Subversions are not good.

Brilliantly Subverted!

Cleverly Subverted!

Wonderfully Subverted!

Gloriously Subverted!

Hilariously Subverted!

Utterly Subverted!

Tropers really like subversions, apparently. This feels like an extension of Tropes Are Not Bad — lots of people here view tropes as bad, and therefore, when their favorite show subverts a trope, they crow loudly about how it is brilliantly, wonderfully, gloriously, hilariously subverted! Because that means that their favorite show is original and perfect and blaaaaah.

Anyway... I'm not sure what to do about this beyond going through and weeding some of it out. Is there a way to gently discourage people from automatically pimping up every subversion in their favorite shows and such as a Crowning Moment of Subversion or something?

edited 5th Nov '10 2:47:48 PM by Aquillion

I think you should relax a bit. There is nothing wrong with these things you cite.

Just remember this: if a trope is played straight, subverted, inverted, zig-zagged, etc, the trope is still used. The exception would be if the trope is averted, because it was never used.

So remember, Tropes Are Not Bad.

Stuff like "Painfully sub/averted" and "Unfortunately sub/averted" exist too, for the record (albeit leaning much more towards averted).

edited 5th Nov '10 4:23:32 PM by Cliche

In many of the cases of "<adjective> subverted", the <adjective> describes how well the subversion was handled rather than the subversion itself.

I'm just annoyed by this when the example is actually Not A Subversion. Especially when the example is played perfectly straight, and the troper just wanted to list it as a subversion. *glances at Throwing Your Sword Always Works, which had examples of the thrown weapon connecting and damaging the enemy being listed as subversions*

edited 6th Nov '10 6:48:25 AM by Servbot

I do wish there was some kind of way we could make every editor pass a quiz about Not A Subversion and Playing with a Trope before allowing them to use "subverted", "averted", "deconstructed", etc. in a sentence.

"Alice walks into a room and sees a chair. She comments on how tired she is. She leans on the back of the chair for a moment, then leaves. In this example, People Sit On Chairs was...

• Subverted
• Averted
• Zigzagged
• Lampshaded
• Sitting on chairs is not a trope."

edited 6th Nov '10 9:46:18 AM by BlackWolfe

There was an idea for a tutorial game people would have to pass but google crisis and all that.

I remember that tutorial. That was something that came out of the "hey, where did all the bullets go?" incident that beget the Edit Tips system.

edited 6th Nov '10 2:36:48 PM by DocStrange

I don't see anything wrong with commenting on the quality of an incident of playing with a trope. Sometimes the execution if utterly cackhanded, other times it's brilliant.

That equally applies to when a trope is played straight though, such as when a Chekhov's Gun is something it would be almost literally impossible to work out without having skipped ahead to the ending.

We aren't supposed to be writing reviews-by-proxy in the example descriptions. It's okay to be snarky but judging the quality of something borders on subjectivity.

edited 9th Nov '10 10:06:50 AM by Fighteer

Tropers like subversions because, to subvert a trope, you usually have to be Genre Savvy enough to recognize you're using a trope in the first place, which inspires all sorts of "One of us! One of us!" sentiment.

Just because it's overused doesn't mean it's misused.

I do find aversions a bit odd. If it's averted, doesn't is simply not belong in that catagory at all? I mean, why put "averted in that so-and-so is actually a saint" in the Total Monster section, instead of simply putting the character in the saint section?

Generally, aversions make sense when there's an expectation of seeing the trope itself... but you don't.

For instance, Most Common Super Power is near-omnipresent in modern superhero comics, so a prominent, modestly-endowed, adult female superhero is an aversion worth noting.

edited 10th Nov '10 6:21:57 AM by suedenim

Or if you've got a fantasy story and nobody uses swords.

Or a Troperiffic pirate film that averts To Arr Is Pirate.

But remember - trope lists are lists of tropes that are used. 99.99999% of the time, we really are not interested in populating that list with tropes that are not. Any trope not on the list can be assumed to be averted. If it isn't, it should be added to the list. That's the way I look at it.

A subverted trope is a form of using the trope, acknowledging it exists while using it differently. An averted trope is something that comes into the parameters of the trope while using it differently, it doesn't acknowledge the trope like subverted does. To subvert Space Is Noisy is to have someone mention that they thought they would hear the spaceship exploding. In this case, averting the trope is more common than subverting it. We don't list aversions often because coming "into the parameters" of the trope can be subjective.

This whole topic is more of a wiki talk thing about editor education rather than discussing the tropes themselves, as all this information about playing with a trope is already out there and discussed many times.

^ Those definitions are not entirely correct.

• Subverting a trope is setting it up but not completing it. Carrying it only partway through.
  • You are watching a comedy. The caterer walks into the big fancy party carrying a huge, elaborate cake. Everything points to the trope Carrying a Cake coming into play — surely he's going to drop it? He doesn't. Carrying a Cake has been Subverted.
• Averting a trope is not using it at all, in a work that it is so expected in, so that its absence is noticeable.
  • You are reading a fantasy. It's set in Japan, or a Japanese Counterpart Culture. The hero has a sword. It's a Tsurugi, though, not a katana. The trope Every Japanese Sword is a Katana has been averted.

Averting one trope often means that another trope is used instead.

edited 14th Nov '10 8:16:31 PM by Madrugada

That's a great one-line description of Subverted. I think it should be worked into the Subverted Trope page and/or become its Laconic. The Subverted Trope page as written is a little too verbose and confusing.

While subversions are not good, they aren't bad either.

Subversions Are Tools?

^^^ Averted Trope also covers any instance when a trope simply isn't used for whatever reason, doesn't it? I.e. including those that there's no set up for, or which have no reason to use the trope. Guide Dang It! does not apply to your average film, for example, because it's a videogame concept. So by default all films avert that trope.

Is there a way to gently discourage people from automatically pimping up every subversion in their favorite shows and such as a Crowning Moment of Subversion or something?

Hahaha, no. Pretty sure Fast Eddie doesn't want any more crowners, and subversion don't work like that.

I think half of the "subverted trope etc" are more deconstructions than subversions, even if deconstructions are subversions...