do you wanna have a bad time?
Is there any situation where an aversion would need to be spoiler tagged? Because I'm pretty sure that if a spoiler tag is needed, the trope was already in play, thus disqualifying it as an aversion.
Hide / Show Replies
Might be a question for Trope Talk.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
King of Crayons
According to the example, the villain planting an Incredibly Obvious Bug, only to have it quickly found, is both a subversion and an aversion of the trope. Which is it? Is it really both at once? It seems to me that that scenario should be just a subversion, not really an aversion.
I teleported home last night / With Ron and Sid and Meg / Ron stole Meggy's heart away / And I got Sidney's leg - Douglas Adams Hide / Show Replies
If it is both an aversion and a subversion, then it doesn't really do a good job of illustrating the difference. So, can we think of another example that's a little clearer? (I still think that the example given is just a subversion, and should be taken out of the aversion bullet.)
I teleported home last night / With Ron and Sid and Meg / Ron stole Meggy's heart away / And I got Sidney's leg - Douglas Adams
Isn't it just a straight playing? The bug is still incredibly obvious. Potentially a deconstruction, but it's still a straight example. If you consider the "no one notices" a definite part of the trope's definition, then it's just a subversion.
Edited by 156.33.241.6 Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Well, the trope page itself lists "The target actually finding the bug" in its list of subversions and parodies, so I'm going to go with "it's a subversion."
Edited by 107.206.35.58 I teleported home last night / With Ron and Sid and Meg / Ron stole Meggy's heart away / And I got Sidney's leg - Douglas Adams
Knows-Many-Things
So basically, when a trope in no way appears in a work, you can still have that trope listed as so long as you say "Averted".
Find the Light in the Dark Hide / Show Replies
In some people's opinion, yes. Normally, the proper response to such examples is to remove them in the hope that people learn from that.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Captain of USS Bajor
I'm of the opinion that a trope non-use only counts as an aversion if the trope is setting-appropriate. In other words, it is logical that a Police Procedural would not have a Wizarding School and a Standard Fantasy Setting would not involve Space Is Noisy (Ultima notwithstanding). I've seen stuff like that listed on some Playing With pages. Thoughts?
Edited by StarSword
I need some aid. Is there a term/trope for when a Averted Trope is what caused the Trope to be noticed in the first place?
If you wish to have an example read the text below the line.
I am creating a possible Trope in YKTTW and the movie that made me think of this trope is actually an aversion.
The YKKTW Entry is called "Minor Pain, Major Injury" , it is from the scene in Reservoir Dogs where Mr. Orange is lying in the back of the car and is moaning and screaming in agony due to the pain his VERY bloody gutshot.
While watching this scene I thought about how rare this is, how more often than not a prolonged gunshot wound or stabbing doesn't seem to be particularly painful, or the character is able to suppress the pain of the wound.
THIS IS NOT AN EXAMPLE OF Only a Flesh Wound as the if the "trope" is used the lack of pain is not due to the wound's location. Nor is this "trope" Major Injury Underreaction as it is not played for laughs and is very rarely lampshaded, nor Feel No Pain as if this "trope" is applied correctly the character is supposed to feel pain as acutely as the next man.
If the YKTTW entry already exists, this Troper would very much appreciate it if he was pointed in the right direction.
Edited by KageNara Hide / Show Replies
I created a new YKTTW entry if the Aversion trope does not exist.
Its called "Trope Identifying Aversion"
I sometimes get confused as to whether a trope counts as an aversion or just a subversion. I understand the difference, but wouldn't pretty much everything be an aversion of something?
Hide / Show Replies
Well, yes. If the trope simply doesn't happen, that's technically an aversion. We try to only list Aversions if the aversion itself is notable given the type of work—aversion of Stuff Blowing Up in, say, a Romantic Comedy wouldn't be worth noting, but if you averted Stuff Blowing Up in a Michael Bay action flick, then it should be on the page.
So I guess one way to put it is that the only notable aversions are meta-subversions: It's "set up" in that the audience expects it from the type of work, but doesn't happen, whereas a proper subversion is set up within the work itself.
I would say that the best example is on the playing with Female Success is Family page. Played straight the trope is that the queen achieves things for her subjects because of her husband, the king. Subverted, Queen Alice is married to King Bob, but she was (and still is) a very successful and powerful queen before she even met him.
The aversion is that Queen Alice is The High Queen, and also a Celibate Hero. And no one says anything bad about that. That or Queen Alice and King Bob are acknowledged as equally powerful, competent, and successful. There is still female success but they've completely avoided using family to get it.
Mr Death: I can think of an aversion for a typical Romantic Comedy; if the male lead Did Not Get the Girl and they end up being Just Friends, but this is played as being okay and not a sad ending, it would avert Official Couple, if not the entire rom-com plot altogether. There seriously needs to be a movie like that...
Also: No Stuff Blowing Up in a Michael Bay movie? Now that would be serious business.
Edited by Stoogebie
"Averted" is massively overused, on lots and lots of pages...which I suspect is because the description of an averted trope doesn't actually match the dictionary meaning of "averted". Per the dictionary, characters who actively work to stop something from happening would indeed be "averting" that thing. If I'm reading page descriptions correctly, that's expected to go under Defied Trope.
Maybe this should be renamed to something that better fits its nature, like Absent Trope (with the implication that that absence is notable, rather than being a chair)?
Edited by ThrawnCA