The thing is that the description as it is now seems extremely broad - broader than I think we want it to be - which makes it hard to pin down what makes one an example over the other.
edited 24th Sep '10 11:25:15 AM by KnownUnknown
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
Put out a trial draft here, and we'll see if we can make it fly.
edited 24th Sep '10 11:30:10 AM by FastEddie
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty
Sorry it took me so long to get back to this. I... er... forgot. And I see in the meantime the trope has gotten some elaboration, so I'm good with that.
Basically, the only thing I'd want to change now is less for the laconic to be "exists to be ridiculed or proven wrong" but "exists to be argued against and/or seen as extreme," which is less restrictive in how it's portrayed.
edited 27th Sep '10 11:48:17 AM by KnownUnknown
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
Zzzzzzzzzz
Now the examples need to be combed through — the way many of them are written, they are still simply radical, misandrist, militant female characters.
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
Got a PM indicating that this was closed too soon, that further elaboration is needed in the description.
I think it is complete, as is. Any further elaboration would just be extra words serving no purpose, each of them potentially inviting further drift or bias.
No reason, though, to stifle discussion here.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty