Ask The Tropers

I would say the value judgment, in which it's said how attractive the unkemptness makes him, is YMMV and should not be on there. I don't recall anyone in universe remarking on it, which would be the only reason it could stay on main, in my opinion.

I didn't choose the troping life, the troping life chose me

In that case the entire Unkempt Beauty page and wicks in general could use some purging then, as I'm simply using it the way I've seen it done elsewhere.

Not that I'd be entirely against it, as some examples on that page do look as if they were typed one-handed.

Edited by AlleyOop

It feels like a trope suffering from similar issues that Adorkable used to. That is, being used as an audience reaction.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Yeah, I agree it feels this way.

^^ That applies to all beauty tropes, though. There's no way to quantify what makes someone a Pretty Boy, how long the hair must be for them to be a Long-Haired Pretty Boy, what the "unkempt" in Unkempt Beauty means, and so on.

Generally speaking, however, Hollywood aims at making sympathetic characters attractive (Beauty Equals Goodness, Fanservice and whatnot), so it can be inferred that Bucky's appearance is intended to be viewed as an example of Unkempt Beauty.

The rewrite looks good; just leave it as is for the time being.

Edited by RoundRobin - Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!

See "Personal opinions on hotness" on our No Lewdness, No Prudishness page. It's not allowed.

I feel like the Shirtless Scene part might be irrelevant to the example, since it's specifically noted as Fan Disservice, so fans might just be projecting their attraction onto it.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

I felt the same but I was unsure how far I can go when altering other troper's edits. Do I have the permission to delete that line?

I think tropes like Unkempt Beauty can be objective, if it's clear from the work that the person in question is considered beautiful. That is, it shouldn't just be an audience reaction, but in-universe.

The most clear-cut case is perhaps if it's an in-universe reaction from other characters, but it could also be discussed or an Informed Attribute.

In Bucky's case, the unkempt-ness is done to show that he's in a bad state physically and mentally. As mentioned, the shirtless scene is Fan Disservice and the look change also included his raccoon eyes which is not something intended to be attractive.

The only times his good looks are genuinely highlighted were when he was a cleancut soldier (and his striking good looks and Heroic Build are used to contrast skinny little Steve) and after he cleaned himself up and went on a date in TFATWS. The entry is clearly going for either "well I think he's hotter this way" or "attractive man is attractive," neither of which are really useful.

Edited by Larkmarn Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.

Yeah, with character attractiveness, there needs to be an in-universe acknowledgement that the character is attractive, and it's not just fans gushing about someone's hotness, especially since most residents of Fictionland are attractive, one way or another.

I wouldn't ask for an In-Universe confirmation for any case when a character is beautiful. It is often implied i.e. because Beauty Equals Goodness etc and not explicitly commented on. I'm in favor of keeping the example. I don't think anyone is debating that Bucky has messy hair and is pretty. I was merely adjusting the wording.

Edited by Asherinka

That implication doesn't even exist here though, as many MCU villains are played by good-looking actors who aren't uglied up Red Skull style, even some of Bucky's own (Robert Redford, Daniel Brühl, Erin Kellyman, the TFATWS spoiler villain come to mind).

I agree with Larkmarn. Bucky is certainly intended to be a handsome man, but the works don't indicate that he's intended to be seen as particularly attractive while he's messy-haired and going through it, and only highlight his attractiveness when he's not unkempt. I'm for removing the entry.

Edited by Synchronicity

As I've understood it, Fan Disservice is used for when a traditional fanservice trope, normally meant to highlight a character as Ms or Mr. Fanservice is used under questionable circumstances that would make it Squicky to normal viewers.

I've run across a fair amount of analysis of that scene which comes from the perspective of believing that the scene was shot with fanservicey elements in mind as a deliberate choice on behalf of the creators, for the sake of turning it on its head (i.e. the popular interpretation of the scene's narrative is that it's stating, "Yes, viewers, we want you to take note of the muscles he now has, and thus have framed it in a way that is potentially titillating to those who might enjoy this thing. However, we also want you to know that he's like this because of torture and drugs, to distress you into finding it a Guilty Pleasure given the circumstances"). That's where the interpretation that he qualifies as an Unkempt Beauty also comes from, this general understanding that the camera itself identifies him as a fanservicey character despite his circumstances. I'm sufficiently far down on the sex-averse end of the asexual spectrum that I'm not the best at identifying what does and doesn't qualify as sexy, but I do think their interpretation of the scene's framing is a valid one.

Hence I figured, based on the fact that other editors have written Fan Disservice entries relating to that scene in the past, that creator intent was sufficiently indicated to qualify it as a main page rather than YMMV trope (though granted, implicit narrative is always inherently hazier to decipher than explicit narrative). But if you're of the opinion that it's still too tangential or rooted in YMMV, feel free to ditch it.

One doesn't contradict the other. A good-looking guy who's let himself go (messy hair, perma-stubble, etc) doesn't suddenly become ugly. A shave and a haircut and they're back into Chick Magnet territory (which is exactly what Bucky did in TFATWS).

FWIW, I think that the Shirtless Scene serves to shows that in the years since The First Avenger Bucky has become as buff as Steve "Captain America" Rogers —therefore, he should have been as much of an eye candy as Steve, were he not HYDRA's prisoner.

---

EDIT: Adept, are you talking to me or Alley?

Edited by RoundRobin - Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!

@Asherinka: When I said in-universe confirmation, I wasn't only referring to instances where other characters directly say, "you're hot," to the character, but this includes visual emphasis, such as Bishie Sparkle, Male Gaze, Female Gaze, etc.

^^ I agree that Unkempt Beauty doesnt't necessarily require the character to be more attractive when unkempt than groomed, but that they are still attractive despite the lack of grooming. That said, I've only ever seen Bucky in Civil War and the Avengers, and I don't remember him (or his appearance) being emphasized in any way.

ETA: Ninja'd. I was referring to Alley's post.

Edited by Adept

This is what I'm trying to say. The works don't emphasize that he is still attractive while unkempt. The trope ^^ linked, She Cleans Up Nicely, even implies that they weren't attractive before doing so.

Well, the fact that Fan Disservice operates on the basis of the work treating a character as a source of fanservice despite being in poor circumstances, suggests to me that he is being consciously presented by the camera in TWS as someone who is meant to be seen as attractive to audiences (perhaps incidentally, TWS is also when he's at his most unkempt). Agreed that CW and Avengers do not do this with him.

And agreed that Unkempt Beauty doesn't have to be mutually exclusive with She Cleans Up Nicely despite the page treating them as opposites. The latter only indicates that they were less attractive, not unattractive, whereas Unkempt Beauty only requires that a character still be considered attractive while messy, without making comparative judgments. I think it's worth editing the page description on Unkempt Beauty to note that She Cleans Up Nicely is a contrasted trope, rather than an outright inversion, would be a more accurate depiction of their relationship to one another.

Also possibly worth tossing Unkempt Beauty into the short-term cleanup to remove examples of people using it just to salivate.

Edited by AlleyOop

@Synchronicity please don't split hairs. She Cleans Up Nicely also says the following:

Edited by RoundRobin - Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!

The reason I'm 'splitting hairs' so to speak is because attractiveness tropes attract examples of what tropers *think* is attractive, rather than what is actually *presented* as attractive. (That's why a lot of Hot X tropes are gone.) So we do, actually, have to be judicious about this sort of stuff.

Edited by Synchronicity

Fair point, and I offer my apologies.

This is a silly discussion anyway. Messy appearance or no, does anyone really doubt that the Deuteragonist of the Captain America films is meant to be viewed as attractive?

- Fly, robin, fly! - ...I'm trying!

All characters are meant to be at a baseline yeah, because Hollywood operates on its own form of Generic Cuteness. But generally I'm against cutting tropes unless it's abundantly clear they don't qualify, and I do think the movies employ enough gaze tropes that implicitly mark the Winter Soldier as an attractive character, independently of actor beauty that I think it qualifies (and in fact I think the way the film consciously deploys certain kinds of fanservice imagery around him so that it can twist it around, rather than pure titillation, is part of what makes him interesting on a meta level, but I digress). I'm fine with Asherinka's version now that I understand the YMMV elements may be out of bounds.

Edited by AlleyOop