Ask The Tropers

Is this the barrier of entry for Edit War? From the Edit War page:

" If someone changes something, you revert it, and they change it again, they are edit warring."

In the page in question, Michael Katsuro changed something concerning Author Tract, and I reverted it with an explanation with why I didn't think the change was merited. I would expect that if Michael Katsuro didn't agree with my reasoning for reverting the edit, he would move the trope to the Discussion section, which is what I always do when a disagreement gets this far.

As far as I know, adding an entry is in itself a change to the page.

Well then we're practically arguing semantics here. Is this thread really necessary? If you would like to move the trope to the Discussion page of the work, I'm perfectly fine with that.

Wait, I just saw this part on the Edit War page: "If you add something, someone changes or removes it, and you change it back, you're edit warring."

Yes, this is already an Edit War, as the original piece was added, removed, and then added back by the same person. Now that that's established, the rest of this should be determining a consensus, hopefully with others chiming in.

Michael, why did you remove the entry? Did you give a reason?

Indeed I did. It was as follows: "Not an Author Tract, just a repeated theme."

To save people some clicks, here is the entry:

• Author Tract: Given that this book is a sequel to REAMDE, it becomes increasingly clear that Stephenson is very concerned about skin cancer. In Reamde, Zula notes that the freckled Wallace has scars presumably where cancers have been dug out. Dodge also identifies by a scar on a terrorist's scalp that the man has terminal skin cancer, relating how he's seen similar scars on others. In Fall, or Dodge in Hell, Dodge thinks about how, due to his fair complexion, he'd always assumed he'd die of skin cancer. Another character mentions that he always wears sunscreen and advises others to stay in the shade to avoid skin cancer.

Here is MichaelKatsuro's reason for removing it: Not an Author Tract, just a repeated theme.

And here is my reason for including it: I think that once a character starts lecturing others on the dangers of skin cancer, it crosses into Author Tract.

Is there really any point where it's a lecture, though? I've been using the word-search function of my e-book program, and I can't find any part where there's more than a short sentence about it, like when Maeve says "And remember: SUNSCREEN AND HATS!"

I didn't even remember Maeve getting in on it, but that's another example. I was thinking about the religious culty guy in the early section of the story when Sophia finds the crucified Enoch Root. He's the one who talks about always wearing sunscreen to avoid skin cancer and advises Sophia's group to stay in the shade.

Clearly there's something going on with Stephenson's repeated mentions of skin cancer dangers and safety throughout these two books in spite of it all having no role in the actual plot. If it's not an Author Tract, what do you think it would be?

Imma be honest: I checked the part you're talking about, and if you mean Ted, the guy with melanoma who talks about "the KKK Libel," then I can't find a place where he tells them to stay in the shade. A page number or chapter number or something would be great.

And I'm not sure it is a trope at all unless it's an Author Tract. It's just mentioning something several times.

EDIT: Never mind, I found the part. Page 191.

I am not familiar with the works in question, but as written the example... does not seem like an example of Author Tract. Simply repeating something multiple times does not an author tract make. There can be other reasons for the repetition, such as foreshadowing something, or a Red Herring, or the work being Anvilicious without enterict author tract territory...

If it is a valid example, it should focus on how and why it is an author tract.

MichaelKatsuro:

Unfortunately, my ancient e-reader is too crude to be able to locate specific passages very easily.

"Mentioning something several times" is a pattern, and patterns in an author's work are usually tropes. The fact that Stephenson keeps bringing up the dangers of skin cancer in works that have nothing to do with it is, I think, pretty indicative of him warning the reader about it.

shadowblack:

As I mentined above, skin cancer is not a plot point in either story and has no impact on the plot. The author is sticking references in for no apparent reason other than his own interest in warning the reader about it. Adding this note, as well as Maeve's additional mention to the list, would be a simple matter.

But both Maeve's warning and Ted's make sense in-story. Maeve's mentioning it because it makes sense to mention it in her situation (going on a nature tour in her job as a guide for such tours, for those of you who don't know).

Ted's mentioning it because he's got melanoma. If his melanoma was mentioned more, it's be one thing, but right now, IMO it's just the kind of incidental detail that Stephenson usually includes to make things feel more detailed and real.

It'd be one thing if some character held a little lecture about it, but right now, I just don't see it.

I thought Author Tract related to the author pushing some political belief, not something pretty noncontroversial like a warning about skin cancer.

Yeah, I guess you could say that this isn't really trying to convince people of a belief, like if he'd been trying to gain support for the idea that it's possible to get skin cancer from too much sunlight (in some alternate universe where that was a controversial claim).

Also, my main problem here is that in the novel it doesn't really come off as the author trying to convince you of anything.

The Author Tract article does not give a robust definition (and I'm surprised it isn't YMMV). But I would consider something a theme rather than any kind of tract if it fits the story well and is not pushed on the audience by narrative or character speeches. A tract or Writer on Board must feel like it is going beyond the needs or scope of the story.

"But both Maeve's warning and Ted's make sense in-story."

I'm not saying that their statements don't make sense in story. That would just be bad writing. But the dangers of skin cancer do not factor into the plot despite characters repeatedly bringing it up.

"It'd be one thing if some character held a little lecture about it, but right now, I just don't see it."

As far as I understand it, an Author Filibuster would be where a character stops the narrative to give a lecture on a subject, not an Author Tract. This work uses multiple characters all bringing up the same topic rather than a single character saying everything all at once. Honestly, Stephenson's many Info Dumps on all manner of tangential subjects could potentially qualify for that trope.

"Also, my main problem here is that in the novel it doesn't really come off as the author trying to convince you of anything."

Characters keep thinking about the dangers of skin cancer, exhibiting the dangers of skin cancer, and telling each other to watch out for skin cancer for no special plot reason. Stephenson is telling you to watch out for skin cancer. Author Tract doesn't need to be something political or controversial.

Note this line from Author Tract:

Can it be said that the entire unicerse of the books has been created to put forth the author's viewpoint on skin cancer?

^ Honestly, that line doesn't fit many of the examples. Sinfest is a clear author tract, but only became so after running for several years. The Order of the Stick is there because it has some page-length lectures on how to (not) play an RPG, but I hesitate to say the entire story and setting was made for those. I feel we need a tighter definition on the difference between this, Writer on Board and Author Filibuster.

shadowblack: No, not at all. The amount of text that mentions skin cancer takes up at most two pages in total.

And to be clear, that doesn't mean there are two actual pages about it. It means that the text, added together, takes up at most two pages if printed all at the same place.

Okay, so nobody except for Crawdad thinks it should be on Author Tract? Because I'm just gonna remove it if nobody's got any objections.

Looks cleared for removal due to the consensus.