and "it requires outside knowledge" isn't an argument of any worth when the work itself makes a joke out of the trope. Missing the reference isn't missing the joke; it's missing the punchline. And it's not like every joke where you don't get the punchline because "it requires outside knowledge" is suddenly trivia.
Check out my fanfiction!
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
I dunno, ~eroock; I'd like someone else to weigh in with their opinions because I can see my side and I think I simply disagree with ~Another Duck about if "dedicated to Tetsuya Koiso" means Mr Tetsuya inspired, retired, or died. (There's always a chance I'm missing an aspect of their argument, and a new perspective might change mine.)
^ Another Duck argued that the creator's intention to use a trope is all that matters, the limited knowledge of the audience can not be used as an argument to make a trope trivia. You probably want to address this in your response. I think intention sounds good if we handled that aspect consistent but there are things like Corpsing, Obvious Stunt Double, Logical Fallacies or Real Life Writes the Plot which put a question mark behind intention.
Edited by eroock on Dec 8th 2018 at 1:00:48 PM
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
The Pot Hole, Authorial Intent, is the reverse to Death of the Author. "Death" says that the author cannot use Word of God declarations to influence how the audience perceives the work, while "Intent" says that the author is the final authority on what the work is trying to say.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
No, the other one.
The difference between The Character Died with Him and In Memoriam is that the former is, within the work, just a character dying, while the latter is explicitly referring to the Real Life person, within the work. The Character Died with Him does not require a reference to the actor.
The tropes are not directly comparable, and in this case, that makes all the difference.
Sure, a Real Life death is trivia, but a work pointing in that direction is not. As such, it doesn't matter whether Real Life death is a trope or not. Again, there's no point in bringing it up whether it's a trope. Even after your explanation, it still doesn't matter.
I don't think examples are unclear if there's a dedication to someone who's dead.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I'm arguing that creator's intent isn't a requirement for tropes, but if there's a clear intent, and the work doesn't contradict that intent (unless that's what the trope is about), then we can take that intent when we evaluate the trope.
Also note that intent, the way I'm talking about it here, requires that the work itself supports that intent. If a creator intends something that in no way is in the work, we can't count it. But if it is in the work, we can, and should. We can't read minds, but we can reasonably assume if there's no Word of God.
What the audience knows, outside the work itself, is irrelevant. Outside knowledge is necessary to understand almost all tropes. This does not make almost all tropes trivia.
Edited by AnotherDuck on Dec 4th 2018 at 7:54:57 PM
Check out my fanfiction!
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
).
Secondly, you're arguing that the difference between Para Text and In-Universe makes these tropes incompatibly different. I disagree, so our arguments are incompatible. (Doesn't make either of us wrong, just unable to resolve with this line of arguments.)
Thirdly, how does "dedicated to Tetsuya Koiso" mean the work is "work pointing in that direction"?
Fourth; "If a creator intends something that in no way is in the work, we can't count it. But if it is in the work, we can, and should." That's been the basis of my contention. Records of when "Tetsuya Koiso" died are not present within the work, so I contend that unless the work itself makes a reference to their death, instead of just their inspiration, In Memoriam is not present. My contention is based on the way you argued that The Character Died with Him doesn't explicitly refer to the death of the Real Life actor.
Edited by crazysamaritan on Dec 4th 2018 at 12:22:45 PM
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
No, the other one.
A dedication to a person points towards knowing who that person is.
Death of the Author does not apply to tropes. We can't just interpret whatever we want and pretend that's what's actually in the work. Tropes are a tool for creators to use to communicate with the audience. Ignoring intent is like ignoring what someone means in an argument in favour of nitpicking words to create some other meaning.
By your logic, Stealth Pun and any tropes relating to Subtext are not tropes, since they are not present in the work. However, since we can deduce their meaning from the context, the message from the creator is present. The context of introducing a reference into a work includes some knowledge about what the reference points to.
Not everything has to be explicit to count as a trope.
Check out my fanfiction!
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
Aside from that, trope-tropes have an interesting relationship with Authorial Intent. Artistic License is an excellent example, because we are assuming an intent from the author based on knowledge that only a portion of the audience is aware of. Artistic License means that the author got it wrong, and we assume it was done wrong intentionally. They might've done the research, didn't do enough research, didn't do any research, or all the research available to them was wrong, but we don't look for evidence that the author was aware of the error. Instead, we assume the author cannot answer our questions and say that the mistakes were present because they served to make the story the way the author intended.
All the above here is just clearing up misinformation. Here's a new argument to try persuading you:
- "Dedicated to J.P. and his friends."
- "For Jackie"
- "They may be called the Palace Guard, the City Guard, or the Patrol. Whatever the name, their purpose in any work of heroic fantasy is identical: it is, round about Chapter Three (or ten minutes into the film) to rush into the room, attack the hero one at a time, and be slaughtered. No one ever asks them if they wanted to. This book is dedicated to those fine men."
- "For my husband, Samuel Barondes,\\
And in loving memory of Louise Ann Brizendine"
- "To Mom and Dad, who believed"
No, the other one.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what I wrote if you think how you explained it does not apply to what I wrote.
It is implicit that the dedication is to the memory of a late person. Therefore, what you call a strawman argument holds up as a proper argument. If you think it's a strawman argument, well, your argument is just that bad.
It's completely and utterly irrelevant if I can tell which of those is the right trope. That's the entire point. What thread have you been reading?
Check out my fanfiction!
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
Edited by crazysamaritan on Dec 7th 2018 at 11:56:06 AM
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
Should Long-Runners be trivia?
And Doorstopper with it?
Because they're about the length of a work, but nothing about the narrative itself?
Although, it would imply Boxed Set and such, which are more like Cover Tropes, in that it's an external presentation of the work that evokes thoughts in the viewer.
Edited by Malady on Dec 10th 2018 at 10:39:17 AM
Disambig Needed: Help with those issues! tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=13324299140A37493800&page=24#comment-576
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
I perceive all of those as Metatextual elements; part of the work, yet not present in the narrative of the work.
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
No, the other one.
Yeah, I think those are still are tropes. They're not something inside the work, but they are the work, so to speak.
Check out my fanfiction!
I think Parody Assistance should be a trivia entry. The original author helping in the creation of a parody work is more of a behind-the-scenes factoid than an actual trope.
How's Your British Accent? reads like a subtrope of The Cast Showoff. The latter is Trivia, the former is not. Does it come together for somebody?
So crowners are working again. Is there any mod around to catch up with the long list of pending requests?
Why is a moderator needed? You can do it yourself on this particular crowner.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
No, the other one.
Parody Assistance may or may not be trivia depending on how it's used. If the original creator takes part in a parody performance, it's entirely within the work, so it's a trope. If the original creator helps with some background stuff, it's trivia. Considering that, I'm inclined to leave it as a trope.
How's Your British Accent? is pretty much an In-Joke about the accent. It's within the work, so it's a trope. I don't think it's used quite in the same way as The Cast Showoff, and I'm dubious if that one's really trivia.
Check out my fanfiction!
...
Not-So-Cheap Imitation should be YMMV, not Trivia.
Not-So-Cheap Imitation should be YMMV due to dealing with audience reaction.
No, the other one.
Agreeing with that. The trope is primarily about the reception of the imitator.
Check out my fanfiction!
Crown Description:
The Trivia category is for narrative conventions that cannot be determined from the final product itself. These are details of production and behind-the-scenes events that influenced the end result of the product. This crowner is used in conjunction with this thread
. Please post in the thread before adding tropes to this list.
Previous crowner here. Make a new crowner after 40 tropes.
As Another Duck noted here
, "Pretty much everything requires some degree of outside knowledge. It's just a matter of scale."
A Shout-Out relies on outside knowledge but we still list it as a proper trope. In Memoriam relies on some outside knowledge (actually not always
) but it's heavily embedded in the work. I would love to see a definition that's clear-cut to avoid such discussions but probably there isn't one and we have to come to a consensus for each trope individually.
That's why we used to have a crowner here to not make it a war between two opinions.
Edited by eroock on Oct 31st 2018 at 5:54:29 PM