The Other Troper
Did thatother1dude even read the trope? This is NOT only about justice or heroes and villains.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid. Hide / Show Replies
Yes, I did (well I read the article, you can't read a trope). So why is that was nearly every example is about? It doesn't help the article is incredibly obtuse with what it actually mean.
And honestly, it seems the real meaning is "characters having trite motives based on vague ideas of good/evil/etc." which is pure People Sit On Chairs. It sure as hell shouldn't have any examples because every example is a critique.
Edited by thatother1dude
I did a little work in advance. We just needed some nonpolitical concepts. I think I came up with enough of them.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage — Paul McCartney
Oh, and this is not People Sit On Chairs. A hero can be motivated by a concrete need, ot a well-defined philosophy....
A hero can be trying to free his country from an evil dictator. That's okay; that's not cheap. It's cheap if he's fighting for freedom for its own sake, when he didn't have any personal connection except seeing oppressed people, especially if the writers don't define what "freedom" is. This particular idea has been tried in Real Life, and tends to lead to either chaos (when the party that was not originally involved leaves) or colonialism (if they don't). Note that colonialism is not a kind of freedom. Also note that whether chaos is better than tyranny is still up for debate.
And freedom is one of the harder cheap concepts. "Justice" or "love" get vaguer. "Good" as a motivation can lead to the Designated Hero.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage — Paul McCartney
Me, I need to be convinced why this isn't an Audience Reaction.