Discussion Characters / RWBYAnima

I do agree with this.

The Hypocrite trope was removed because two of its subtropes (in this case, Never My Fault and Secretly Selfish) are listed in Raven's section.

Also, Hypocrite is having its own pre-Trope Repair Shop thread here

While I do think that trope is probably a big part of what's going on with her, I don't think we've got enough to confirm it is yet. It might be worth asking on the RWBY thread in the New Media forum whether people think an example for her can be made with what we know right now.

Well, it's fine if you want to feel that she is, but that's YMMV and you'll need to find a relevant YMMV item for it.

Beyond Redemption is an objective trope, which requires The Hero to spend time trying to save the villain's soul until they reach a point where they've come to the end of road with the villain's constant refusal/inability to be saved, and therefore decide the villain cannot be redeemed.

Nothing like that has ever happened in the show. Qrow and Raven have never had a good relationship and it finally breaks down completely during the Battle of Haven, but Qrow is not The Hero and he hasn't been trying to redeem her in the first place. The most he's ever done is criticise her for abandoning Yang (which isn't the trope) and only once did he make a half-hearted suggestion that she return to Ozpin's side. That isn't an example of him constantly trying to redeem her, he was trying to obtain information he wanted from her at the time, and he didn't have her knowledge of Ozpin and Salem, which was the key driver of their antagonism towards each other (when he did learn that information he, like Raven, turned on Ozpin — he may not have abandoned the fight against Salem, but he did turn on Ozpin). None of that is this trope, so Qrow wouldn't be an example even if he was The Hero.

Ruby is The Hero of this story. She's only ever once tried to bring Raven over to Ozpin's side. Raven dismissed her once. The subject hasn't been raised since (and hasn't had a chance to be raised), and Ruby has given no indication that she thinks Raven can't be redeemed. So, the trope isn't in effect there either.

Also, Raven doesn't classify as a villain in this show. She's an antagonist and a Wild Card, but she isn't one of the villains — villains and antagonists aren't quite the same thing. It's very common for them to overlap, which is why they're often viewed as the same thing, but Raven is one of those examples where they're not the same.

I think that someone should add a trope about the fact that despite her generally cold attitude towards her, and her pretending to not care about Yang that much Raven has been constantly watching over her daughter in her corvid form during her life and that at the end she showed signs that she genuinely cares for Yang. I have tried several times to add a trope about it but each time it got deleted so I don't know how to put it.

Could we apply Safety in Indifference to Raven ? It's clear that she's constantly lying to herself, trying to convince herself that she doesn't care about or even ressent her daughter and teammates, to keep her guilt the hurt away.

She isn't in Yang's life to do any parenting, let alone abusive parenting. The few interactions they have fall more into Parental Neglect territory, I think.

Well, a lot of what you're saying there is very much an opinion and the tropes on the page are objective.

That said, her flaws and family issues are very heavily covered under multiple objective tropes: see the Beneath the Mask, Broken Ace, Byronic Heroine, Cain and Abel, Dirty Coward, Family of Choice, Fatal Flaw, Flaw Exploitation, Hypocrite, Inferiority Superiority Complex, It's All About Me, A Lighter Shade of Black, Mercy Kill, Might Makes Right, Never My Fault, Not So Similar, Regretful Traitor, The Social Darwinist, Sour Outside, Sad Inside, Tears of Remorse, Thicker Than Water, Treachery Is a Special Kind of Evil, etc.

Some of these entries are entirely devoted to the flaws in her outlook and beliefs (Hypocrite, Secretly Selfish, Sour Outside, Sad Inside, Tears of Remorse, etc.).

I'd say the subject has been objectively covered about as thoroughly as it can be given the sheer amount of tropes that are listed.

In an effort to avoid any further edit warring, I'll post my two cents here.

I was concerned that the Hypocrite trope should not be used when it's subtropes are. So, I removed it. However, after reading up on the RWBY forums, some users felt it would be a better fit under Straw Hypocrite given her stance on the war with Ozpin. I reclassified it under that trope, but I must have been mistaken.

Given that, I think we can keep if there's not a valid sub-trope available. I've asked on Trope Finder here.

If there is a trope that can describe Raven's skewed perception of family and her own relation with her family, I think that it should be added. As for Raven really believing what she preaches I think that it's unclear whenever she believes it sincerely or not, given her tendency to lie and to try to justify herself both to others and to herself as well as her moment of weakness when Yang is around or her past relation with her team or Summer are brought back could be very well interpreted as her knowing deep down that her actions and attitude toward her family are wrong and that she's actually not so brave or strong but is in denial about it because admitting it would be admitting that everything she did and sacrificed were all for nothing, which they were.

As for the two tropes now that I think about it, I find that Hypocrite fits her hypocrisy into saying that family only comes for her help while she's the one who only come to see Qrow when she needs it better than Straw Hypocrite.

Hmm, while I'm still waiting on the Trope Finder query, I plan to restore the Hypocrite entry unless someone objects.

Well, the entry has absolutely nothing to do with Raven's stance on the war with Ozpin. It's about an argument she had with her brother over the concept of family.

That said, even if it had been about her stance on the war with Ozpin, it still wouldn't be a Straw Hypocrite example for the reasons I've already outlined (the trope only applies if the character doesn't believe in the position they've taken; Raven believes in the position she's taken).

Come to think of it, you could be right.

Please, somebody leave a suggestion? I can't hold a discussion all by myself.

I'm sorry I was not trying to under your skin, or start an Edit War, I was just confused because it just didn't make sense to me, how is it that is considered Adaptational Jerkass, when Coco's Adaptational trope were removed? Was it because she was not seen as much? well we didn't really know that much about Sun background before the novel so at the very least it should not be an angst upgrade. Also we the Jerkass moments he had were involved with his whole team, who he did not interact with during the show, but his interactions with Blake were all nice not mean. I recall Scarlet was given an Adaptational Jerkass trope but was removed on the ground that he did not have much of an establish personality in cannon, but it was never established much in cannon how Sun was with his team.

While his team dynamic wasn't established outside of Neptune, his personality was, and the book demonstrates that his personality is a lot more in line with a "Jerkass" compared to the series proper, where he's shown to be, at worst, Innocently Insensitive. And as for Coco and Scarlet, its more because they had no personality to go off of in the series proper to compare to, since Scarlet had only two lines, and Coco's only defining traits were "cocky" and "fashionista".

To be honest I have read online about the novel and its contents but I have not actually read the novel, but would that be a more in-depth look at Sun's personality, because we never really see him interact with anyone else but Blake, someone who his is already established to have feelings for, so would it not make more sense that maybe he was just trying to show the better parts of his personality around her?

We've seen him interact with Neptune, Ilia, Ruby, Weiss, and the Belladonna's, and there are times where he is incapable of just showing his better personality only, like when he reads Blake the riot act after he wakes up from being stabbed by Ilia. He's just that nice a person. It's why the word Blake used to describe him is Earnest.

And that aspect of his personality also appears in the book. The problem part of his personality comes through in relations to his team, which we never get to see in the show. In fact, part of the problem with his team is that he keeps running off to help other people the way he helps Blake. All the book is telling us is that him abandoning his team to help Blake isn't a one-off. He does that all the time. The book basically deconstructs The Dulcinea Effect trope by exploring what its knock-on effect is to the people he's supposed to be with instead of the people he feels he has to help after only just meeting them.

Fans asked how come the show only gives us Sun, or Sun and Neptune at best, and not the rest of his team. The book tells us why, and how his team feels about that. Even Neptune was annoyed with Sun in their departure episode (Volume 6) — we just don't know why until we read the book.

In the book Sun is completely different with Velvet than he is with his team. And that's the difference we get between the show and the book as well — the Sun that deals with Velvet is the Sun we saw in the show. The Sun that deals with his team-mates is the Sun we never got to see in the show because we never got to see his team interactions in the show. We never got to see his team and his team dynamics at all. Even in the tournament fight. The lesson about his team and leadership that he thinks he's learned in his departure episode turns out to not be the lesson about his team and leadership that he needed to learn — because he was still making assumptions about what his team wanted and the lesson was actually to stop doing that and let his team actually tell him what they wanted instead (hence Neptune's displeasure with him in the departure episode).

While I do believe a form of Adaptational Jerkass is in effect, tropes are not automatically bad, and I believe this is a justified example precisely because we get the fully-rounded Sun in the book because his team dynamic is what's being explored. In the show, we only get the 'earnest' side of Sun — which is also present in the book. So any jerkassery traits that we can brush off in the show (for example, stalking Blake across a continent because she genuinely needs help she's refusing to ask for; making assumptions about other people that turn out to be wrong; etc.) because it's Sun being Sun, and he's lovable at the same time can't be brushed off in the book (as indeed the 'earnest' label in the show does do) because we're seeing the fallout of his The Dulcinea Effect personality on his team-mates, and his inability to realise that's the real problem instead of it being what he assumed the problem was (which is why he doesn't understand why they haven't just 'got over it').

Except the whole thing with the show had Sun aware he was a crappy leader and had fucked over his teammates, hence why he took them to Vacuo in the first place. Yet suddenly in the book he doesn't think he did anything wrong and they should just get over it?

And even then, it's already troped that Sun has a case of Deliberate Values Dissonance going on due to his upbringing in Vacuo, so how is that really a character flaw exclusive to him if it's something all of Vacuo demonstrates. Yet many people and the narrative itself like to treat it as if it's just a flaw for Sun, that he's an asshole to his team period rather than due to his upbringing.

• Deliberate Values Dissonance: A lot of Sun's conflict with Team CFVY and the rest of his own team in Before the Dawn is the result of his Vacuan upbringing making him very quick to try to move on from conflict and trauma, which comes across as Innocently Insensitive at best and very self-centered at worst, though it's shown that he actually does mean well by it.

Yes, as I said: what he thought the problem with his leadership was, and what he assumed the solution was (go on an adventure together) turned out to not be the problem and not be the solution, which is why Neptune is upset with what he says in the departure episode and why the problem isn't solved after their adventurous trip to reach Vacuo (which happens off-screen between the show and the book). The reason he took them to Vacuo was because he felt it was the best place to take them to train for what's coming (Coco felt the same way; it's one of the things the pair have in common).

As the book indicates, by the time they reached Vacuo, Sun's figured that he'd done what he needed to do to solve the problem (which is effectively why they went to Vacuo via the 'scenic route'). But, because he got the problem wrong, the team was still pissed off with him. He was all out of ideas as to why they still hadn't come round after weeks together and still hadn't got over it. That's because he'd neglected to do the one thing they actually wanted him to do: ask them what they wanted instead of making assumptions on their behalf.

Yes, his Vacuan upbringing is a factor in his difficulty realising that their issue is that he's undermining their agency. But I didn't discuss that in my post because I was addressing the 'earnest' point. His Vacuan upbringing makes it harder for him to figure out what his flaw actually is, which is that he needs to actually give his team agency. He thought he could fix things just by spending time with them, but when he's with them he's making decisions without their input and making assumptions about their feelings without asking them how they actually feel. His Vacuan upbringing isn't the flaw that needs solving, but it is a complication in the path to him learning what the actual flaw is.

Ok, while the Jerkass part may apply, I still do not think the angst upgrade should, given that we didn't really know about his background in the show, as his time on there revolved around Blake's character arc. Also I'm still a little confused about how an Adaptational trope can apply in the first place. I mean I always thought it was like how in the Harry Potter Films Snape is a Adaptational Nice Guy as a lot of his Jerkass moments from book series was changed or cut out completely. But if the events and the way acts are cannon to the original show and his ernest side is still shown in the novel how is a "different adaptation?" Given that the novel does not have an episode on the show would it not be just considered an extra event to the show an not a different adaptation? I like say there was a novel that was version of the events of volume 1 that did no real thing different except change a few details like say Weiss does not get mad a Ruby for accidentally bumping into her, and does not display her discriminatory viewpoint toward the Faunus, I figured that would Adaptational Nice Guy. But novel has no episode counterpart to compare it to, that is what I'm trying to say.