Follow TV Tropes

Discussion Main / CreatorsPet

Go To

Jun 27th 2014 at 5:44:09 PM •••

Okay, I'm objecting to the X Men Evolution entry of Jean Grey on the Western Animation sub-page. I may simply be a fan of the character, but I never detected overwhelming hate for her, except for one bad fanfiction writer who put her down to make the self-insert OC look good. Nor did I really see any justification for her being classed as Creator's Pet - Rogue, after all, got far more screen time and it was her character arc that dominated the show, though she was fairly well received. People who are simultaneously intelligent (I don't think she was ever shown as being top in the school, and she's always been very clever) and sporty do actually exist in real life.

Maybe Base Breaker (though I can see little enough evidence of that, either...) might be more appropriate?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 28th 2014 at 2:07:48 AM •••

I don't know, but we have this forum thread for discussion on the issue.

Apr 28th 2014 at 4:18:36 PM •••

Can a character be both a Base Breaker and a Creator's Pet at the same time. If not, we should remove examples like Broly where that is clearly the case. I'm pretty sure this trope means "The Scrappy who's loved by the creators".

Also what should we do about characters who are popular in certain areas and not others.

Apr 15th 2014 at 10:07:56 AM •••

Sometimes I wonder what the point of subjective trope pages are if you still have to jump through so many hurdles just to list something.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 15th 2014 at 10:26:05 AM •••

Because "subjective" doesn't mean anything goes.

Apr 16th 2014 at 5:58:01 PM •••

Good thing I didn't imply that it does then. But still, if Your Mileage May Vary, why does everything have to seem so drearily official?

Apr 16th 2014 at 11:21:22 PM •••

Because a trope can have both YMMV and objective requirements. YMMV is a concept for "this relies on opinion"; it doesn't say anything about how to add examples.

Sep 24th 2013 at 1:23:35 PM •••

Removed a especially natter-y Anti-Travis rant form the Star Wars EU section for being a)completely irrelevant to the trope at hand and b)so YMMV that I doubt it would place in the YMMV section.

Jun 26th 2013 at 6:20:32 PM •••

I think that Superboy-Prime qualifies as a subversion of this trope. He has many of the hall-marks of a Creator's Pet in that he always has a spotlight in major crises, writers use him to kill off a bunch of characters they don't care for, and generally like writing him...but they still hate him and treat him with no respect, just like the fans.

Jun 17th 2013 at 5:59:49 PM •••

If the Word of God admits that a character is a Creator's Pet, does the character still qualify despite not meeting the criteria?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 18th 2013 at 8:34:00 AM •••

I believe that Creator's Pet and The Wesley were once two tropes, where Creator's Pet (or at least something like that) was the supertrope and included characters that the fandom liked, so long as the creators, well, really liked them as well.

As far as I know, that's gone now so... no.

Jun 26th 2013 at 6:29:21 PM •••

Um, sorry? Wasn't being passive aggressive. In the slightest. I thought there was once a trope along the lines of "a character who is loved by creators" that was a supertrope to The Wesley.

No need to be rude.

Jun 28th 2013 at 9:22:28 AM •••

My deepest apologies. I just took your comment the wrong way.

Jan 23rd 2013 at 11:07:34 PM •••

If a character happens to become overused by the creator because it first became very profitable/popular with the public, does said character qualify for this trope?

Edited by ritzoreo Hide/Show Replies
Jun 10th 2013 at 11:48:29 AM •••

In that case, characters like Wolverine or Batman don't really fit the trope since they only became a pet after becoming very popular.

Fighteer MOD
Dec 26th 2012 at 2:12:46 PM •••

As this trope has been split into separate example lists, I am locking the main article. Any discussion of the description should go here.

Edited by Fighteer
Feb 28th 2012 at 10:50:17 AM •••

Why the name change? the Wesley was fine, so why the change to Creator's Pet? It Bugs Me!

Hide/Show Replies
Feb 29th 2012 at 1:32:48 AM •••

Not everyone is familiar with Star Trek: The Next Generation. Besides which, there's some potential for confusion with others named Wesley (or Westley). Creator's Pet is a more self-explanatory title.

Edited by McKathlin
Mar 8th 2012 at 4:52:46 PM •••

Sorry but going to have to call BS on this. While it is understandable that there are other characters named Wesley Star Trek, the original and the Next Generation, is a household name in which everyone and their own mother is familiar with. Not familiar with the original trope sounds like a excuse one would come up with when they just want to rename the trope for the hell of it

Mar 21st 2012 at 10:20:14 AM •••

Myopia at its finest. TNG is nearing twenty years since it ended and the first original is over forty. There are also people who just might not be into science fiction. To expect people to see "The Wesley" and immediately connect the name to a guy from a specific show and know what the trope is about is absurd. If I were to create a trope called "The Haruhi" and expect everyone to know that it's about a seemingly normal person who doesn't know they have superpowers, would people be willing to let that go? Didn't think so.

Mar 28th 2012 at 2:21:13 PM •••

Yeah, the old trope's name completely stumped me.

In fact, when I came across this trope was the first time I ever heard of the Star Trek character.

May 23rd 2013 at 6:28:02 PM •••

Star Trek The Next Generation is a household name, but Wesley is only known to the fans.

Dec 5th 2011 at 4:03:11 PM •••

Is it just me or is the entry for Imoen from Baldur's Gate fairly vicious?

  • Imoen from Baldur's Gate is an inversion; the fanbase loves her, but the creators openly despise her for some reason.
    • " They despise her because the only reason the fan base likes her is because she is a fairly attractive woman. In Baldur's Gate, she was a generic character (she even had one of the generic voice sets rather than a unique one) with virtually no development beyond being almost forced on you as your first party member so you had access to thief skills. The only role in the plot was to die in Baldur's Gate 2, but given the undeserved fan base love for her, they had to rewrite vast sections of the plot to accommodate that."

That's almost at complaining about characters that you don't like levels.

Hide/Show Replies
Dec 6th 2011 at 1:18:19 AM •••

It's also ridiculous - if the creators were so inept and weak-willed that they "rewrote vast sections of the plot" rather than kill a fan-loved character, then they're almost beneath contempt. That's just pathetic.

Oct 24th 2011 at 11:47:07 PM •••

One thing I'm wondering, what if a character is, say, in only one or two episodes. But in those episodes, it's clear the producers really liked them, but the fans pretty much hate their guts. Do they have to be a main character, or do they just have to hog the screentime they do get and get shilled during it?

Edited by doomsday524 Hide/Show Replies
May 23rd 2013 at 6:29:30 PM •••

For it to qualify it has to be a relatively unimportant character, because if they're actually plot-important they're not thrust into scenes for no reason.

Sep 29th 2011 at 3:12:08 PM •••

I am currently involved in an Edit War against someone who's name i forgot to look up before posting this message over the entry for Itachi Uchiha.

  • Constantly done with Itachi Uchiha in Naruto. Does he get called out for his repeated Mind Rape attacks on Sasuke? No. Does he get called out for enabling Akatsuki to get stronger? No. Does he get called out that he did nothing to prevent Akatsuki from gaining the Biju? No. Does he get called out for his More Than Mind Control plan to rob Sasuke of his free will? No. Instead, he is viewed as a perfect person inside the Narutoverse. Bee even said, after Itachi lectures Naruto *then breaks the point of the lecture by going alone to face Kabuto* that he wasn't 'just strong'. Itachi can get away with anything and is now a huge Karma Houdini since he's not called out for ANYTHING he's done.

I do not believe this entry can belong on this page because Itachi is not a Wesley, large parts of the Naruto fandom love Itachi, another large part hates him, and presumably the rest of the fandom doesn't love or hate him, but acknowledges that he's there. Since the Wesley is defined as a character who is hated by the overwhelming majority of the fandom, i don't see how Itachi can be considered a Wesley.

Now, if i'm wrong, and he can be put on this page despite not being a Wesley, i believe that certain parts of the message should be removed or toned down. The Karma Houdini part doesn't apply to Itachi. Karma is a simple concept: do bad things, and bad things will happen to you; do good things, and good things will happen to you. Itachi did bad things for good reasons, and bad things happened to him. First he killed his family (bad thing he did) and then he spent the last eight of his twenty one years as a diseased fugitive despised by the people he sought to save (bad thing that happned to him). Then, not only did he DIE, but he was resurrected to find out that his plan failed and the war he murdered his family to prevent started anyway. Because he did not escape Karma, he is not a Karma Houdini.

I also believe the Hyprocite part is debatable. I can see how one would come to that conclusion. But it ignores the fact that Itachi was talking about fighting one person on his own, while Naruto was talking about fighting AN ENTIRE WAR on his own.

Edited by ninjadude853 Hide/Show Replies
Apr 2nd 2013 at 7:23:12 AM •••

TO be honest, I'd say Sasuke is more a creator's pet than Itachi (whose association with Sasuke gives him traces of this)

May 26th 2011 at 9:35:41 PM •••

While I consider Carlie a Wesley myself, her section has picked up a lot of natter. Does anyone mind if I cut down on all of that and just give a brief summary?

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 28th 2014 at 4:21:11 PM •••

Sure you can (that'd actually be really helpful).

May 17th 2011 at 4:24:43 PM •••

Am I the only Troper who thinks Bill 156 is a Wesley? Because a bunch of the otaku nation does, especially in the affected area (Tokyo). It doesn't help that the Tokyo GOVERNOR pushed for its passage.

Apr 15th 2011 at 9:57:58 PM •••

I personally think this trope needs to go to the Repair Shop. Most of it contains legit examples of this trope, but a lot of it is just complaining about main characters you don't like. Main character detested by you /=/ Wesley.

Edited by WhiteBear Hide/Show Replies
Aug 9th 2011 at 4:32:08 AM •••

I agree. You can see the sheer HATRED radiating from many, many entries, and it's getting creepy as fuck to see people pretty much doam at the mouth and lose all coherence in regards to FICTIONAL people. A good example is Nozomi from Bleach, whose supposed "Wesley" tratis would be withstood or even praised if she was a male since there are MANY males who are as "overpowered" as she is in-story, but aside of Aizen she's the only one who gets slammed. And then there's her "chemistry" with Ichigo, which to me is the REAL reason why she's hated.

Jun 20th 2012 at 10:49:14 AM •••

Why is it that any time a female character is criticized for any reason, somebody decides to play the misogyny and/or shipping card? You're being sexist for assuming that nothing regarding a female character can be negative and/or reducing a female character's worth to shipping material. It's also presumptuous to act as if male characters are given a free pass regarding anything.

As for Nozomi... Really? There are so many negative things I could say about her, but I wouldn't touch that issue, nor the rest of your arguments, with a ten foot pole.

As for this trope, in general, people seem to be adding examples regardless of how many people share their opinions and some will flat out lie about how many actually agree with them. Some have gone as far as criticizing those who don't agree with them.

Edited by InsertHandleHere2
Mar 22nd 2011 at 7:01:56 PM •••

I doubt anybody's going to see this given it hasn't been posted in for a while, but I removed Jo from Big Time Rush from the Live Action TV section. I didn't know fans actually liked her-I added her in the first place, because at one point I remember her being listed as The Wesley on the show's YMMV page. And the point of her actions in "Welcome Back, Big Time" was that Kendall was being a jerk? The only justifiable excuse was his constantly breaking her kiss scene, and for the most part going to such extremes to know what was happening with her and Jett even though it was nothing. Regardless, I still hate that episode.

As well as that, I find Gibby being listed as one questionable. Most iCarly fans I know like him, and I don't see him as much of a Jerkass myself.

Edited by lightning37 Hide/Show Replies
May 23rd 2013 at 6:32:33 PM •••

Gibby's by a looooong shot the LEAST Jerkass character on iCarly.

Mar 5th 2011 at 10:28:55 AM •••

re cut

Teachers Pet normally implies that the person is hated too. the sort of behaviour of a "pet" is generally regarded as irritating, comparing something to a pet i hardly flattering, redirects don't have to be spoony.

Feb 20th 2011 at 7:55:27 AM •••

I'm curious: I don't read comics, so what exactly is the hard life Carlie Cooper supposedly has that makes Spiderman's life look trivial? (I don't doubt that Carlie's life is likely a cakewalk compared to Peter's I just would like to know how)

Hide/Show Replies
Aug 15th 2011 at 6:46:28 PM •••

Essentially her dad was a dirty cop and that's about the extent of it (she might have a missing mom too as I can't remember one being mentioned, but don't quote me on that one). Oh and she was friends was Gwen Stacey but considering Gwen and Peter were discussing marriage around the time she died and he saw her die at the hands of their mutal friends father...moot point.

Dec 20th 2010 at 2:09:36 PM •••

So... I was thinking this entry is a bit overlong. Some of the parts don't even make much sense; I have NEVER seen the Dark Angels get that much praise from GW, and a lot of fans playing them makes them Ensemble Darkhorses, not Wesleys.

Plus, the Ultramarines entry in general seems to be "Whinewhinewhinewhinewhine" more than just explanation.

Should I cut some?

  • Some Warhammer 40000 fans think that the sudden elevation of the Necrons and their undying C'tan masters to essentially the prime source of all evil in the universe - responsible even for Chaos, the force intrinsically opposed to the Necrons and the traditional Big Bad of the setting - was an entire race of Wesleys. The insinuation that the C'tan secretly rule a large part of the Imperium and are worshipped by a smaller but incredibly critical part has not helped this any.
    • The new 5th Edition rules seem to be trying to rectify this, pointing out that the long hibernation coupled with the constant repairs to their bodies have turned many of them into mindless procedure-following automatons, and most Lords are so completely insane they think themselves immortal gods and build grand powerful bodies for them to inhabit and wage war with. Whether this removes the C'tan from the fluff completely is uncertain at this point, but it appears Chaos is back as Big Bad numero uno.
    • The Tau could be considered another example of this trope. When they were first introduced they were young idealists with shiny new technology and anime-inspired mecha, needless to say many fans thought this didn't at all fit with the tone of the universe. The fact that they then continued to prosper and expand significantly whilst suffering no major set-backs in conflict with the other factions only served to reinforce the fans' belief that Games Workshop had only introduced them to lure in young anime fans. With the release of their second Codex, however, they were 'darkened' appropriately and made to seem less like a United Federation of Planets-esque utopia and more like an Orwellian police-state. Most fans have now come to accept the Tau as a legitimate part of the 40k universe.
    • Now there's the original Space Marines themselves, and the Ultramarines in particular. Codex Creep has made them more powerful on the tabletop, and for some reason the Ultrasmurfs keep getting more hero units, more exposure and never seem to lose. It was even worse in the last edition; almost every single picture in the previous Codex was of the Ultramarines, with only a few pages to show that other chapters actually existed. The Space Wolves are being accused of even more Codex Creep, especially with one particular psychic power that's just begging for errata, but... they're Viking werewolf space marines, we just can't manifest the hate.
      • While we're at it: the Commander kit comes with six pauldron options. One blank, one with scroll-and-circle-for-insignia, one with a skull-faced eagle, one with a Crux Terminatus, one for the Deathwatch...guess which chapter insignia was on the sixth. (The Dark Angels were the only other chapter to get a reference in said kit, and that took the form of an unbelievably tiny little winged sword badge that was almost impossible to get off the sprue without surgical equipment.)
        • To be fair, the Dark Angels rule GW. Go to any 40k/Hobby store. Any one. You WILL find a Dark Angels fan. Also, they tend to be the only ones to actually succeed in their campaigns, due to the more experienced players using them.
      • A better explanation behind how much of the Wesley the Ultrasmurfs are: In most codexes, the armies get a sweeping generalization through most of the codex, and individual armies get a one paragraph summation regarding their basic structure. There are 30 chapters within the basic Space Marine codex. 29 of them have the one paragraph summation and a picture of a basic Space Marine. The entirety of the rest of the codex is dedicated specifically to the Ultrasmurfs. All of the stories involved in other codexes are usually battles that involve a lot of armies fighting together, and prevailing. There is precisely one chapter that gets referenced at all in the stories, and that's the Ultrasmurfs and the Ultrasmurfs only. It's no wonder that they're annoying the players with how much they get pushed.

Edited by Scardoll
Dec 17th 2010 at 5:11:42 PM •••

What is really the difference between a Mary Sue and a Wesley? Aren't Sues hated by the readers, loved by their authors and generally offered large roles of the story (if not it's central focus)?

Hide/Show Replies
Dec 18th 2010 at 2:57:07 AM •••

A Sue is a related concept, but not identical. They're defined as Willing Suspension of Disbelief-breakingly perfect, whilst the Wesley just has to be despised by the audience for whatever reason, and yet given a disproportionate amount of hype by the authors and prominence in the plot.

Rolo Lamperouge, for instance, is a Wesley but not a Sue. He's far too fucked in the head for the latter, without even the almighty competence of a Villain Sue or the improbable success rate of an Anti-Sue.

Edited by Iaculus
Jun 22nd 2011 at 7:50:58 PM •••

I think that the term you're looking for is Canon Sue.

Nov 8th 2010 at 10:28:24 AM •••

Adric seems to be misplaced here. I don't think he counts as a Wesley because his teammates don't exactly lavish praise on him all the time (see "Four to Doomsday" for some choice Take That, Scrappy! moments, including Nyssa telling him to shut up and the Doctor calling him an idiot and a delinquent) and since he's in the infamous "crowded TARDIS" he doesn't have heaps of screentime either. I think the only real Wesley quality he has is the fan-hate, which would make him more of a Scrappy. Personally I love the little bugger, but I know he's far from perfect.

Oct 25th 2010 at 8:49:57 PM •••

Been bugging me for a while, but the Jessica Jones example doesn't really list why she's a Wesley other than one single example of shilling. If anyone else has support for it feel free but I'm thinking of cutting it just for poor explanation.

Hide/Show Replies
Oct 25th 2010 at 8:50:46 PM •••

For reference, here's the entry:

  • Jessica Jones; her status as the Wesley was confirmed for all time in the first issue of Young Avengers when you had the four main rookie Young Avengers, all of which are in their mid-teens, meeting Jessica Jones (an obscure super-heroine who hadn't even been a hero for the last 5-6 years Marvel time, having retired to become a private eye) being treated like the Second Coming by the Young Avengers.

Oct 4th 2010 at 4:48:47 PM •••

I thought I was the only one who hated that stupid Godot -_-

Sep 20th 2010 at 3:42:22 AM •••

Page quote:

I'm the troper who originally put in the "Face it Lana, you're amazing!" quote at the top of the page (the ultimate Lana shill). Later I found that it had been changed to "C'mon Lana, you're amazing!" Admittedly, I don't own the Smallville DV Ds, but I'm sure that the line was "face it". I've changed it back again, but if someone with the DV Ds would like to check what the exact quote was, then feel free to switch it back to "c'mon" again if I'm wrong.

Sep 15th 2010 at 10:56:18 PM •••

  1. Andy Bernard on "The Office" qualifies for me. Ever since he came in, he has disrupted the character dynamic of the show and the showrunners have gone out of their way to make him a primary focus of the show. The fact that he and Erin have been earmarked by the network as the New Jim And Pam is just more of the same.

  • Your Mileage May Vary. Andy has sometimes become the most likable person on the show during the times both Jim and Pam have Taken A Level Of Jerkass.

Guys, if you feel the need to start with "for me" then it probably isn't broad enough and should go in Tropers Tales

Sep 3rd 2010 at 7:35:52 AM •••

Wouldn't a Music subsection be relevant ?

In concerts, acts tend to invariably include in the setlist personal favourites the audience could do without : - The Gloaming more regularly performed live by Radiohead than anything off The Bends - Queen shows were universally viewed as exhilarating experiences. During 8-minute-long bleeps-and-bloops Get Down Make Love, less so - Generally any overlong self-indulgent guitar or drums solo - U2 has performed Sunday Bloody Sunday at every show but one in 13 years. It's a hit so they might think they're providing fanservice, but in truth the fans are SICK of the ear worm

Edited by
Aug 29th 2010 at 5:27:05 PM •••

I have a question, why is Wesley Crusher the "Wesley", yet Will Robinson of Lost in Space, not considered the "Wesley"? Like Wesley, he's a genius and like Wesley, he did occasionally get the Robinson family in trouble? I'm just honestly curious

Hide/Show Replies
Nov 15th 2010 at 2:39:43 PM •••

I guess since no one answered this question, it means that Will Robinson of Lost in Space IS indeed "The Wesley" of that program! :O

Jun 29th 2011 at 11:58:17 AM •••

I doubt it. Most of the fan hate was directed at Doctor Smith and most of the remaining hate was for the Robot.

May 24th 2013 at 9:06:10 AM •••

The Wesley isn't just "a genius who gets someone into trouble." It's specifically a fan reaction, where the fans hate a character despite that character being touted by the creators.

Aug 23rd 2010 at 8:00:01 PM •••

i really have to ask because this is not on the canonical list of yadda yadda yadda... but what's the difference between this and the canon sue?

Edited by juancarlos Hide/Show Replies
Aug 23rd 2010 at 8:02:57 PM •••

Canon Sue is a type of Mary Sue and therefore all examples are listed in the Canonical section of whichever definition of Mary Sue the character fits. The Wesley furthermore does not have the plot warping effect of a Black Hole Sue but nonetheless is given more attention than he/she deserves.

Aug 1st 2010 at 12:58:21 PM •••

Would corn fit on this list? The US government subsidizes the living daylights out of it and also levies a large enough tariff on sugar(actually the sugar lobby's fault) that corn syrup can be found in damn near everything. The corn lobby's also running these "sweet surprise" commercials that use Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics to gloss over the fact that fructose is less healthy than sucrose.

Jul 22nd 2010 at 4:06:27 AM •••

I doubt Kotchanski counts as the Wesley. Lister and Kryten still get as much screentime as before and she never got any shilling in the season where she joined the cast full-time (in fact, quite the opposite happened to her at Kryten's hands throughout the series). In the next season most of the focus was back on Rimmer and Lister's Odd Couple room sharing, so she wasn't exactly a Spotlight Hog. Not to mention that she was all but Put on a Bus in Back To Earth. If anything, she's a milder version of a Replacement Scrappy. But even then, the staff tried to stop her from truely replaceing Rimmer by keeping his appearences in flachbacks and dream sequences to make the most of Chris Barrie's limited availabilty for work, while he was filming The Brittas Empire.

Edited by Truro
Jul 7th 2010 at 7:01:02 PM •••

Ryan Lavery of All My Children definitely fits this trope. More than one discussion board actually has a "Die, Ryan, Die" war chant, yet Ryan quite possibly gets more screen time than Erica Kane. All the other characters (especially the women) practically wax poetic as they extol his virtues to anyone they can corner, yet none of these virtues are readily apparent... the audience is just supposed to believe in them because they've been TOLD to.

Edited by
Jul 7th 2010 at 8:50:17 AM •••

I'm not a Harry Potter fan at all, but is Ginny Weasley really universally hated by fans/loved by JKR enough to be on this page?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 29th 2011 at 11:50:47 AM •••

No. She is a base breaker. Some fans hate her, some like her.

Jun 17th 2010 at 5:16:21 AM •••

Is Neelix really a wesley? I don't remember him getting a disproportionate number of focus episodes. He's a Scrappy no doubt, but I don't think he fully qualifies as a Wesley.

Jun 14th 2010 at 1:24:25 PM •••

I like the top page quote. Lets keep it! (and name it George)

Jun 8th 2010 at 4:55:58 PM •••

Doesn't Owen actually have a lot of fans? I listed him as a Base Breaker and nobody seemed to mind.

Edit: And he won the first season because he got enough votes from the fans. Well, I think the "you pick the winner" never happened for the first season in Canada, but in everywhere else...

Edited by greatpikminfan
May 24th 2010 at 12:35:32 PM •••

I deleted some factual errors, but I'm wondering if River Song even fits given the justification. This is not Complaining About Characters You Don't Like.

Hide/Show Replies
May 27th 2010 at 11:27:38 AM •••

Most importantly, in two years she's appeared in two stories amounting to four 45 minute episodes. As of now, she's not a major character.

Jul 1st 2010 at 1:54:30 AM •••

There seems to be a few tropers who seem insistent that she is, so I added a small snippet in the main body of the Doctor Who entry.

But honestly, I don't get it - apart from acting smug (supposely) and having a mysterious past, she's another companion who relies on the Doctor to save the day and have her fat pulled from the fire (just like...well, everyone else really). Apparently her flying the TARDIS seems to be a sticking point, except for the minor fact that he taught her to.

Oct 15th 2010 at 11:18:00 AM •••

Well, I don't really like her (I can't really explain properly...), but I don't think she's a Wesley. I mean, she doesn't show up enough to be one.

Jan 13th 2011 at 10:31:28 AM •••

Removed Christina d'Souza and Jenny, both of them one-episode wonders who cannot possibly qualify as The Wesley. As for River Song, I'm not sure it's relevant how competent she is—this is The Wesley, not Mary Sue. The creators clearly love her (the guy who created her is now showrunner, and she's popped up twice already in his first season in charge). The fanbase is lukewarm at best. She butts into stories where she doesn't have much reason to be; both "A Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone" and "The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang" would have worked just fine without her. I don't think she's The Wesley yet, but a few more appearances and a little more fanbase hatred and she will be.

It doesn't help that Moffat has written himself into a corner. It would have been possible to drop her after her original appearance in "Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead"—her retro-relationship with the Doctor could have been brushed off by way of Timey-Wimey Ball—but now that she's become a recurring character, Moffat is committed to developing that retro-relationship, and it's not at all clear how he can manage it without completely hijacking the show.

Edited by Dausuul
Jan 1st 2012 at 3:20:30 PM •••

As of the Season Finale, I think it's safe to say she's a Wesley, given her horrific actions and lack of tangible (and explicit) consequences for the aforesaid actions. However, it's always going to be YMMV, no matter the character; even the original Trope Namer had his fans.

Jul 3rd 2012 at 1:23:38 AM •••

...what in god's name did she do that was so "horrific" that required tangible consequences? The woman was kidnapped from her parents at birth, brainwashed into an assassin by a cult, then forced to shoot someone she loved. And then pay for a crime she learned she had to commit or all of time and space would collapse - a crime that she actually DOESN'T commit but has to pay for anyway.

May 22nd 2010 at 6:04:16 AM •••

Is Dana Walsh from 24 really a good example of a Wesley? I'm not contesting that she was a detestable character with a time-wasting subplot, but I don't really sense that she was the "Creator's Pet" or overly well-liked by the writers or showrunners. Given how her character has turned out, it seems like the writers intended for her to be widely hated by the fans, which contradicts the basic idea of a Wesley.

Apr 25th 2010 at 9:19:14 PM •••

Pardon me — does anyone know if there's a trope that describes the polar opposite of The Wesley? As in, a character that fans like, but the creators hate? And I don't necessarily mean Screwed by the Network where executives hate them.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 20th 2010 at 8:31:49 PM •••

A lot of the examples here seem to be base breakers. Should I cut the entries that say the character has a fanbase?

Apr 9th 2010 at 3:38:16 PM •••

I said this in the archived dicussion, but do the Kankers from Ed Edd N Eddy count? I think that since they are used as a quick way to wrap up the episode, the writers must like them. Yet, they are hated by nearly every single EENE fan.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 20th 2010 at 8:27:47 PM •••

From what I remember, the Kankers got the least screentime of any character. I don't think they'd really count.

May 24th 2010 at 12:34:08 PM •••

That's not saying very much considering the Omega Cast structure of the show.

Apr 4th 2010 at 4:18:07 AM •••

It's subjective. Stop adding natter!

Apr 3rd 2010 at 9:56:48 PM •••

Is Green Lantern John Stewart really The Wesley? Most of the fan criticism of him seems to be that he's just put in situations that other G Ls would fit better, not that he's a bad character.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 13th 2010 at 5:25:54 PM •••

I went ahead and took the liberty of erasing the comic entry since a lot of it was actually completely inaccurate. Dwayne Mc Duffie accusing people of being racist. A wesley is a character who is near universally hated by fans, but writers continue to push him/her into leading positions. The closes Green Lantern to ever fit that description has been Kyle Rayner, not John Stewart, and even then he was more of a Replacement Scrappy. Simply put, John isn't a Wesley becasue "getting position instead of fan favorite character."

If anything, John more properly fits the description of Base Breaker.

Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:


Media sources: