First draft of a possible description rewrite:
The land is about to be overwhelmed and the leader refuses to flee. Whether the peril comes from war, natural disaster, or something else, it would be far better for everyone involved if he got himself out of danger. His duty to land, life, or people dictates that he must organize the resistance, go elsewhere to find aid, or simply get out of harm's way, but he won't budge until this battle, metaphorical or not, has been won.
Sometimes, he can eventually be convinced to leave, though he is often the last to do so. Sometimes, force is needed from friends or advisers. Sometimes, he dies in the ruins, usually with his personal guard.
Compare The Men First; the military commander may refuse to leave troops behind, but will go with them if they can be gotten out.
If the leader is supposed to return In Its Hour Of Need (but is otherwise dead or canned), that's the King in the Mountain. If your allies are supposed to come help your nation in its hour of need, that's Gondor Calls for Aid.
See also Stand Your Ground.
Rocks fall, everyone miraculously survives. Hide / Show Replies
It does look good. Except... Is it a complaint about the leader getting in the way, primarily? That complaint is either necessary to the definition, or it makes it murky and therefore should be zapped.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. Mencken
I've put the cut request on hold pending resolution of the issue.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Good question. Hmm. I had interpreted it to mean that the leader isn't necessarily getting in the way in the disaster zone, but it is significantly more dangerous for him to stay where he is for whatever reason, if that makes any sense. By all logic he should leave, but due to his own personal feelings he stays. Is the second sentence the thing muddying up the description as far as that is concerned?
Rocks fall, everyone miraculously survives.
The logic of forcing a leader to leave is to ensure the leader remains alive - not just through the crisis, but to lead the rebuilding afterwards. Otherwise, the fallout of losing the leader wouldn't just be demoralising, it could potentially cause succession issues during the 'rebuild' period, afterwards, when stability and familiarity are essential.
So, the leader tends to be pressurised into leaving. The leader that insists on staying because it's his duty to share the danger, hardships and duties of the people who could never leave, causes this kind of stress and worry for the people whose own duty is to keep their leader safe.
It's therefore not about the leader getting in the way of people by staying (that is probably a trope in its own right, as it's usually played for comedy when it happens), it's about the people whose job it is to protect that leader now being put into an impossible situation. If your leader is now refusing to leave the front lines or Ground Zero, how do you keep him safe?
Edited by Wyldchyld If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
Well, I'm not sure it is a complaint. The leader sticking around and requiring too much personal protection is just one reaction to his sticking around. I think the intention was for the trope to be a variation on 'The Captain Goes Down With His Ship', where the metaphorical ship doesn't necessarily go down altogether, but is in serious danger of doing so.
It is about the decision/determination to stick to the bitter end, not about the results of that decision.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. Mencken
I've declined the cut request now. If some issues still remain, you can re-cutlist it.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
@eyebones: Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm saying, but better worded. The only issue with his desire to go down with the 'metaphorical ship' would come from those who want him to be safe. Seeing the fallout of that explored would probably be the trope's deconstruction rather than the actual trope.
Edited by Wyldchyld If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.
Errrr... cutlisting seems a little (a LOT) premature. TRS stalled on a rename/new description, but cutting is usually a last resort, and even if it was cutworthy, we should clear out the wicks first.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them. Hide / Show Replies
I did a moderate re-work of the description, using the existing description as basis and the standard conventions of English grammar. The trope should now be communicating what it was trying to in the first place.
Rocks fall, everyone miraculously survives.
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Unclear Description (titles crowner 11/9/13)
, started by Xavier1161 on Sep 9th 2013 at 6:48:38 PM
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman