Better example sorting: Author Appeal

I don't know if it's because the folders are by paraphilia, or people just don't pay attention, or what, but this page is very confusing. Primarily, it seems to me that every kink a person exhibits in his/her work is listed in the folder for each of them. I think Quentin Tarantino and feet comes up at least twice. Maybe alphabetical? Dividing by medium isn't really feasible or applicable.

It might also be a good idea to limit examples to those that have been verified, but that's a separate step and possibly a separate discussion.

edited 15th Sep '10 7:11:14 AM by HersheleOstropoler

Bump, and it occurs to me that the nonsexual examples could be moved to Creator Thumbprint.

I'll take the response here as no objections; I should be able to get to it by the end of the week.

Thank you, whoever moved the non-sexual examples.

I have a question.

How is it 'author appeal' for a gay or bisexual author to include same-sex relationships or sexual activity when it isn't author appeal for a straight author to include opposite-sex relationships or sexual activity?

I disagree that it is "not Author Appeal for a straight author to include opposite-sex relationships or sexual activity". Naked women in a story written by a straight man is Author Appeal. That situation is even the page quote.

Also, if there is a tendency toward what you are describing, perhaps it is more "notable" when the straight sexual activity is kinky or fetishy in some way. Vanilla straight sex is normal, but vanilla gay sex is deviant. TVTropes is a catalog of tropes that are, not a catalog of what tropes should be.

edited 7th Nov '10 4:01:57 PM by rodneyAnonymous

I'd actually be disinclined to include vanilla sex at all; if only 1% of the population are asexual, no more than 3% of authors are, so an author who likes sex including sex in a story is a bit People Sit On Chairs.

The issue would be proving that it's (ahem) self-gratification instead of simply Sex Sells.

Which is why it's easier to catalogue less mainstream kinks. They're less likely to have been put there for the audience's benefit.

Premise: For a straight author to include a naked woman is Author Appeal
Proposed conclusion: Therefore, for a gay author to include a gay man is Author Appeal
The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Premise A: For a straight author to include a naked woman is Author Appeal
Conclusion A: Therefore, for a gay author to include a naked man is Author Appeal

Premise B: For a straight author to include a straight man is Author Appeal
Conclusion B: Therefore, for a gay author to include a gay man is Author Appeal

Premise A has the advantage of being arguably true, while I think we can all agree Premise B is false.

edited 9th Nov '10 2:33:00 AM by Yamikuronue

A more accurate analogy would be:

Premise B': For a straight man to include a straight woman is Author Appeal.

Conclusion B': For a gay man to include a gay man is Author Appeal.

Premise B' is more plausible than Premise B, but it's still a bit of a stretch to claim it's universally true.

edited 9th Nov '10 7:26:54 PM by tbarrie

I alphabetized the letter folders, but I had to dump a bunch of entries that didn't explicitly mention the creator's name into the unattributed folder. Sorry for any loss of information.

I also didn't do anything about the duplicate entries, but at least they should be easy to spot now.

Did you put anywhere the entries that weren't sorted or did you just delete them?

I see, I went for the gay man as an Author Avatar and chose "straight man". Your back-forming of Premise B` no less valid and no less obviously untrue if this is to remain a trope and not People Sit On Chairs.

edited 10th Nov '10 12:37:33 PM by Yamikuronue

For example, if I were to put a bisexual woman in a story and portray her having sex with other women, would that be Author Appeal or simply writing what I know?

Ditto for a bisexual/gay man or lesbian woman.

Further if someone is writing a story that looks at how aliens view sexuality and how that affects their social structure, would that be Author Appeal if it wasn't strictly heterosexual?

Which, considering the sheer variety and bizarreness of sexuality in nature, is probably not likely anyway.

I think there has to be something more to this then there being non-mainstream sex or approaches to sex in a story.

Also, this is a trope in which inclusion is determined by tropers, in which case I don't think Tropes Are Not Good or Tropes Are Not Bad really works to excuse the bias against non-heteronormative authors.

edited 10th Nov '10 6:32:05 PM by MercuryInRetrograde

You know, I liked the page better the way it was organized before.

To sort of answer that question, it seems like pretty much all of the examples are ones where this is something that particular author does a lot.

To give a well-known example, Quentin Tarantino is known for having a Foot Focus. One shot of a character's feet wouldn't qualify, but if that happens in like every single film, then it's a good case of Author Appeal.

Edit- or with your specific example of bisexuality, the page indicates how SM Stirling has a "hot lesbian scene" in like every single work of his. It sounds like that example is justified particularly because the author has no male homosexuals- it's a clear case of Girl on Girl Is Hot (and it would be the same if this was a straight female author who always had Yaoi Guys).

Giving it some thought, I don't think the writer's gender or sexual preference is really the issue. A good example of Author Appeal is one where the viewer/reader notices it without knowing anything about the creator.

edited 10th Nov '10 10:29:26 PM by Jordan

This is not meant to imply a value judgement. Just a thought experiment:

It is common knowledge that Albert is sexually attracted to himself; he gets "excited" when he sees his reflection in a mirror. Albert writes a story in which the main character is obviously an author avatar. Is that Author Appeal or simply writing what he knows?

edited 10th Nov '10 11:40:07 PM by rodneyAnonymous

IMO, both. Ditto for a gay woman writing about women having sex. It is both Author Appeal and writing what she knows.

Double-posting and replying to your own post?- that's strange.

Also, I don't quite agree with the above post. It can't be Author Appeal merely for a gay person to write about gay relationships (or a straight person to write about straight relationships) or almost every work would be an example of Author Appeal.

While hard to explain, I tend to think of Author Appeal as something "intrusive" in a work- and that's not meant as a value judgment.

edited 11th Nov '10 4:34:22 PM by Jordan

The time to complain was two months ago, Jordan. But go ahead and defend incompetantly sorting it by ill-defined fetish categories including a large catchall, if that can be defended.

Someone should make a note saying whether this is alphabetized by first name, last name, or title.

edited 5th Dec '10 7:34:01 AM by Mullon

By this point, I'm pretty fine with the new ordering. Since several authors have multiple "Appeals", it does make some sense.

I think the only problem (can't think of an example offhand though) is where a work seems to have an Author Appeal- how do you list the work, since the page know refers to authors?

By author, though there's a catchall folder for when that's impossible. But I'm not sure if it's meaningful to say a work has Author Appeal unless the author has done nothing else. The evidence that it appeals to the author is that it shows up in multiple works.

This thread expired after 60 days of inactivity.