11 KiB
[D] Genre Saviness and Self-Awareness
-
Author: u/alexanderwales Time flies like an arrow*
-
Score: 10
-
Created: 2014-11-05T21:14:19
Post:
Comments:
u/alexanderwales [+9] Time flies like an arrow (24 minutes later)
I'm posting this partially because I disagree with it - or maybe just only agree with it halfway. He covers Deconstruction well enough, but I think that Reconstruction can be just as important, if not moreso.
Intelligent characters would notice if the author was playing it straight.
This ignores the existence of the Justified Trope. In the Ed stories they have humongous mecha with sounds in space ... but those sounds are piped into the cockpit by a computer program that's creating the sounds based on input from its sensors. Similarly, you can play Let's Split Up straight by having the characters split up for logical, intelligent, non-contrived, and completely justified reasons. (Non-contrived is the hardest part of this.)
I think that you could have intelligent, Genre Savy characters who understand that their situations in some ways resemble the stories that they've grown up in, but nevertheless behave the same way as the characters in those stories for reasons that are internally consistent and which spring from their intelligence. They don't do things because that's what people in stories do, they do them because they are, in fact, the correct things to do in their circumstances. (Though I'll also admit that this works better with some tropes and genres than others.) And I do think that seeing the group split up for a reason that's actually good is probably more satisfying for the reader than seeing an author tear apart the idea - criticizing a thing is cheaper and easier than improving it.
u/None [+3] (17 hours later)
Yeah, I agree with you on reconstruction. TVTropes itself points out that tropes themselves aren't necessarily evil, or wrong, or dumb. They're just trends in storytelling. A story that deliberately avoids every trend in establishes storytelling rapidly becomes nonsensical post-modern junk that can barely be allowed to have a plot at all.
Although I think that the problem you're pointing out is less due to a disagreement and more of a "you missed a spot" sort of thing. Reconstruction and well-executed tropes are things I think EY is in favor of, but weren't the specific focus of this excerpt.
u/DaystarEld [+3] Pokémon Professor (a day later)
I don't think EY would necessarily disagree with this: R!Harry mentions at one point that the problem with being "the good guy" is that even when you know someone is taking advantage of that trait to lure you into a trap, you still can't just ignore the trap.
Essentially, a Hero can know full well that they're being manipulated into doing something detrimental, but that they might still rationally decide to do it anyway (if they have no alternative) because their values include putting themselves at risk to help others.
u/nerdguy1138 [+5] GNU Terry Pratchett (8 hours later)
Nobody's said this yet, but why does he think Buffy ended after only 3 seasons? 7.
u/alexanderwales [+9] Time flies like an arrow (8 hours later)
I assume it's the same "Too bad they never made any sequels to the Matrix" joke, though I don't know enough about Buffy to know why someone would disavow everything after season three.
u/Escapement [+4] Ankh-Morpork City Watch (15 hours later)
Buffy was structured almost like Harry Potter in some respects. There's a year to each BTVS season, as there is to each of the seven HP books. And BTVS starts with Buffy as a freshman in high school in Season 1, and therefore ends with graduation in Season 3.
Season 3 is therefore, where there's a satisfying ending at the end - Buffy graduates High School, there's a rousing and climactic fight with a major villain, there's a lot of scenes that possess a certain finality. After Season 3, there's a lot of changes and the series as a whole becomes very different. In a lot of ways, the series becomes worse for it, and as already mentioned the series is perfectly ended by the capstones of season 3. While there were some especially powerful and well done episodes in seasons 4+ (for examples - Hush, The Body, and Once More With Feeling), the linked article above is definitely correct that it loses sight of the core metaphor and becomes somewhat unfocused.
u/The_Mad_Duke [+2] House Tremontaine (17 hours later)
I love the way Buffy's creators reinvented the show each year for the last four seasons. There is lots and lots of great stuff in those seasons.
Season 4-7 may not have been perfect, but the first two seasons of the show were far from flawless too.
u/buckykat [+2] (12 hours later)
clearly, it's in a vein with that and all three star wars movies, but i dunno why only seasons 1-3. 4 was kinda weak, but some of the best episodes come later on.
u/The_Mad_Duke [+2] House Tremontaine (17 hours later)
I also thought season 4 was weak the first time I watched it, but over time it's definitely grown on me. The first half especially has a large number of great standalone episodes.
u/MugaSofer [+1] (3 days later)
8.
u/autotrope_bot [+0] (27 minutes later)
Let's Split Up, Gang
Named after an often-used Catch Phrase from _ Scooby-Doo _ , Let's Split Up, Gang is a common tactical maneuver. In a RPG with more playable characters than there are allowable party members, there is usually a point in the game during which the party splits into groups in order to accomplish some goal. This is typically a test to make sure that you've been training all the characters, not just the few you always use. Leaked Experience and the Bag of Sharing come in very handy at this point.
I am a bot. Here is my sub
u/psychothumbs [+7] (19 hours later)
Genre savviness is a tough trope to work with, because it's by definition unrealistic. Unless there is some in-story reason that the situation is playing out based on certain tropes (like in Cabin in the Woods for example) it's a bit silly for characters to act like they're aware of what kind of story they're in - and even worse for them to act based on that knowledge in ways that wouldn't make sense in the real world.
People watch horror movies and complain about how dumb the characters are, splitting up, investigating or dismissing weird noises as the case may be, etc. when the reality is that their actions are totally reasonable for people who don't know they're in a horror movie. When I hear a weird noise in my house I go check it out without worrying that it might be a murderer or super-natural monster.
u/None [+6] (a day later)
The real problem is that the people split up after they've encountered the killer/monster.
Otherwise, I mostly agree with your point.
u/PeridexisErrant [+4] put aside fear for courage, and death for life (13 hours later)
If you had read TV Tropes, you would think the phrase, ‘Portal Fantasy’.
...
On a more serious note, this whole idea becomes a lot less meaningful if you really internalise the idea that generalising from fictional evidence is a terrible mistake.
I don't mean that there is no 'truth' in fiction, since obviously people often find some kind of truth that isn't about literal facts, but there are only two possible sources: the reader, and the writer. In the first case, fiction can enable reflection, prompt consideration of scenarios otherwise inconceivable, etc. In the latter, an author can teach by example - especially ethics, politics, and other mental skills... so long as the author is both competent and a good teacher. On ethics, suffice to say that I would enjoy more stories where pacifism is a decent option. And on the mental side - even when an author has real instead of 'Hollywood' expertise, it's usually hard to tell unless you already know enough not to gain much.
So no, even if I found a portal to another world (or learned magic, etc.), I wouldn't be thinking "how do I avoid the mistakes of characters in my situation" - because they, and the problems they faced, never existed. At most, I'd be treating fiction as a convenient source of inspiration which then goes through a sanity check (mecha: no. re-orient in 0G? yes.)
u/None [+2] (17 hours later)
The enemy's gate is sideways.
u/None [+2] (18 hours later)
mecha: no.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THIS!?
u/PeridexisErrant [+3] put aside fear for courage, and death for life (a day later)
I'm far too pragmatic to be a shonen protagonist, that's what. Also as far as I can tell this universe has laws of physics rather than gentle suggestions.
u/None [+2] (a day later)
I'm far too pragmatic to be a shonen protagonist, that's what.
Being a shonen protagonist is very pragmatic. Nobody ever actually believes you can pull off the stuff you do, so you always get the jump on them.
u/lfghikl [+1] (5 days later)
What would be among your first thoughts, dear reader, on finding that you had been mysteriously transported into a magical world? ”Gosh,” you would think, “this sure does resemble a lot of other books I’ve read where the protagonist is mysteriously transported into a magical world one morning.” If you had read TV Tropes, you would think the phrase, ‘Portal Fantasy’.
If I were to suddenly find myself in a magical world resembling standard fantasy books then I think my first serious thought would have to be 'Simulation'. Reminds me a little of That Alien Message to be honest.