Discussion Characters / TheLegendOfKorraNewTeamAvatar

Well for one, Spiritual Successor is for works, not characters. So that's misuse there.

And really, those are some interesting parallels, but they are fairly broad and vague. Certainly not enough to qualify for Expy, which is the character-based version of Spiritual Successor.

Why is Spiritual Antithesis useable for characters but not Spiritual Successor?

It's not.

Well, then Spiritual Antithesis should be removed from Korra's entry. It's what gave me the idea in the first place, though I still don't see why it can't apply to characters, especially since this is a sequel series made by the same people. In a world with literal spiritual successors and antitheses.

I removed them both. It's a work trope, not a character trope.

One could argue that, since they both broke up with Mako, it's still technically possible for both of them to be lesbians- we just aren't sure, meaning it's probably best to file those under YMMV.

Actually I think we should put both Korra and Asami under Ambiguously Bi- the extent of their affections for members of the opposite sex is never made clear enough to state conclusively whether they're bisexual, homosexual, or some other orientation. I also think we should put back in the Lipstick Lesbian entry for Asami and a Butch Lesbian entry for Korra, with the addendum that they might be bisexual, but for all appearances appear to fit the stated tropes.

Considering neither of them had anything resembling a relationship with a guy since their teens, I'd say you could easily chalk it up to them being young and not really knowing they like girls yet.

Especially in Korra's case, where she went from "sheltered and separated from society" to "this professional sports star likes me and fights by my side!"

So, just the lesbian entries, or should I throw in the Ambiguously Bi entries, too? EDIT: Speaking as a lesbian, I can totally see that from Korra's perspective- but I still think she counts as ambiguous. Same with Asami- though now that I think about it, both of them had a lot of moments where they seemed really uncomfortable with guys flirting with them. That's not an uncommon reaction in real life, but I wonder if the creators did it deliberately to hint at their sexualities...

For that matter- should we put in Incompatible Orientation entries for them and Mako, or not?

I just threw it in there myself.

Personally, I dislike the overuse of Lipstick Lesbian. It's basically "she's an attractive lesbian", which seems... a bit vague. But ah well, just my opinion.

As for Incompatible Orientation: Definitely not. For one, their orientations are unclear. So we don't even know if it's incompatible. For another, it's never mentioned as the reason either of them broke up with Mako. Mako broke up with Asami for Korra, and Korra they were simply Better as Friends. Even if they turned out gay, doesn't mean it actually affected their breakups.

Okay- I still added Butch Lesbian for Korra because she fits that trope overall, regardless of specific preferences, but I get your reasoning for Asami.

Yeah, that makes sense. The thing is, Asami would probably be considered a tomboy in most settings, what with being an Action Girl to the finest degree. It's just compared to Korra that she's the girly girl.

But between Korra's amazonian tropes, and masculine tropes, it makes sense for her.

I think we should probably leave Bi The Way, though.

I think we are going to have to put a notice on the main page that editing tropes regarding Asami and Korra's sexuality need to be brought to the discussion page. To prevent at least a bit of the edit war going on.

Ok- I definitely think we should avoid anyone saying that they're Bi The Way, however- just because they both dated a guy (the SAME guy, which I might add has a huge layer of subtext to it) a relationship with one guy, especially if it didn't work out, does not indicate a clear interest in men.

We should default to what we've seen. We know they've both dated a guy, and they're together now. While I think it's entirely possible they're lesbians, it's still technically speculation. Nothing actually proves that they're no longer interested in men. Thus we default to the most inclusive trope.

Ambiguously Bi just got pulled. Honestly, it should stay, but now for the opposite reason; it's unclear if they're lesbians or bisexual at this point.

Word of god is that they are bisexual.

As a side note, is the fact that the colour scheme in one of the last scenes is reminiscent of bisexuality symbolism worthy of mention? Sounds like it might be a fannish interpretation, Word Cruft, a Fridge moment or something like that.

I'd put it under Trivia, personally.

Oh, and for the Heroine On Hiatus edit war: For the time being, mentioning that Tenzin promised the support of the Air Nomads is enough. Please don't add speculation, even if it's a logical conclusion.

Also, less trope name potholing and less curtly edit reasons would be good.

They don't qualify as superheroes.

Yes they are, they are treated as such, they stand out compared to others. Korra is like a super hero herself. They defend the world on a recurring basis

Superhero is not just a person with superpowers. There are setting factors involved, such as being grounded in a realistic setting. As far as I know, Korra isn't that.

Also, you ought to ask The Rogue Penguin on why they removed the example.

Really? Justice league and The Avengers are far from being part of realistic settings. In all those settings, there are alien invasions, demonic entities to be dealt with, etc.

Korra's the only one with abilities that really stand out, though. Mako, Bolin, and Asami are undeniably skilled, but in this World of Badass, they're not really particularly super powered.

Plus, from what I know "dedicated to protecting the public" is not the primary focus of the stories, which is why most sources don't apply superhero tropes to Korra characters.

But they always find themselves end up having to save the world. It always gets threatened season after season. Plus, it is the avatar's duty to protect the world and it's people. Unlike the previous series, where they had to free the world from a nation's tyranny, this time, they defend it from falling into danger, which has been the case. If you say that "dedicated to protecting the public" is not the primary focus of the stories, that contradicts the whole purpose or existence of the Avatar. If the world or it's people weren't always in great danger, then there would be no story for the Avatar. It's these elements of duty and prevalent injustice that make up most of the plot

Superhero needs more than "saving the world". The discussion is starting to head into the territory discussed here though.

When he shoots Amon with it.

Ah, right.

... that said, I don't know if that's so much a skill as it was that it was the best he could do. The phrasing makes it sound like he can use Lightningbending as a Static Stun Gun; somehow I doubt he wasn't trying to kill Amon.

The death of Mako's parents may be a Shout-Out to Batman's origin, but otherwise, the two aren't all that much alike- certainly not enough to call him an expy:

Let's see:

• Batman is a costumed vigilante; Mako ends up as a cop
  • I'll add to that that Batman is a Great Detective with all that implies; Mako is extremely arguably a great detective- he's great in that he's the only competent member of the police force
• Bruce is an only child and was raised by Alfred; Mako sort of raised Bolin and the two were "raised" by mobsters and later that former pro-bender guy
• Bruce is extremely wealth; Mako is a Satisfied Street Rat
• Batman is a Badass Normal; Mako has superpowers
• Related to the above, Bruce is a genius and makes heavy use of technology; Mako is (arguably) of normal to high intelligence and doesn't use tech, being a bender.
• While both have relationship issues, those issues seem quite different- Batman pushes people away because of a It's Not You, It's My Enemies; Mako's problem is dithering and pursuing too many relationships
• Batman is an older guy (hard to give an age given Comic-Book Time); Mako is a teenager

I could keep going if you like. Incidentally, given that she inherits the family business and is a Badass Normal relying on tech, I'd say if anything Asami is closer to being an expy of Batman than Mako is, and along those lines, Varrick is too- that's because Hiroshi is sort of like an evil Howard Stark and Varrick is an evilish Tony Stark and Tony Stark/Iron Man is the Alternate Company Equivalent of Bruce Wayne/Batman.

Ok, you mentioned things that aren't normally factored in to a character being an Expy, such age, social class, having superpowers. Second, both are geniuses in their own right, and even Desna and Eska acknowledge how great a detective Mako is. Third, Batman also did pursue too many relationships.

It's the character and backstory that should factor into a character being an Expy, not all those trivial things you mentioned.

Plus, Mako and Batman share similar personalities, being the stoic, cynical kind of heroes. He is also the Honorary True Companion to the Hero.

I think at least some of those things are very important in the determination of whether Mako is actually an Expy of Batman and doesn't just have an aspect of his background which may be a Shout-Out.

The difference in social class is important as are the issue of powers, and "presentation", as Batman is the Trope Codifier for having a Rich Idiot With No Day Job civilian identity and Batman is also known for use of gadetry, coupled with maintaining a mysterious image. So, when in contrast I look at Mako, who grew up in poverty and has now become a low level beat cop, he doesn't seem to share any of the obvious aspects that would cause fans to compare the character to Batman.

You'r really overselling the "detective" connection. I shouldn't harp on the idea of Mako being stupid, but there is a difference between competent police work combined with some hard-boiled detective like shake downs (which what we get from Mako) and Batman as a character who does do those kind of shakedowns, but is a great detective in the sense of being a Sherlock Holmes like genius. Not that Mako is stupid, but he's definitely not presented as a character who is unusually intelligent in the way that characters like Sokka and Varrick have a pronounced Guile Hero/ Magnificent Bastard characterization.

In terms of similar personalities, I would somewhat agree with first season Mako who in the first couple of episodes was framed as stoic and cynical. However, that was increasingly downplayed and in the second season, he's quite earnest.

When you speak of Honorary True Companion to the Hero, you are comparing Batman to Superman to Mako to Korra, right? When you put it like that, the two sound similar, but if you compare the two relationships, they are nothing alike (among other things, Mako and Korra have a romantic relationship; also, at least in the second season, Mako was the Good Cop to Korra's Bad Cop and most of the time, Batman is the Bad Cop to Superman's Good Cop).

Ok, one more thing, Mako got promoted, so he's not so low level anymore. And Yes, I am also comparing Batman to Superman to Mako to Korra. I think both Batman and Mako are kind of Morality Chains to Superman and Korra respectively. For example, Batman carries Kryptonite to prevent Superman from going out of control, while Mako had to prevent Korra from letting her emotions get the best of her and causing her to make rogue decisions. Korra's own Kryptonite is the law.

Remember, Expy is short for "Exported Character."

Do you really think Mako counts as Batman exported to this setting? A couple similarities as a Shout-Out, but I think that's all.

I might have overemphasized the Badass Normal/gadgetry elements, since there are several Batman expies who achieve their "Batmanness" through superpowers (i.e. The Midnighter and The Confessor).

However, I think being a Batman expy usually requires having a secret identity with stylings of The Cowl and/or having a Rich Idiot With No Day Job civilian identity (Batman and the characters he's inspired by have both).

Mako doesn't fit either of those qualities.

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying any of it

Any of... what?

Dude, Expy is one of the most abused tropes on the site. It's important to scrutinize these entries. From the page, "Short for "exported character", an expy is a character from one series who is unambiguously and deliberately based on a character in another, older series. A few minor traits — such as age and name — may change, but there's no doubt that they are almost one and the same."

Mako is not unambiguously and deliberately Batman. At most, his backstory is a Shout-Out to Batman, but that's nowhere near enough to make an expy. There's way too much different (like their entire personality and role in the story) to count.

Like anyone cares.

Like I said, I'm not buying any these arguments, so don't bother saying "these are the facts" or anything like that.

O...kay.

Not everything is a trope.

Insistent Terminology?

She is a fully realized avatar, just check this article: http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/07/11/legend-of-korra-second-season/

Explicitly, what part of "Separate technique" do you not get? The Avatar State and Unalaq's enhanced waterbending are two separate things. She knows how to use the Avatar state, but not her Uncle's enhanced waterbending. She was trying to use the two abilities in tandem. Keep in mind that her uncle's enhanced waterbending on dark spirits is completely seperate. Not all fully-realized Avatars can do what Unalaq did.

As I already said, some random article saying she's fully realized doesn't mean she is. Posting the same article that someone already posted again doesn't debunk the position that it's wrong.

I never said anything about them not being separate techniques. What I did say was that if you've got a thousand thousand lifetimes of experience mastering waterbending, including your immediate previous incarnation who has been known to learn new techniques on the spot, then there is literally no excuse for Korra to have failed in calming the spirit...unless of course she did not have access to the abilities that her predecessors possessed. And if she is lacking those abilities, it can only be assumed that she is either not in complete control of the Avatar State or she willfully refused to make use of those abilities.

There's something about a razor that I forget the name of that says the simplest answer is usually the correct one and it is simpler to assume that she is not a fully realized Avatar than to speculate on her reasons for refusing to calm the spirit. (Villain Protagonist +1? Kehehehe)

Being a fully-realized Avatar doesn't mean you automatically know how to do the advanced forms of bending, Aang didn't know how to metal bend, lightning bend, bloodbend, or heal after becoming a fully realized Avatar at the end of Book 3 (and Roku, Kyoshi, Kuruk, Yangchen all knew nothing about energybending). Being a fully realized Avatar just means you have a basic mastery of the normal forms of the elements and can control the Avatar State. The Avatar state works as a power booster, it doesn't mean you have access to all the past lives memories during it. If one did, Korra would already know about Wan's life story. And again Unalaq's technique is separate from the Avatar state, fully realized does not equal mastery of all the various subforms of bending.

A being the head of Republic City doesn't automatically equal forces of good. Tarrlok was essentially the head of Republic City as well (he was the leader of the Council) and he was not good. Raiko has every potential to corrupt as he does to be an honest politicia. Which so far has shown to be a mix, he has made good reasonable points but he is also shown to be very concerned with his public image as well. And Korra's hardly a villain protagonist, she brash and emotional, but nowhere near villainous.

"The Avatar State is a defense mechanism, designed to empower you with the skills and knowledge of all the past Avatars." - And to think, Roku is one of my least favorite Avatars. Now that he's proven me right I may have to re-evaluate my opinion of him.

And why do you keep repeating that Unalaq's technique is separate from the Avatar State? I can't imagine you're suggesting that I had not already acknowledged it. Because I have. Thrice.

Speculating on Raiko's corruption or lack thereof is just that, speculation. Until he proves to be corrupt, there's no reason to assume he is any more than there is to assume Varrick is (which Varrick totally is). Iroh works for the Republic. Lin and Mako work for the Republic. Korra went to the Republic for help. They're not the bad guys. Stands to reason that they must be the good guys. Just different good guys than Korra's group.

Tarrlok became meaningless to this discussion once he was outed as a bad guy and not Good Is Not Nice.

Being empowered with all of the skills and knowledge of the past Avatars does not mean you know the life history of all the Avatars while in the state, e.g, Aang did not know about Roku being Zuko's ancestor until Roku told him directly and Korra does not know about Wan's life history. The Avatar state is a power booster to one's own skills thanks to the skills of the pasts lives, it does not give you direct knowledge of the skills, if it did Aang would have known how to bend all three other elements after the first time he went into the state. Also Roku's words do not equal Word of God, he has been known to exaggerate, e.g. when he claimed to have mastered firebending thousands of times in past, that is actually biologicall-mathematically impossible as the first Avatar only lived 10000 years ago (10000 divided by 1000 equals 10 years per lifespan).

Also the reason why Unalaq's technique being separate from the Avatar State is significant is because even if the Avatar state worked how you think it does (it doesn't) there is no evidence that Unalaq's technique was known by any of the past Avatars. It is presented as something new that only Unalaq knows, Korra can't calm spirits yet because she never got the full proper instruction from Unalaq on how to do the technique.

The United Republic doesn't automatically equal good, there is good and bad elements in the Republic. And being head of the Republic does not make one a Big Good.

Being empowered with all of the skills and knowledge of the past Avatars does not mean you know the life history of all the Avatars while in the state,

He said, as if it were relevant to the subject in any way.

As previously stated, three times now, skill and knowledge is the key ingredient here. Specifically the skill and knowledge that enables the previous Avatars, notably Aang, to use new bending techniques, notably waterbending, within moments of learning about them. Fancy that.

Roku's words may not equal Word of God, but they are far more Word of God than yours are, so I should think I'll be sticking with him for now.

even if the Avatar state worked how you think it does (it doesn't)

Despite evidence to the contrary.

there is no evidence that Unalaq's technique was known by any of the past Avatars.

Fascinating. And that's relevant how? If I thought that the past Avatars already knew it why would I be going on about Aang learning new techniques quickly? Why wouldn't I just say "Aang already knew that technique, so balls to you!"?

The United Republic doesn't automatically equal good, there is good and bad elements in the Republic. And being head of the Republic does not make one a Big Good.

The bad elements being one guy who was effectively The Mole and one instance of not jumping at Korra's beck and call the second she snaps her fingers. If Yamamoto can be the Big Good of Bleach while still being an asshole, I should think that a few flaws wouldn't prevent the Republic from being considered good when it's clearly aligned with the good guys.

And as the Republic is the good guys, that would make Raiko, as the most important member of the Republic, the Big Good. So yeah. It kinda does.

Aang's talent at learning waterbending fast didn't come from the use of the Avatar State. When Aang learned waterbedning he had not any control of the state, he learned waterbending quickly because he is just a talented kid.The Avatar state was never responsible for Aang being able to learn new bending techniques, the state just powered up his bending and unconsciously bend elements he hadn't mastered yet. Mastering the Avatar State does not mean one can automatically master new bending techniques. Korra not mastering Unalaq's technique yet is no indication of a lack mastery of the Avatar State. The United Republic is not some heroic organization of good in the show. There are plenty of good people living in it and working for it but it is a country that has its own interests separate from the main protagonists. The trope definition for Big Good is the leader of the largest group opposing the Big Bad. And Book 2 has no clearly defined Bjg Bad yet (and even one wants to argue that Unalaq is, Raiko is certainly not opposing him right now).

At this moment, The Republic isn't really the good guys yet... assuming we're considering Unalaq the Big Bad, then the Big Good would be the leader of the force that's opposing him. Which is explicitly not the Republic.

It's a matter of what you consider the conflict. Raiko could be (assuming he doesn't turn out to be a President Evil) considered the Big Good of the Avatar World as a whole, but for the Water Tribe Civil War? He's neutral. Since he had nothing to with the first season's conflict, and his role in the second season's conflict wasn't as a Big Good, I don't see any need to refer to him as such at this point.

Aang's talent at learning waterbending came from ability and a skill, not from the Avatar State. But the point is that those abilities and skills should be available to Korra through the Avatar State.

Korra's failure to master Unalaq's waterbending is quite another thing from the Avatar State failing to master it. Because with the combined experience and skill of mastering new waterbending techniques, and lifetimes of spiritual and bending ability, there's no reason it should have failed if she were using the abilities the Avatar State should have given her.

Which means either A: She doesn't have them, and consequently hasn't mastered the Avatar State or B: She actually didn't use them, even though she had access to them, for reasons of her own.

A is more probable, but if you want to give me some good reason for her refusing to use the Avatar State to the best of her ability I'm all ears.

Larkam makes sense on the subject of Big Good, so I'll leave it at that. Still say Raiko's better at it than Korra though.

When Korra is in the Avatar State she does indeed have access to the skills of the past Avatars' Waterbending and it makes her awesome at waterbending. It doesn't however, give her the skill to master Unalaq's technique as it is an entirely new technique that only Unalaq knows. Using the Avatar state doesn't give one mastery of techniques that have never been learned before. Mastering the Avatar state means one has complete control of going in and out it of it and can control their actions while in it, all of which Korra can do.

When she's in the Avatar state, it doesn't mean that, at that moment, she has the combined strength and techniques of every Avatar at once. It means she has access to every Avatar's techniques and strength. Presumably, if a past Avatar had mastered spirit calming, she could use the technique while in the Avatar State. But there's no reason to think that someone had.

Given she can access the Avatar State at will, has mastered all four elements, and has conversed with past Avatars, I'd say it's safe to say that she's considered fully realized.

She had access to those techniques and strength. She could have accessed that experience to figure out how to calm the spirit. Learning new skills very quickly. It's what an Avatar does. Once again, buttloads of experience. Just because the Avatar State doesn't automatically have every skill there's ever been ever no matter what doesn't preclude the possibility of, you know, learning it. Which leads back to that thing where the Avatar can pick up new skills very fast. The past Avatars can do it. Channeling that skill and ability should by all rights allow her to succeed in calming the spirit.

So we're back to square one. Option 1: She's not fully realized. Option 2: She is but for some retarded reason she chose not to use her Avatarly abilities and allow the spirit to kill her (although she's not actually dead).

And there's another thing. No, she hasn't mastered all four elements. It's been explicitly stated that she hasn't mastered airbending. Using and mastering aren't the same thing. Just as she can use airbending, just as she can use the Avatar State.

Once again, if you've got an answer for Option 2, I'm all ears. But unless you can provide it, it's Option 1 agogo.

The way you're describing how the mastered Avatar State works is not how it is shown to work in the show. The Avatar State gives extra knowledge and experience to power up your already present bending and achieve feats you would not be able to do without, what it doesn't do (which you seem convinced it does) is aide one in learning and perfecting new skills. The Avatar State can only help Korra power up her existing abilities. And Korra has mastered the mechanics of airbending (the Korra-style air bending), just not philosophy of it. Korra non-mastery of Unalaq's technique in now way reflects her mastery of the Avatar State.

The way I'm describing the Avatar State is how it's described in the show. Aang never needed it; he was given a solution to all his problems by Chelonian ex Machina.

Now who's making things up? "Korra style airbending" is just an excuse she uses to not train because she thinks she doesn't need more than she's already got.

I'd like it very much if you just admitted that I was right. Because we both know that I am. But as that's not gonna happen, and as I've got pokemon to play, I really don't want to waste too much more of my time on this argument. So go ahead and call her a fully realized. It'll just be one of those things that's on there and isn't true.

I think you are both right and wrong. Definitely right about "Korra-style airbending", but I think wrong about the spirit-bending insofar as it seems (at least right now) like something new Unalaq invented (which Korra showed some ability to imitate).

Like bloodbending and metalbending, and (previously) lightningbending spirtbending is a "specialized" version of a previously existing elemental power, and the various Avatars don't seem to have skill with those- either because they were invented later, or else, because the Avatar is a Jack of All Trades.

Korra is fully realized to the extent she can use all of the elements, but is held back by her lack of spirituality. I certainly agree that her weakness at airbending and difficulty with spiritbending probably have to do with that deficiency.

... and saying "everyone else is wrong and knows it and are just disagreeing out of pride" is really not helping you.

Making Eagal look pretty arrogant, too, actually. I'm gonna throw my hat in and say unequivocally that he's completely wrong on everything, just for that.

^^ Well, that too obviously. I don't really even like Korra that much/the way she had been behaving, but that has very little to do with her ability to Spiritbend (especially because of the implication that Unalaq controls the spirits because he/they are evil).

Honestly, I don't think Korra is dumb enough to count.

• She's not a ditz.
• She's not a Fearless Fool.
• She's not Too Dumb to Fool, and ends up getting manipulated A LOT because of it.
• She doesn't have any Cloud Cuckoolander tendencies.

• Korra does indeed show a strong ditzy tendency. Sure, most of those fall under No Social Skills and can be handwaved as her being naive, but naivete isn't a disqualifier (Goku and Luffy again). She fights in Republic City like a superhero against the Triads, and causes more damage than the Triads' crimes. And of course, there's that scene where she kisses Mako right after kissing Bolin and doesn't even realize that that's a problem.

• Korra's also a borderline example of Fearless Fool; "unable to recognize imminent peril" is definitely a trait of Korra's. She can recognize peril when she's helpless, sure (see Amon and Tarrlok), but she's too blind to catch it beforehand.

• She doesn't have Cloudcuckoolander tendencies because she's not Played for Laughs.

• She's not Too Dumb to Fool, because the point of this series is that the Gordian Knot can't just be cut; her being easily manipulated is not a sign of intelligence. I don't think it's necessary to the Idiot Hero trope that karma favor the hero.

I simply don't think she's dumb enough for the Idiot Hero.

Her intelligence is fairly realistically flawed for a teenage girl who's lived a sheltered life. She's not shown as Book Dumb, her social skills aren't that bad, and while she's got definite Leeroy Jenkins characteristics, she's shown to be well aware of the dangers of many situations.

She's just never been shown as particularly dumb. Not particularly smart, either, but notthat dumb.

Korra isn't anywhere remotely close to an Idiot Hero. I'm honestly completely baffled this question is even being asked.

"Realism" or not has no bearing on whether she fits the trope, and "her social skills aren't that bad"...on that point, I'll point to No Social Skills. There's a reason that trope is on her sheet ("you're oppressing yourself!). (As for Book Dumb, we haven't seen anything one way or another there, so it's kind of disingenuous to say that "she's not shown as Book Dumb.")

If it were just being a Leeroy Jenkins, or being trivially easy to manipulate, or having No Social Skills, I'd agree that she wasn't shown as particularly dumb, but she consistently acts rather stupidly in all of those ways, so it's a lot easier for me to see her as an idiot. (Yes, she's probably the kind of idiot who needs some sense slapped into her, rather than a congenitally-low IQ. That doesn't disqualify her from fitting the trope.)

Korra's brashness is no where near the level of the Fearless Fool trope. Korra charges headfirst into dangerous situations but she is not blind to the danger she is just confident enough that she can overcome it. Idiot Hero, like Larkman said requires much greater degree of dumbness and sillyness. Korra making mistakes does not equal Idiot Hero level of dumb.

This doesn't even fit remotely. That someone acts compassionate when some else is hurt doesn't mean the person is attracted by that.

It is way too subjective to be put in the character tropes, for the same reason Strangled By The Red String is in YMMV and not in the main tropes section of the show because there no where near universal agreement on it. Your reasoning is also very personally subjective. Put in YMMV if you feel it necessary to have it mentioned somewhere. Also the trope description is for couples who have very little on screen relationship, it can be said objectively Mako's and Korra's relationship with each is explored on screen, whether you think it was done well or not is an entirely different matter.

Not going to start natter, but these aren't subjective tropes by Tv Tropes standards. Both Designated Love Interest and Flat Character are completely objective tropes that have valid backing behind them from a creative prespective. I'm not trying to say people shoulnd't disagree with the entries just that they really don't belong on YMMV like Strangled by the Red String; which is subjective.

And not a personal attack, just an observation, but I'm getting a very strict, touchy vibe from the page edits. Any other page, fairly critical entries could be posted with no objections from others. But, here, it feels like so many people with so many different opinons and prespectives are congesting LOK's forums, so less flattering views (no matter how critically valid) of the series, are strictly confined to YMMV page.

I'd just like to know if there's a way I could validate these entries while sounding critically ambivilant. I mean Suki was condsidered a Flat Character and Yue got pegged a Shallow Love Interest. I was just under the assumption that just because some people like LOK's pairings/characters doesn't mean we shouldn't analyze their merits as literary devices.

Well if there is a large disagreement in whether or not a character is fulfilling a trope doesn't that indicate that the application of said trope is more subjective than others? And while TV Tropes is very casual it is still a wiki, the main objective of the site is "to recognize tropes", for the recognition of a trope to be comfortably/definitively stated IMO requires a certain degree of significant consensus. Naturally, anything that is very popular is going to have more conflicting views and less consensus, so I think it is somewhat expected that edits would be a little more strict. Also part of your reasoning speculated on creator intent which I think is pretty subjective reasoning (not necessarily weak reasoning but still not something that can be evidenced).

And Suki and Princess Yue are/were considered a Flat Character and a Shallow Love Interest? Because they don't currently have that listed in their character entries.

I am not saying we shouldn't analyze the show or characters' merits as literary devices but that is why there is an "Analysis" section for each character section and the main page entry.

Also in defense of my Designated Love Interest entry, there can be a *display* of romance between two characters, but that in no way makes it "explored" or "logical". Yes the nature of Korra and Mako's relationship is obvious, but 1) we're informed their feelings are true with minimal substantial buildup until that point, 2) beyond the love triangle their relationship only consists of failed communication and obvious romantic gestures that seem to function only to the detriment of their characters more than actual chemistry or relationship merit, and 3) they very rarely sit down to have subtle, low-key glimpses into their feelings for each other.

Everything is either browsed over for the sake of action sequences or just plays out in a formulaic, over-the-top fashion with no logical backing (ie Mako's reaction in episode 9). This sums up the entire trope to a T. It really doesn't help that Bolin and Asami, themselves, never got any solid character arc outside of their love entanglements.

That may be your personal reaction to their romantic development, but I could easily find another person making the exact opposite argument.

The series' romantic subplots (like the previous series) and the couple are extremely divisive and are disagreed upon immensely. I could also find plenty of people arguing why any of the A:TLA couples would fit the Designated Love Interest trope as well but likewise there is far too much disagreement as well to put it in the characters' trope list.

If you still feel that strongly about it, why don't you just put Korra and Mako in the example box for Western Animation of Designated Love Interest? Plenty of couples are listed in the example entry for the aforementioned trope but without the trope itself listed in the aforementioned character's or work's entry .

A character in a story who, despite being presented as the One True Love of a central character, doesn't seem to have much of a relationship with said character at all. The catalyst for the relationship appeared off-screen before the series began, and save for maybe an occasional over-the-top gesture, never really appears to manifest.

Mako and Korra were in a relationship for, what, less than a minute of screentime? There's no possible way this can apply right now.

No, he shouldn't. The trope is about good looking antagonists.

I'd say he's closer to Handsome Devil but he may still be a bit to benign for that.

Handsome Devil is when the character is hated in universe.

Stop trying to shoehorn in tropes about how much "everyone" hates Mako. It's gone way beyond irritating.