Follow TV Tropes
With the example about \"Mamma är lik sin mamma\" (\"Mum is like her mom\") by Siw Malmkvist, I\'m pretty sure that it comes more under Fair For Its Day, since it was released at a time when such female stereotypes were coming under criticism and actually changed big time.
I would think King Of The Hill plots fit well in this trope if this apply. It\'s filled with social commentary of topics and issues that are relevant today and in a viewpoint of a hard-working southern conservative Christian Hank.
Can't a work resonate today if it at least looks modern? The style of how something is done, its content notwithstanding, can appeal a great deal to today's audiences, particularly if there isn't any distracting ideological baggage.
Am I the only one who finds it a little troublesome that some of the examples on this page refer to television shows that are still on the air? Oh my gosh! Isn't it amazing how works created in the long-ago era of the 1990's still resonate today? Most of the examples on the Values Dissonance page are either from time periods prior (or nearly so) to living memory, that is, before modern audiences were born, or from cultures widely separated by geography, religion, or philosophy. It seems to me that for this trope to have any real meaning, the value in question has to resonate across a similarly wide gulf in time, space, or culture. Otherwise, we're just talking about how the values in a work can resonate with the same culture that produced and was the primary audience for a work. As it is right now, this trope reads like People Sit On Chairs. Is there any strong reason I shouldn't start pruning a lot of examples?
ETA: Well, it's been a week with no replies, so let the pruning commence. (Incidentally, I left in the Anime/Manga examples, even though they were all pretty recent, because any work made in Japan that becomes popular in the US, or vice versa, is an example of this trope almost by definition, but I'm open to the idea that that means that Anime/Manga examples also ought to be excluded unless they also resonate across time.)
They seem to have crept back in, so I removed a lot of them again. I think that a few things (related to trans issues and maybe homophobia, where cultural attitudes have changed very fast) might be worth mentioning, but even then, support for those issues is Older Than They Think. But things like "this work from a decade ago about the economy is extra-relevant today!" definitely don't qualify.
While not as important as this whole Anti-Flamebait thing, it would be helpful if somebody in the know would explain what the short acronym "B5" means in the Blake's Seven entry.
Alright, this trope page seems to be one giant piece of Flame Bait. Despite the page telling people to not assume that just because something is old that it is accurate, the examples seem to be doing just that. These examples are highly subjective, yet they are portrayed as facts. Not to mention that they all seem to lean towards a certain direction on the political spectrum (while the Urban Legends all seem to lean towards the other). I can find several in the TV section alone that I do not agree with at all.
Just because people see something does not mean it is there. Take the comic book and movie 300, which was accused of being, among other things, a racist screed against middle easterners and a jingoistic vehicle for the Bush Administration. None of these have proven true, yet they are still upheld as such by many.
Can we please re-write the examples to show that they are truly subjective, and that only some people, not all, believe that they are resonant? Otherwise, we're violating the rules of this wiki.
Considering that it's a YMMV trope, isn't subjectiveness in the examples a given?
This being a subjective trope, examples will be subjective. However, Examples Are Not Arguable is wiki policy, and so the examples are written as factual.
This whole thing is basically just Gushing About Shows You Like.
[on the off chance I can't get it back, here's the original page]
Some moral values just don't travel well. The attitudes of the society have changed, or the issue they addressed has become obsolete.
But others...like wine, only get better with age. Years after the original author and audience have passed, new generations will still look at the given Aesop and say "Damn right." Maybe some authors knowingly spoke to issues that were years ahead of their time. Maybe many of society's questions are just Older Than They Think. Maybe they just got lucky. These are the principles that stand the test of time and have outlived the original moral issue they were meant to address a hundred times over.
Keep in mind that this is somewhat a subjective trope, as what resonates as an accurate observation for a conservative may not be the same as a liberal, for a woman may not be the same as for a man, for a fundamentalist may not be the same as an atheist, for a citizen of one country not the same as a citizen of another, and so on. The best advice (as always applicable when one deals with the internet) is to keep an open mind. Likewise, do not assume that merely because it is old that it is accurate.
May cross over with Some Anvils Need to Be Dropped.
Community Showcase More