Follow TV Tropes
As pointed out in one of the older entries on the the discussion page, a lot of the stuff on this page is from non-serial works, and therefore cannot contain characters being written \"out of character\" or \"holding the idiot ball\'\'. Also, the trope in its description is explicitly negative, which seems like it should be YMMV, if not Darth Wiki. To make the page comply with its own description, a lot of examples will have to be cut. In its current form, this page is Author Tract, but treated as always a bad thing.
Personally, I find it absurd to treat all instances of a story having a political/social message as a bad thing (which is what this page in its current form largely does, given the number of non-serial examples). A lot of these works are read in large part because of these messages.
So many fanfic examples without titles. Should I remove them?
Also, one exmaple is about a Warhammer fanfic where everyone has been converted to Christianity, but the entry has stated it has vanished. How can I confirm if the work ever existed in the first place?
Some things in this are a bit politically biased. Phrases such as "PC police" should really be a red flag.
I removed the Dragon Age example, as it was being little too broad as to what defines this trope, not to mention an improper use of the phrase non sequitur
As the person who wrote that example in the first place, I respectfully disagree. The trope is about authorial intrusion that is jarring because it isn't integrated into the scene/story/characterizations very smoothly, and Sten suddenly going on a tangent about how "people aren't simple" — especially in the middle of an unrelated conversation where no one has suggested otherwise — is a great example of both that and a Non Sequitur.
I suppose you're right. Thanks.
I'm not sure the Beast Machines entry fits on this page, since the show didn't have any overt message from the creators and the entry seems to belong on Executive Meddling.
Shouldn't this be a subjective trope?
Concerning "Glee" : I think YMMV concerning Cooter being portrayed as a nice guy previous to the abuse storyline. I always thought he kind of seemed like a - well, you know.
Since they are ineligible by the definition of this trope, I think all the literature, film, and almost everything not episodic needs to be gutted. Most of those would fit Author Tract, but do not belong here. It can't be this trope if there's only 1 writer, and/or the point the writer is trying to make is throughout the entire work.
Am I the only one that thinks that just because there's sexual and atheist messages placed in an episode of Doctor Who, doesn't mean that the writers have stretched the characters out of whack? The Daleks are insane and dogmatic with or without the Dalek Emperor as a god.
And WHAT long take that? I don't deny "World War Three"'s "massive weapons of destruction" line is a clear jab at Iraq, but what else?
I don't think the Berman/Braga entry is valid. Seems to me that they moved away from the Roddenberry Suetopia mostly because there are more story opportunities in a Federation that isn't perfect.
Nice picture choice, by the way. Make sure to keep that one.
In the literature section, there is an entry for the His Dark Materials books by Phillip Pullman, which is followed by 4 sub-posts of back-and-forth disagreement over how blatant the symbolism is in C.S. Lewis' Narnia series.
I believe all 4 sub-posts should be removed, because none of them actually relate back to the original post. In addition, C.S. Lewis is not even Writer On Board, because his work was less "religion/Christianty is good" and more just "bible stories with animals", unlike Pullman, who, as the original post points out, was actively pursuing a actual "organized religion is bad" angle.
I agree with this. I've read about C.S. Lewis's writing, and (just like it's stated in the entry here) that his beliefs influenced his writing, but weren't the main motivation of his writing. Though he should be referenced as the target of Phillip Pullman's works.
Removed this entry because it is a very shallow reading of the books (Skimming the dust jacket-level) and combines multiple books into one. Potentially a valid example, but requires extensive reworking.
''In the Living Greyhawk RPG, the "River of Blood" event featured bumbling villains who were kidnapping children in order to perform "Raxivort's Orgy" which was described as a wild party in celebration of their god. Individual judges across the country re-interpreted the party as a sexual orgy involving the rape of the kidnapped children. Even though it was not the author's original intention, the more offensive version was so prevalent that Wizards Of The Coast issued an apology and re-edited the event.'
isn't this just Unfortunate Implications and Accidental Innuendo. how is it Writer on Board?
I realize this is an old posting, but since the original example is still there, I would say that I agree with Joeyjojo.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?