Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openTo Split, or Not To Split?
Tiny Meat Gang is a page that has bugged me for a while, because it doesn't just trope the duo as a musical act / podcast, but also contains tropes pertaining to Cody Ko's YouTube channel, which (especially recently) hasn't always even involved Noel (who also has his own channel).
Should the page be split into Music/ (or Podcast/) and then a Web Video page for Cody himself?
openCreate parent universe trope? Literature
I built the Threadbare and Small Medium entries regarding series by Andrew Seiple set in the common universe of Generica Online. I occasionally find myself copy-pasting entries to both pages when I find a trope common to the universe in general. To use a mildly trivial example, the world has an in-universe Cap on class levels (due to the world being associated in some way with an MMORPG) that has in-story effects. I could list that the cap exists on both works pages, but it seems to make more sense to put it on a Generica Online page.
openFoldering a page
So ArtisticLicenseHistory.Hamilton has gotten pretty huge and hard to manage (and I at least think all the examples on it are legitimate), and I was wondering if it's a good time to put things into folders. I already know the folders I personally would use - character reworks (physical, emotional, relationships, etc.), incorrect facts, timeline issues, and the Reynolds affair/pamphlet - but I'm wondering if I need any kind of approval before I do so. If I need approval, can I get it/be directed to where I can get it?
For the record, I'd go with something like this (though some specific examples could be switched around):
- Alexander Hamilton is portrayed as a flawed yet ultimately well-meaning Nice Guy, but in real life he was an absolute Insufferable Genius who loved to hear himself talk. Well known for dishing out Too Much Information and being a complete Troll to people he didn't like, Hamilton was defined by his military aspirations and warmongering attitude, first during the Whiskey Rebellion by encouraging Washington to use the military on his own citizens and then during the Quasi-War with France where he was compared to Napoleon Bonaparte. Miranda himself has emphasized how different the real Hamilton was compared to the show's Hamilton several times since the show became popular.
- Hamilton is portrayed as a straightforward abolitionist in the play; one of his main condemnations of Jefferson is involvement in slavery, and he joins Laurens in saying "we'll never be free until we end slavery". In real life, his views on the matter were much less straightforward. Hamilton was left two slaves by his mother after her death, and his wife, Eliza, grew up with slaves in the household. Philip Schuyler, Hamilton's father-in-law, had slaves during the entire time Eliza and Hamilton were married, and Hamilton was involved in their management. In fact, new evidence at by the Smithsonian
suggests that Hamilton was a slaveowner as well. Hamilton was indeed vocally critical of slavery as an institution and (along with Burr and John Jay) was a founding member of the New York Manumission Society, which supported ending New York's slave trade and gradual emancipation, policies eventually adopted by the state legislature.note Burr was probably more progressive than Hamilton on this score; he introduced a bill calling for immediate abolition of slavery in New York, only for it to be rejected by the legislature. But he was no abolitionist by the generally accepted use of the term, i.e. supporting an immediate end to slavery, in part because of his own financial interest in the institution.
- Aaron Burr's philosophy of "talk less, smile more" would actually fit Jefferson more than it would Burr. In real life, Burr was incredibly ambitious and wasn't afraid to fight; he was actually the first of the show's characters to join the Revolution, and in his political career he often engaged in very risky practices to undermine the Federalist Party, such as when he founded the Manhattan Company
in order to break Hamilton's hold over New York's banks.
- Burr is portrayed as a rich "trust fund baby" as a contrast with Hamilton's dirt-poor upbringing. This isn't entirely accurate; while Burr really did come from a wealthy family, he had a rocky relationship with them at the best of times and was eventually disowned by his relatives. He graduated from university at 16 not because of his wealthy and important father but because of his smarts and work ethic. Burr actually spent most of his adult life as a middle-class man, whereas Hamilton was able to join the upper classes fairly quickly.
- Mulligan was actually fifteen years older than Hamilton, and by some accounts was The Mentor to him (which may explain the in loco parentis line in "My Shot") rather than a peer roughly the same age as the play depicts. Additionally, while he definitely knew Burr since they were neighbors in New York, there's no evidence suggesting that he ever met Laurens and Lafayette; it's theoretically possible, but if it ever happened then no one chose to document it.
- Musical Eliza Hamilton is portrayed as demure, shy, and "helpless", singing, "I have never been the type to try and grab the spotlight". The real Eliza was noted to have been a tomboyish child and to never have lost her strong will and impulsiveness, also said to be suppressing a temper that periodically flared up. Incidentally, she also preferred "Elizabeth" and was almost never called Eliza; "Betsy" was the pet name used by her family and Hamilton himself, and prior to Chernow's book Eliza was rarely addressed as such.note Which Miranda may have adopted simply because Eliza is an easier name to rhyme than Betsy. But then, she is the one to tell this story...
- George Washington is portrayed as a Humble Hero who doesn't necessarily want power but will take it if it means he can do his part to help. This is the image he gave off at the time (and this portrayal is incredibly common in modern America), but he was also noted to have very deceitful tendencies and used his humble image to hide a man who loved the power he had and worked to gain more of it. He was also a noted spymaster and expert manipulator, all of which is gone from the show. And, as noted by his own contemporaries, Washington had a nasty temper that he only barely restrained and on top of that, he was easily irked by even the smallest of perceived infractions. In one correspondence from Alexander Hamilton to his father-in-law Philip Schuyler, Hamilton recounts an incident in which Washington, having been kept waiting at the top of the stairs while Hamilton was preoccupied by a passing officer, scolds him, “Col Hamilton (said he), you have kept me waiting at the head of the stairs these ten minutes. I must tell you Sir you treat me with disrespect.”
- Thomas Jefferson's charismatic and flamboyant mannerisms in the show have little in common with the actual man, who was very socially awkward and nervous (to the point where many historians think he was on the autism spectrum). In a bit of symbolism, his personality here is instead based on the larger-than-life language he authored.
- James Madison was incredibly sickly, small, and frail, even by the standards of the time. While the show maintains his illness through his consistent coughing, the role is double-cast with Hercules Mulligan, so he's a lot taller and more muscular than in real life (his original actor was a former football player and subsequent castings have gone in a similar direction).
- Madison boasts about his writing of the Bill of Rights. While this is certainly true, it is unlikely that he would brag about it, as he was against the idea. Madison believed that the government's powers as listed in the constitution were few, limited and defined, and that a Bill of Rights, which illustrated specific things the government was not allowed to restrict, would be not only redundant but actually destructive, and raise the implication that the government had more power than its authors intended.
- King George III is portrayed as a Card-Carrying Villain who gladly starts the war with the Colonies, but while George was obviously not a Laughing Mad maniac (at least not until later on in his life), he also was not responsible for the war starting. He certainly kept it going, but the incidents that led to the Revolution starting were entirely due to Parliament and British soldiers actually in the Colonies, not George himself. His portrayal as a sadist and an out-and-out psychopath who delights in seeing war break out also stands in stark contrast to the real King George's reported personality: throughout his life, he was noted to be mild-mannered, humble, and kindhearted (and presumably saw preventing the colonies from defecting as his job).
- Generally, the play emphasizes Hamilton and Burr's relationship for Rule of Drama. In real life, the two men were never intimate friends as shown in the show's first act. They were on cordial-to-friendly terms in the 1780s and 1790s, occasionally socialized with their wives and families and worked together on a few legal cases in New York. Nonetheless, Hamilton wrote even at the time that while he and Eliza found Burr charming and personable, they rarely saw eye-to-eye on politics which, for these two intensely political men, prevented any sort of bond from developing. Miranda is correct to show Burr's campaign against Philip Schuyler causing them to fall out completely, but they had never been especially close to begin with.
- In the 2nd Cabinet Battle, Hamilton is depicted as wanting to stay neutral in the French Revolution while Jefferson wants to send soldiers and aid, creating a clear-cut battle between the two. Ironically, while Jefferson did publicly support the revolutionaries and aided Lafayette as much as he could, the notion that America should stay neutral in the revolution was one of the few things the two ever agreed on in their entire livesnote More specifically, while Hamilton wanted to outright declare neutrality in the conflict, Jefferson wanted to stay neutral without declaring it so as to not alienate their French allies (he also believed that the President didn't have the power to declare neutrality in the first place, arguing that if someone had the power to declare war, there was no such thing as a power to declare peace).
- In "Aaron Burr, Sir" Hamilton meets Burr, Marquis de Lafayette, Hercules Mulligan and John Laurens all at the same time in 1776. This was done for the sake of moving the story along and better establishing the quartet as the core group of the narrative. In real life, Hamilton met Mulligan in 1772 (Mulligan actually hosted him in his house for multiple years), he met Lafayette and Laurens in 1777 while he was working with Washington, and while no one can quite pin down when he met Burr, they most likely had met each other in passing by the time Hamilton joined the Army (their first documented meeting was in the late 1780s, but they moved in similar social circles while living in New York, so it's unlikely they didn't at least know of each other).
- In the bar scene, the revolution is described several times as "imminent," and Hamilton says "I wish there were a war," despite the narration putting it in 1776, when the fighting would have been well underway. In fact, if this scene does take place in 1776, then Burr would have already been part of the Continental Army - he enlisted in 1775.
- "The Story of Tonight (Reprise)" sets Alexander and Eliza's wedding earlier than it actually was. It's implied that Hamilton was the first of his friends to get married, though historically he was the last (not counting Burr), and none of those friends were present at his wedding (Laurens was the only one invited, but he was in British custody at the time). Also, Burr had just been promoted to Lieutenant Colonel, which actually happened a few years before Hamilton got married.
- In the show the Battle of Monmouth, Laurens' duel with Charles Lee, and Hamilton's break with Washington are depicted as happening after Alexander and Eliza were married. Historically the Battle of Monmouth took place in 1778 while Alexander and Eliza were married in 1780. In the show the battle and the duel are moved to happen at a later date. Historically Washington and Hamilton's break was not caused by the duel and Hamilton resigned as aide while Washington wanted him to stay on.
- "Dear Theodosia" has Burr singing to his daughter Theodosia around the same time that Hamilton receives word that John Laurens has been killed in action. Theodosia wasn't actually born until 1783, while Laurens was killed in August of the previous year.
- While Burr and Hamilton really did defend Levi Weeks during the first recorded murder trial in Americanote Historically, Henry Brock Livingston was the third defense attorney on the case, "Non-Stop" places this event shortly after the revolution and before Hamilton wrote the Federalist Papers. In real life, this trial didn't happen until 1800, but Burr and Hamilton are already on the outs by this point going by the show timeline If you're interested... Weeks was acquitted for the murder, but the general public opposed the verdict and he was eventually forced to flee New York.
- The show has Jefferson's resignation as Secretary of State and his running to succeed Washington as occurring in close sequence, while in the real world Jefferson resigned in 1793, shortly into Washington's second term.
- Peggy Schuyler's death is moved up a few years so Peggy's actress can change into Maria Reynolds for "Say No to This". In real life, Peggy died in 1801, which would be much later in Act Two.
- "The Election of 1800" has Hamilton emerging from mourning for his son Philip to place his vote for Jefferson, rather than Burr. In reality, Philip didn't die until 1801, when the election was long over.
- Hamilton's break with John Adams didn't occur until 1800, when he published a pamphlet attacking Adams on the eve of the presidential election. In the play, this happens before he publishes the Reynolds pamphlet, which occurred in 1797. "The Adams Administration" also claims Hamilton was "fired" by Adams - Hamilton had in fact resigned as Treasury Secretary in 1795, while Washington was still president, though he remained an unofficial adviser to Washington and enjoyed no such rapport with Adams. Indeed, Hamilton angered Adams by trying to influence policy through his cabinet members, whom Adams in turn fired, thus inspiring Hamilton to publicly denounce him. Adams had also undermined Hamilton’s military efforts by sending a second (successful) peace envoy to France, removing the need for a standing army and making Hamilton’s commission irrelevant. note Understandably, Miranda has said that he chose to gloss over this because other works on the period, including John Adams, had already covered Adams and Hamilton's feud.
- The play (especially the lyrics of "My Shot") further muddles the slavery issue by conflating abolition with manumission. These terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but "manumission" was generally understood to mean encouraging slaveowners to free their own slaves, through financial compensation, restrictions on the slave trade and other incentives, rather than immediate, unconditional emancipation. This was considered the moderate antislavery position at the time, which Hamilton, Burr and most other prominent Americans supported, while few public figures in America endorsed outright abolition during this era. John Laurens was a notable exception, but his death during the war prevented him from doing much to affect it.
- In "Aaron Burr, Sir", Burr is called “the prodigy of Princeton College,” and Alexander heard his name there. Princeton College was not always called that, with its name only changing from the College of New Jersey to Princeton in 1896.
- In the same song, Laurens enters the scene having consumed "two pints of Sam Adams." While Samuel Adams was made a partner in his father's malthouse in the 1740s, there is no evidence he was ever a brewer (one who actually brews beer). The beer that bears his name today did not appear on the market until 1985.
- The show has Hamilton inspiring Mulligan to take a stand and become a revolutionary, while in real life it was actually the exact opposite; Mulligan, a longtime member of the Sons of Liberty, connected Hamilton with William Livingston, a prominent revolutionary, and by 1775 Hamilton had published his first essay arguing for independence.
- While Lafayette says he dreams of "life without a monarchy", the real Lafayette wanted to keep the French monarchy around, believing it would help act as a stabilizing force.
- Though Samuel Seabury's loyalist sympathies were well-known to other New Yorkers, he published his pamphlets anonymously under the pan name "Westchester Farmer" or "A.W. Farmer," and his authorship of them wasn't proven until after the Revolution, when he was forced to forswear his allegiance to the British crown.
- The real Angelica was already married to John Barker Church when she met Hamilton. And rather than a loveless marriage of convenience, they eloped because she feared her father wouldn't approve of his British ties, meaning she wanted to be with him. There were rumors that Angelica engaged in affairs (not only with Hamilton, but Thomas Jefferson, whom she knew during his time in Paris) but they've never been substantiated; by most accounts her marriage with Church was a loving one. Also, in "Satisfied" Angelica says that her father "has no son, so I'm the one who has to social climb for one", which was untrue; in real life she had three younger brothers (hence why she was able to marry for love). According to Lin, by the time he became aware of the Schuyler brothers, he decided to keep the line to emphasize the emotional sacrifice Angelica was making.
- It's highly unlikely that Burr would have tried to become Washington's "Right Hand Man" as the titular song seems to suggest he did. While he did at one point serve on Washington's staff, he quit in June of 1776 to be on the battlefield and then quickly developed an antagonistic relationship with the General due to his lack of commending Burr's war efforts (thus denying him a promotion).
- It's highly unlikely that anyone in the 1770s would call New York "the greatest city in the world" or evince any of the city pride for which it has become proverbial. While an important trade hub famed for its diverse population, Philadelphia and Boston both outclassed it in size and trade routes, and among the New World, Port-au-Prince in colonial Haiti was the larger city and more profitable one, and internationally of course, Beijing, London, and Paris exceeded it greatly in size, splendour, population, and political and social importance.
- "A Winter's Ball" features Hamilton proudly admitting that the story that Martha Washington named a tomcat after him is true. At the time, this rumor did have a lot of followers, but in modern times it's largely considered to have been a false claim made to discredit Hamilton and his positionsnote It's not quite known who started this rumor - some sources, including the Ron Churnow book the musical is based on, claim it was John Adams late in his life, while others claim it was British loyalists who spread it after his death. Miranda himself has admitted that the story is most likely false, but he kept it in on purpose to showcase Hamilton "at his peak cockiness".
- Burr was not Lee’s second in his duel with Laurens. The real second was Major Evan Edwards, a commander of the Eleventh Pennsylvania Regiment and Lee's aide-de-camp. Little else besides this fact is known of Edwards' life, apart from his history in the war (he fought in fifteen battles, including Yorktown). Also, unlike Burr, there is no indication that Edwards disliked Lee, and in fact what evidence exists indicates that he ended the war on good terms with Lee, as he would go on to name one of his children after him.
- In "Yorktown (The World Turned Upside Down)" the show places Laurens in South Carolina where he will later be killed in action, but historically Laurens was at the Battle of Yorktown; he fought side-by-side with Hamilton and helped negotiate the British surrender.
- The battle in which Laurens is killed is portrayed as something like the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812- as a battle which only occurred because the combatants hadn't heard that the war was over. In actuality, the war wasn't over at that point- the final peace treaty wasn't signed until the following year.
- There's no evidence that Hamilton asked Burr to help write the Federalist Papers, nor would he have likely done so; Burr, while still on friendly terms with Hamilton at that point, had already aligned himself with the anti-Federalist/Republican faction in New York.
- Jefferson, Madison, and Burr refer to their party as the Democratic-Republicans, in line with how the party is usually described by historians in order to avoid confusion with the modern-day parties. Circa 1796, the party was usually referred to as the "Republican" party; it changed its name to the Democratic party around the time Andrew Jackson was elected, with some parts splitting off into smaller splinter parties that were eventually absorbed into the modern Republicans.
- In "Take A Break", a nine year old Philip at one point says "I have a sister but I want a little brother!" The real Philip actually had two younger brothers by this point, and would eventually have two sisters and five brothers.
- Washington's farewell address is incredibly condensed and paraphrased for the musical - an appropriate response, considering the actual document is 32 pages long and written in archaic English.
- Aaron Burr didn't actually switch political parties in order to run against Phillip Schuyler as depicted in the show; he had been a member of the Democratic-Republican party for several years by the time he was elected to the Senate.
- In "It's Quiet Uptown", Hamilton mentions taking his children to church on Sundays and making the Sign of the the Cross at the door. In reality, Hamilton was raised Presbyterian (the Sign of the Cross is a Catholic gesture), but became less religious as an adult and didn't regularly attend services.
- The duel between Phillip and George Eacker went about as different in real life as it possibly could've gone. In the show, Phillip fires his shot into the air, but Eacker cheats and shoots him before the count is over. In real life, both turned around but neither one shot until Phillip slowly began to raise his gun, at which point Eacker shot first in preemptive self-defense; while it's possible that Phillip never intended to kill Eacker, there's no way of knowing for certain.
- Hamilton becoming Commanding General of the Army during the Quasi-War with France is not even mentioned, even though the first act of the play establishes Hamilton’s aspirations for military glory.
- "The Election of 1800" also greatly simplifies the political trainwreck that led to Hamilton having to choose between Jefferson and Burr. Explanation In reality, Jefferson and Burr were originally on the same ticket (as Democratic-Republicans), not running against each other; Burr was supposed to be running for vice president, and up until the electors voted it seemed like there had been a straightforward Democratic-Republican victory. However, the rules at the time had each elector cast two votes, with the President being whoever came in first and the VP being whoever came in second; due to some confusion or miscommunication, the Democratic-Republican electors tied Jefferson and Burr instead of giving Jefferson one vote more as they'd intended. This threw the election to the lame-duck Federalist-controlled House, who considered giving the presidency to Burr to spite Jefferson and the rest of the Democratic-Republicans. Burr, although he didn't actively encourage his nomination, also did nothing to discourage it, which did not help his reputation afterwards. It was in this context that Hamilton, still a leading Federalist figure despite his political humiliations, denounced Burr as lacking principles in a speech before Congress and convinced his fellow Federalists not to go with him. The musical simplifies this convoluted situation into a straightforward Burr vs. Jefferson election that viewers are more likely to understand.
- Burr's final challenge to Hamilton was not a direct result of the 1800 presidential race, although it was certainly a contributing factor to Burr's anger. Hamilton actually censured Burr as a candidate in two races; in 1804 it was in New York's gubernatorial race, another political clusterfuck that Burr took far more personally than his presidential defeat.note Burr ran against fellow Republican Morgan Lewis, a protégé of outgoing Governor George Clinton (who would ironically replace Burr as Vice President). As the Federalists failed to field their own candidate, Burr campaigned to gain Federalist support along with the state's anti-Clinton Republican faction. For Hamilton, Burr's fishing for Federalist votes confirmed his view that Burr completely lacked principles; subsequently, he convinced the state's leading Federalists to withdraw support from Burr while also publicly denouncing him. Burr lost to Lewis in a landslide; unlike in 1800, he blamed Hamilton personally for his defeat and became convinced that Hamilton was obsessed with destroying his career. Then, in the same year, Charles Cooper revealed that Hamilton was slandering him further to his professional colleagues, and that is when Burr finally snapped and decided to duel himnote Whatever Hamilton said to prompt this is a Riddle for the Ages; Hamilton refused to specify and Cooper never publicly repeated it. This was all likely left out in the interests of time and not making Hamilton look like a complete Jerkass. This also has the unfortunate side effect of implying that the duel took place in 1800 instead of 1804.
- After Jefferson wins the presidential election, he rejects Burr's position as Vice-President, claiming that as president he can now change the rule that states the person with the second most votes becomes Vice-president. In reality, this was not changed until the next election (1804). Aaron Burr actually did serve as Jefferson's Vice-President during his first term in office. The two did have an extremely frosty relationship, however, which led Jefferson to drop Burr as a running mate in 1804.
- Disregarding whether or not the real Hamilton intended to kill Burr during their duel, we know that he didn't aim his pistol straight in the air and "throw away his shot"; the shot he fired ended up hitting a tree directly behind Burr, proving that he at least aimed in his general direction even if he intended to miss. The standard practice for "throwing away" one's shot (formally known as deloping) in a duel was to fire a pistol into the ground, making it nearly impossible either to harm one's opponent, or for the opponent to misinterpret his intent. Unless Hamilton's intentions were communicated to Burr beforehand (for which there's no evidence), Burr would have no reason to assume Hamilton, by aiming his pistol over Burr's head, wasn't in fact trying to kill him.
- "The World Was Wide Enough" has two large examples of this. First, Burr in real life had next to no remorse for his killing Hamilton until much later on in his life (he really was quoted with the whole "world was wide enough" line, though there is dispute among historians on whether he was serious or sarcastic); indeed, close friends of his were downright concerned over how little he seemed to care. Second, the song overdramatizes the effects of Hamilton's death on Burr's political career. He was ruined internationally (Hamilton was much more popular overseas than he was in America) and did face severe backlash domestically, but he was never charged for the duel and he finished his term as Vice President without further incident.note As noted above, Jefferson had already decided not to renominate Burr, irrespective of the duel, which is why Burr had been running for Governor of New York It wasn't until the 1807 Burr Conspiracy that his career was truly destroyed and he was forced to flee to England. It's really only in modern times that Burr is now mostly known as the man who killed Hamilton.
- "Say No To This" implies that the affair only took place for a few months. There's conflicting information over just how long the real life affair lasted, but the smallest amount of time generally considered to be plausible is still around a full year (summer of 1791 to July 1792).
- While not outright stated, the show implies Maria and Hamilton are around the same age, if not Maria being slightly younger. In reality Maria was anywhere from 11-13 years younger than Hamilton, and was freshly 23 when she first approached him (Hamilton himself was in his mid 30s).
- The show places Hamilton negotiating with Jefferson and Madison to give Virginia the nation's capital after he begins his affair with Maria. While the two events did occur very close to each other, D.C. actually became the capital in 1790, while his affair didn't start until the next summer.
- In the real life investigation into the Reynolds affair, Jefferson's role was more of a "behind the scenes" nature and Madison and Burr weren't involved at all, but because future president James Monroe doesn't fit into the rest of the narrative, his role was split up into the three already-established antagonists of the show.
- In the show, the confrontation between Hamilton and the investigators occurs after the events of "The Adams Administration". Disregarding the fact that the real-life investigators were completely different people, the confrontation that this scene is clearly based on occurred in December of 1792, long before Adams became President.
- "The Adams Administration" has Hamilton releasing his public response to Adams' comments about him ("Sit down John, YOU FAT MOTHERFUCKSTICK!") before the events that lead to the Reynolds Pamphlet begin. The Reynolds Pamphlet actually came first in 1797, while the Adams Pamphlet that the song hints to was released in 1800.
- Eliza already knew about Hamilton's affair with Maria Reynolds long before he admitted it publicly; in the show she finds out along with everyone else when the Reynolds Pamphlet is published, maximizing the hurt and betrayal she feels. Although she didn't exactly cut him off during this time, as they conceived two children, a son and a daughter, in the years between the scandal breaking and Philip's death.
- In real life, the situation that caused Hamilton to release the pamphlet was much more complicated than depicted in the showExplanation It began in 1792 when Monroe, the man who actually led the investigation into the affair, informed his friend Thomas Jefferson about it despite promising Hamilton he would keep it secret. Jefferson sat on this information until 1797, when he proceeded to spread the rumor around to their peers to discredit his enemy. This eventually made its way to journalists, who published the story alongside documents confirming it as truth - though they discounted Hamilton's infidelity and focused instead on his supposed partnership with James Reynolds, who'd recently been arrested for defrauding veterans' pensions and was trying to use the dirt he had on Hamilton to get himself out of trouble. These journalists outright accused him of several financial crimes, meaning the public and the government were both calling for his head. To protect himself from the charges, Hamilton released the pamphlet and admitted to the affair while denying any financial wrongdoing, hoping that by being honest about the affair but denying the financial crimes he would still be considered trustworthy and the charges would go away. The musical removes all of this to cut down a convoluted situation for time and to make Hamilton's belief that he can write his way out of anything a Fatal Flaw that ultimately ruins his career, alongside emphasizing the stupidity of the move.
- In the musical, Burr takes great pleasure in watching Hamilton's political career crumble due to the pamphlet. In real life, Burr was actually one of the few who sympathized with him and had served as Maria Reynolds' divorce lawyer in the past (indeed, Burr is generally the only person involved in the scandal considered to have behaved honorably during the shitstorm that followed the release of the pamphlet). Conversely, while Washington showcases his disappointment in Hamilton in the musical, the real Washington's opinion of Hamilton was reportedly unchanged by the pamphlet, with Washington still holding him in "very high esteem".
- The Reynolds Pamphlet did next to nothing to Hamilton's political career. While "The Reynolds Pamphlet" portrays it as a career-ending scandal, in real life Hamilton's influence was pretty much untouched, with him still controlling many of John Adams' cabinet from behind the scenes. It was actually the "Adams Pamphlet", the pamphlet Hamilton wrote attacking Adams, that wrecked both his career and the entire Federalist Party (in essence, the pamphlets and their respective damage to Hamilton are flipped in the timeline).
- The pamphlet is propped as a literal two page pamphlet - the actual document, including the supplementary letters and financial documents, is 95 pages long.
openMike Matei
So for context, I watch AVGN sometimes, so I know who Matei is in passing and how he departed. However, quite a few of the entries I've seen of him seem to list him as being somewhat controversial. Fair enough, but some of them either read like a List of Transgressions or seem quite bashy towards him? I'm not sure if these need a rewrite but they don't seem too neutral to me. I remember someone being banned a while ago for an anti-AVGN agenda.
- Mike Matei, co-producer of The Angry Video Game Nerd, has a habit of making sockpuppet accounts to defend himself, banning people from the AVGN subreddit who mention past incidents or call him out, and removing mods who don't agree with him. Thanks to these removals, AVGN fans know that Matei's lying about the size of his genitals, his horrible Minecrap video, his (now-deleted) livestream where he was falling-down drunk, his insultingly racist and insultingly unfunny comics (with such humor as "'my pussy smells like fish' is a thinking man's joke"), and the fact that he stiffed an old woman over a homemade Klingon costume. All Matei needed to do was leave well enough alone after these incidents, and they probably would have been downplayed or forgotten.
- With regard to the embarrassing videos, Matei released the joke video "Minecraft With Gadget" as a piece of filler while working on Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie. It got negative reviews, so much so that Matei deleted the video and consecutively took down re-uploads of it ever since its release, which only made people more interested in seeing it. This only spread further after the video became a meme thanks to OneyPlays and SiIvaGunner, resulting in more and more people reuploading it
and making memes of it. While Matei is still clearly ashamed of the video, he eventually re-uploaded it himself in May 2020, long after its memetic status had died down a bit.
- With regard to the embarrassing videos, Matei released the joke video "Minecraft With Gadget" as a piece of filler while working on Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie. It got negative reviews, so much so that Matei deleted the video and consecutively took down re-uploads of it ever since its release, which only made people more interested in seeing it. This only spread further after the video became a meme thanks to OneyPlays and SiIvaGunner, resulting in more and more people reuploading it
- Mike Matei was already a somewhat divisive figure on Cinemassacre by some for his infamous Minecraft with Gadget and Elmo In Grouchland videos, as well as his occurring roles on AVGN which some accused as spotlight stealing, but was otherwise generally well respected by fans for the most part for helping James contribute to Angry Video Game Nerd. During the latter half of The New '10s, however, his reputation was tarnished when he boasted about his penis size on social media, complete with him showing a picture of it on the official Cinemassacre subreddit, and deleted comments mentioning the incident, his mishandling of fan favorite Bootsy and Kyle Justin's departure from the site and censoring conversation about them, his antagonistic behavior towards fans who disagree with his opinions on both YouTube and Twitter (going so far as to demand that someone unfollow him for questioning his stance on Disney and superhero movies), publicly taking an antagonistic view towards save-states and rewind features in emulators that was criticized as gatekeeping, claiming the creators of Mortal Kombat modeled The Joker from Mortal Kombat 11 off his take on AVGN (which many saw as narcissistic), and his poorly made edgy webcomics The Loco Bandito coming to light (although he has since apologized for said comics). All of this combined has made Matei a pariah among longtime Cinemassacre fans, to the extent where many fans rejoiced at the announcement of Matei's departure from Cinemassacre in 2020.
HoMM Fan
openPage in the wrong namespace with no content
Wasn't sure where else to bring this up but
Paradox Expanded Universe Fan Factions seems to be a fan page of some sort for Red Alert 3 Paradox Expanded Universe (which itself is a fan page for Red Alert 3: Paradox... itself a mod of Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3. Yeah, quite a sequence).
It's currently in the TRS queue, but it's not a trope, it's a page incorrectly placed into the Main namespace and consists of nothing but ZCEs. Pretty sure this is safe to cut along with its laconic page, and I would have done so already if it wasn't in the queue for the TRS. Permission to cut it and get it out of the TRS queue afterwards?
Also, we should see about moving Red Alert 3 Paradox Expanded Universe to a Fan Work namespace, as it's not really a Franchise either, but that's secondary.
openMutually exclusive YMMV?
- Complete Monster: The Darkling, also known as the Black Heretic and Aleksander Morozova, is a narcissist who deceives Alina, who desperately wants to see the good in him, into believing he is a good man despite his cruelty. A narcissist, stalker, and abuser, the Darkling exploits the emotional, psychological, and sexual vulnerabilities of Alina and the other Grisha, while blaming others for his own failings and for the violence he inflicts upon them. He sexually harasses and stalks Alina; blinds his mother for warning Alina about him; mutilates Genya for helping Alina escape; threatens to torture Mal and Alina in front of one another to ensure their cooperation; hunts down and kills Alina's only maternal figure; and erases an entire town from the map in a demonstration of his power. Aiming to destroy all nations besides Ravka, Darkling reveals that his goal is not to empower the Grisha, as he had claimed, but to rule the world in his own name with Alina as his enslaved, mentally-broken bride.
- Unintentionally Sympathetic: The Darkling already got this in the text proper due to the ambiguous nature of how he was written. But when you come to know that the Grisha were essentially the Ravkan equivalent of the Jewish community, he goes from a Complete Monster to a liberator of his race who is unfairly persecuted and pushed into villainy by an oppressive monarchy. Plus both in this trilogy and in later books in the series, we learn just how horribly other countries in this world treat Grisha, from vivisecting them or killing them for their blood to enslaving them or burning them as witches, and later developing a drug to further control and enslave them which makes the Darkling's desire to build a truly safe refuge for his people much more understandable.
The seem incompatible as CM has been vetted to be beyond any valid sympathy which US is about. (I guess they could overlap if it was before they fully cross the line but this doesn't seem the case.) The CM entry states the "Sympathetic" stuff is done out of self-serving lies/motivations. The US entry may be more an un-cited Unfortunate Implications over making one undergoing such racial prejudice pure evil, or Draco in Leather Pants / Misaimed Fandom without the explanation how it's whitewashing.
Should the US be cut as CM is vetted to a higher standard? Or what? This a question for CM cleanup?
Edited by Ferot_DreadnaughtopenExtremely small "Referenced By" page Videogame
So I recently discovered this 'Referenced By' subpage for the Halo franchise that appears on every single game's subpage bar as a redirect. It was created in February of this year by darkemyst and has only been edited three times since, with the last edit being in May of this year.
It also only has six examples and not all of them even seem to be valid, which has me thinking it should be cut. To list all the examples and my thoughts on them:
- Aldnoah.Zero: The Hypergate looks very similar to the African portal that leads to the Ark from Halo 3.
- This entry provides two image links on the page itself, one of which is broken and just redirects to the main page of Bungie's website (and they don't even own the Halo franchise anymore). I found a working image and frankly the similarities seem fairly superficial, though I suppose the argument could be made that it's a reference: Hypergate (Aldnoah)
◊, Gate at Voi (Halo)
◊
- This entry provides two image links on the page itself, one of which is broken and just redirects to the main page of Bungie's website (and they don't even own the Halo franchise anymore). I found a working image and frankly the similarities seem fairly superficial, though I suppose the argument could be made that it's a reference: Hypergate (Aldnoah)
- Guardians of the Galaxy: Peter's laser pistols bear more than a passing resemblance to the Covenant Plasma Rifle from Halo: Combat Evolved, or also the laser pistols from The Black Hole (1979).
- The Expanse: While at first glance the Ring's design is reminiscent of a lifeless Halo, Manéo Jung-Espinoza's attempt at flying through it reveals that it actually operates more like the Supergates built by the Ori.
- Both of these entries openly admit that the similarities are vague and limited enough that it could be a reference to something else entirely, which makes them invalid IMO.
- Marathon: The Eternal Level name "These Caves Can't Be a Natural Formation" is a line from Halo: Combat Evolved
- The Marathon series pre-dates the Halo franchise which made me seriously scratch my head at this. I had to dig through our page on the former to find out that this is apparently a reference to a fan-made total conversion mod called Marathon: Eternal that was released after Halo. Not sure if that's valid.
- Quake: The Blaster in Quake IV can fire either single, extremely weak shots or more powerful charged shots in a manner similar to the Plasma Pistol.
- This is an extremely basic and generic gameplay mechanic that many, many shooters have adopted for many, many weapons throughout gaming history. Edit history shows that it was also in the above category of "the entry outright admits it could be referencing something else" until the last edit on May 10th 2021 - specifically, pointing out that it's equally similar to the "Dispersion Pistol" from Unreal I.
- Minilife TV: In "Spirit in the Sky", Master Chief's helmet is one of the items in Chris's swag pile.
- This is possibly the only inarguably valid entry on the page and it's for a LEGO stop-motion web series sitcom I've never heard of.
openVideo Examples
How do you edit video examples again? Asking since I recently finished the work page for the source of one of the video examples on Self-Destruct Mechanism and want to edit it so that it links back to that.
open Cities taking advantage of fictional portrayal
Do we have a trope for the phenomenon where real life cities (or parts thereof, like a street) embrace the fact that a popular work of fiction is either set in that city, or in a fictional city that just happens to have the same name? Like how Metropolis, Illinois declared itself Supermans hometown due to sharing it's name with the fictional city that the man of steel lives in. Or how the German city of Bremen fully embraced the fairy tale of the Bremen Town Musicians.
If not, is this trope worthy?
openDEATH BATTLE! Fridge Horror cleanup Web Original
The "Character Death Consequences" on DEATH BATTLE!'s Fridge page compose almost all of the Fridge Horror section's examples, with only a small handful of examples being about something else in a different folder. However, the show clearly states how the animations are pure Spectacle, with the specifics of the animation not meant to reflect what should happen in a fight. The page itself acknowledges this fact in its Fridge Brilliance section, as does TV Tropes itself in Pantheon.Acts Of War. With how much these examples are bogging the page down, I suggest moving them to a separate page.
openIn-Universe Draco in Leather Pants Web Original
I was trying to expand the list of tropes on minor characters for a little known Web Series called Escape the Night and I was wondering, can I use the trope Draco in Leather Pants as an In-Universe trope? I saw people do it with other YMMV tropes, and it fits very much with the character. The character is Colin, a Jerkass and Mr. Fanservice who is rude, selfish and vain, but is idolised by several of the girls simply because of his looks. One of the girls goes through Character Development and realises just how cruel and selfish Colin is, but the other one doesn’t and keeps idolising him. Can I put the Draco in Leather Pants under his character tropes or not?
openIndexing Pages for Authors
Let's say there was an Awesome Moments page for The Stand. Would it be alphabetized by itself, or under Stephen King works? Or both?
And if the latter, would it be under S or K?
Thanks.
Edited by ACWopenAbout BadassAdorable Videogame
Hey there. I'm sorry if this query has been posted before, but I've been seeing this trope abused a lot lately to the point that it's practically become a vague catch-all term for literally anything and everything that a troper finds admirable/likable about a character. One recent example I deleted was from this character's page: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/FinalFantasyXIIILightning
Here's what the trope entry said: "A beautiful woman who changed herself into a stronger, more confident person capable of protecting both herself and her little sister."
Like, I know this character, and at best the only traits that could be subjectively seen as "adorable" out of her are those rare moments she goofs up. Most of the time, she's either a rude and edgy type (pre character development) or a serious and caring yet still edgy type (post character development), and doesn't even have the least bit of semblance to how a physically adorable character is supposed to be.
Could it be the way the trope page is written? Is it okay to just have it turn into an ambiguous, loose terminology?
openCommented out old folder, misuse(?)
Found this whole folder commented out under Slow Laser:
- Scientists have created a Terawatt laser (over 1,000 gigawatts!) that can fire a beam into space... for scientific purposes. The laser is so powerful that it can only be fired for brief periods, creating a visible pulse that seems to "travel" through the atmosphere like a sci-fi "blaster" due to the ionizing effect. The ionization of the atmosphere around the beam creates a temporary plasma vacuum that allows the laser to remain coherent over much longer distances, which is what propagates as a visible pulse, hence the glowy visible laser effect is actually the intended purpose.
- Military lasers are still research projects, for the most part, but as Technology Marches On, laser weapons are going to be increasingly prevalent.
- Microwave-based non-lethal "riot cannon" do exist, but given that they cause serious physical pain without much damage, their association with torture has left this project on the back-burner. Electroshock weapons using a laser pulse to create conductive trails (instead of wired tasers, for example) are also in the works, but are of dubious usefulness.
- Liquid chemical lasers exist and work. There's one mounted in a 747 intended to kill ICB Ms, though it isn't quite ready for prime-time yet. A similar device has been toted for an AC-130 mounted "super sniper weapon" to perform silent, long range pinpoint kills. Ground-based systems are also being tested to shoot down incoming artillery shells and missiles.
- Solid state combat lasers are on their way; these can be mounted anywhere with enough power available. And if/when they become widely available on the battlefield . . . it will never be the same again. Combat aircraft will be driven out of the lower atmosphere, artillery will become almost useless (without firing hundreds of shells at the batteries just to get a few through), and missiles will become much, much less effective.
- The US Navy is preparing to deploy a ship-mounted solid state laser into active service in 2014
(original plan called for the use of megawatt-range variable frequency free-electron laser
, but that has been pushed back to 2020s). Although it took a lot of money to develop, actually firing it is cheaper than missiles or bullets, and it has succeeded in destroying its targets in every test run. However, it does have some disadvantages: a direct line of sight is required (as it fires a straight beam, it can't arc over walls or reach beyond the horizon like conventional artillery), it needs to hold on the target for several seconds, and adverse weather conditions could lessen its effectiveness.
- The US Navy is preparing to deploy a ship-mounted solid state laser into active service in 2014
- Less destructive but highly effective microwave emitters in the form of modern complex radar and ECM units can be used to track, blind and hack enemy radar and communication mechanisms. This was apparently used by Israeli strike craft against Syria in the recent past. The F-22's radar, among several other AESA systems, has been rumored to be capable of such feats as well.
- One type actually based on lasers uses a piece of video software called a “glint detector” for targetting. Linked together with an appropriate laser, it allows any number of lensed devices (such as cameras… Or eyeballs) within view for hundreds of feet to be instantly detected and burned out.
- The largest laser ever created, consisting of focused beams from 192 individual lasers, will be used at the National Ignition Facility in California to attempt to finally achieve break-even nuclear fusion.Details.
- If completed, the Extreme Light Infrastructure can even outperform NIF, since it can have its peak power in exawatt range, and should be powerful enough to tear apart the vacuum of space-time itself
!
- If completed, the Extreme Light Infrastructure can even outperform NIF, since it can have its peak power in exawatt range, and should be powerful enough to tear apart the vacuum of space-time itself
- Lawrence Livermore laboratories used to have a Petawatt laser
, which could produce over 1015 Watts of power at the instant of its peak output. The pulse was so brief, however, it only produced about 600 Joules of total energy.
- Scientists have developed a mosquito-zapping laser
. It doesn't attack humans or butterflies, according to TV reports.
- The Spyder III Pro Arctic
. The world's first consumer hand-held laser weapon. Made from a cannibalised laser projector, it packs enough power to ignite flesh and cause permanent blindness instantly. The emitter also looks exactly like a lightsaber handle!
- Not yet effective as a weapon though, since it takes minutes to burn through your opponent, enough for him or her to kill you by more mainstream weapons. Unless they can in the near future multiply the power by a factor of 10 and keep the same size and battery.
- In 2010 the BBC posted a story linked to the first public video of a laser weapon
destroying a large target.
- There actually are laser weapon system being actively used today, such as the Thor
and ZEUS-HLONS
, but they are primarily for explosive disposal, not for shooting people.
- This guy
makes frickin' laser beams as a hobby! The demonstrations show two pistols and what can only be considered a Sonic Screwdriver burning through discs and sunglasses, popping balloons, and setting matches on fire from across the room. Granted, being Too Dumb to Live and looking into the beam emitter directly will blind you permanently even with a welder's shield. But still, laser pistols!
- Laser Glo is a company that builds handheld lasers powerful enough to ignite small fires in paper and sometimes unrefined wooden targets.
- There was one very, very real LASER (machine-)gun produced in the 1990s. The ZM-87
, a blinding neodymium LASER weapon, intended to blind by burning out eyeball corneas and digital camera CC Ds with a longer range (2+ km) than an actual bullet-firing machine-gun. Now, this type of weapon is precise and extremely effective at neutralizing hostiles, yet entirely non-lethal as the beam is not powerful enough to damage vital organs, and blinded soldiers would be forced to surrender because they cannot aim a gun nor run away. It is for that reason that this kind of weapon is actually banned by a 1995 international convention on the laws of war. Yes, all sides in an armed conflict would rather have their soldiers die from gunshots than be blinded but alive - it costs too much money to rehabilitate blinded personnel and POWs... which makes one realize how sinister war is.
- It makes little sense in Real Life combat though, for multiple reasons: it can't fire indirectly like artillery or rocket artillery, cameras and eyeballs can be protected with welder-type goggles, which troops would deploy when they see their first-line comrades blinded and it does not harm troops under cover, inside APCs or inside buildings or bunkers. It works more like a torture device to be fired at lightly-armed men on open ground than like modern explosive weapons.
- A conventional LASER weapon can't be expected to fill every role on the battlefield, but no form of eye/camera protection short of a blindfold can filter out an adjustable color LASER. Otherwise, it's no worse than an anti-personnel machine-gun against vehicle armor or ferrocrete, or a MASER
against unprotected flesh.
- A conventional LASER weapon can't be expected to fill every role on the battlefield, but no form of eye/camera protection short of a blindfold can filter out an adjustable color LASER. Otherwise, it's no worse than an anti-personnel machine-gun against vehicle armor or ferrocrete, or a MASER
- It makes little sense in Real Life combat though, for multiple reasons: it can't fire indirectly like artillery or rocket artillery, cameras and eyeballs can be protected with welder-type goggles, which troops would deploy when they see their first-line comrades blinded and it does not harm troops under cover, inside APCs or inside buildings or bunkers. It works more like a torture device to be fired at lightly-armed men on open ground than like modern explosive weapons.
Checked the edit history and this seems leftover from when the page was Frickin Laser Beams, commented out for the same misuse that caused the rename of just being lasers but lacking the Hollywood properties this is about. Should everything but the first be cut as it covers the external visibility part, or all cut as having nothing to do with slowness?
Checked the edit history and this seems leftover from when the page was Frickin Laser Beams, commented out for the same misuse that caused the rename of just being lasers but lacking the Hollywood properties this is about. Should everything but the first be cut as it covers the external visibility part, or all cut as having nothing to do with slowness?
open Seeker of Crocus discussion
I feel like I'm opening a can of worms here, but I'm literally gonna go mad
So, I stopped reading this little spin off from the Blossomverse a long time ago after a lovely response by Green_Phantom_Queen from one of my criticisms, but after reading updates about the latest chapter (or more specifically the one before it) I feel like this needs some serious discussion:
So. to make a long story short: Chloe goes absolutely apesheet after Sara. with the power of the Unown, cripples Parker (oh no), merges Professor Cerise with an unown-made copy of himself to create a perfect version of her father (OH NO!) and is about to pull a Parker on all of Vermillion City all of spite. Professor Sycamore, the main character of the story, tries to talk her down, but not only does she rebukes him, but does so by tearing down his optimistic point of view and stating she's going to kill the culprit to stop them no matter what he said.
This hurts him bad enough, but then Specter (from Yu-Gi-Oh) talks her down by appeasing to her pessimism and does so in a way that makes the professor looks completely useless, which in turn causes him to go nuts.
The Professor merges with his shadow and intents to either destroy everything or Restart the World because he's grown sick of the story's growing pessimism and his inability to do jacksheet despite being the freaking main character, and he has to get his madness sealed before he kills everyone.
After all of this... the story tries to paint Chloe as having done nothing wrong, and instead show that Professor Sycamore is the one who needs to learn a lesson, not her.
Now, I don't know about you, but this looks to me like co-writer Green_Phantom_Queen (Spinnerette is the main author, but I haven't read her works that much, and even if I did, all this writing just reeks of Queen's traits) has learned absolutely nothing about the previous year or two writing the Blossomverse, but I do feel like this situation is a bit too complicated to see it like that.
So, what do you guys think? Is Chloe at fault? Is Professor Sycamore at fault? Is Specter at fault? Is nobody at fault? Just... let's try to reach a consensus here.
And note: Green_Phantom_Queen and Shady Missionary are not allowed here. This is for unbiased, third person opinions only.
Edited by MacronNotesopenTrivia misuse?
On the TV show Euphoria, there's a joke about a character being a One Direction fangirl who wrote Louis x Harry fanfiction - complete with a fully-animated Imagine Spot sex scene. The real Louis Tomlinson has made it known that he really didn't like the joke.
This was originally noted on the Trivia page
for Euphoria under Disowned Adaptation. I deleted it because Disowned Adaptation is "Creator rejects adaptation of original work," not "Celebrity doesn't like a Real-Person Fic joke about themself."
It's since been re-added (not by the original Troper who added it) under Creator Backlash, which I'm pretty sure is still misuse, because that's "Creator comes to hate their own work." Am I right in this line of thinking? I don't want to delete it again and start an edit war, but it seems like shoehorning.
Edited by iamconstantineopenTroping creative work hosted on Neopets?
A post in the Roleplay Cleanup thread
made me start thinking about how much untapped potential the Neopian Times has for finding tropeworthy creative works. For those who don't know, the Neopian Times is a newsletter produced by Neopets, filled with creative content made by site players, from comic strips to short stories to longform stories. There's a lot of really, really tropeworthy stuff hidden away in that one corner of the website.
My question is, if I did one day decide to go on an Archive Binge and find as many tropes as possible from these stories, how would I trope them? I don't think they'd go on the Neopets page itself, since the stories weren't produced by the site, merely hosted on them. At the same time, making separate pages for each work seems a little much, though I can definitely see how these stories could be considered fanworks.
So, how do?
openSid entry on YMMV/ToyStory
On YMMV.Toy Story 1, Alternative Character Interpretation has multiple entries for Sid, and they look disorganized, with not all of them looking like individual interpretations. Can someone take a look?
- Many fans don't think that Sid is necessarily evil. He's just a kid who is wildly creative and inventive. Though he may have a destructive streak, he isn't just out to blow up toys. He wants to see what makes them tick, and how to make them cool and different; some have gone on to say that the Mutant Toys are, in fact, art pieces with very deep meanings. If you really think about it, Sid had no idea the toys were alive, and his parents don't seem to pay much attention to him and Hannah. He is probably acting out for attention.
- In fact, aside from the cruel but darkly hilarious prank he plays on his sister, Sid doesn't do anything wrong. His destruction of toys comes out of both creativity and Parental Neglect. He does seem to love his dog.
- When Woody reveals to him the true nature of toys, Sid is traumatized because of what he's been doing. He's rambunctious but not sadistic, as evidenced by his love for his dog, so when he realizes that everything he's done was happening to living things he understands his actions and completely freaks out (assuming he wasn't freaking out over the realisation that he was about to get his comeuppance).
- Sid also has multiple locks on his door and the one scene where a parent is shown, his dad could be seen as being drunk or hungover. Victims of abuse often lash out at others, and Sid's disturbed "play activities" with his toys could be his way of taking out his feelings of vulnerability and helplessness, especially since he is always the one "in control" of his imagined scenario.
- The creators were fully aware of this and like to joke that Sid is "the kind of kid who would grow up to be an animator." They give an adult Sid a brief cameo in Toy Story 3, where we see him working as a garbageman. Though he comes off as something of a metalhead, there's no indication that he grew up to be anything other than a normal, well-balanced adult.
- Many fans don't think that Sid is necessarily evil. He's just a kid who is wildly creative and inventive. Though he may have a destructive streak, he isn't just out to blow up toys. He wants to see what makes them tick, and how to make them cool and different; some have gone on to say that the Mutant Toys are, in fact, art pieces with very deep meanings. If you really think about it, Sid had no idea the toys were alive, and his parents don't seem to pay much attention to him and Hannah. He is probably acting out for attention.
Also, does the first one count? Most audiences understand that Sid didn't know toys were alive.
openMove from CriticalResearchFailure?
Critical Research Failure Is now a redirect with examples being cut or moved. I asked cleanup about this example
but haven't gotten any response in weeks.
YMMV.The Conversion Bureau The Chatoverse
- Critical Research Failure:
- Contrary to what "New Universe Three: The Friendship Virus" claims, men are not responsible for 98% of all violence and rape.
- Also, the increase of oxytocin would increase nurturing... in anyone within your "group" according to nationalism. Enough of it increasing worldwide would cause such an up-spike in tribalism that about five wars would break out at once.
- She has stated that her interpretation of Celestia, who is basically the omnipotent god empress of Equestria, is more in line with Lauren Faust's original version of the show, despite Faust herself directly stating that Celestia is not actually a goddess.
The Clesetia entry can be moved to Undermined By Reality. The oxytocin thing might fit Artistic License – Biology. The 98% I don't know as they are such a controversial author I'm not sure if it's meant to be taken seriously or not, the oxytocin thing I have similar but lesser questions about. Thoughts about this?

So about 4 days ago I cut the opening quip from She Is Not My Girlfriend and transplanted it onto the trope's Laconic page, replacing the one that had been there for the past 11-12 years. I did not provide a reason for the edits, but I felt the descriptor I put in was more appropriate than the one that was replaced. I figured somebody would make an ATT report regarding the edit, but that hasn't happened, so I'm doing it myself. Thoughts?
Edited by JHD