Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Laconic and desciption imply very differant things. Which is correct?
, started by ElleWednesday on Jun 12th 2011 at 5:46:23 AM
What is a difference between The Snark Knight and Knight in Sour Armor anyway? They're both similar
Hide / Show Replies
This is a question for Trope Talk.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Yes.
I have to object to the reason for deleting Fred Phelps, which claims that he is rather a Straw Nihilist or a Misanthrope Supreme.
Misanthrope Supreme requires committing or condoning murder, which, at the moment, Phelps has not done, so he doesn't fit that trope.
Straw Nihilist is about a character who believes life is meaningless because everything is going to be destroyed. Given that Phelps is a fundamentalist Christian who believes in the existence of an afterlife, he doesn't fit that trope either.
Edited by 99.254.158.95 I'm a Troper!!! Hide / Show Replies
Although his considering of natural disasters and wars as just divine wrath may qualify him for Misanthrope Supreme.
I'm a Troper!!!
- Tyler Durden in Fight Club.
Uh ... the trope description is pretty vague, but very few of the other examples refer to The Chessmaster bordering on Complete Monster. This trope seems to be about more than just the attitude; someone as proactive as Durden doesn't seem to have much in common with, say, Daria.
Not deleting it because it's possible I'm misinterpreting this trope, but I wanted to call it VERY MUCH into question.
Hide / Show Replies
The trope definition is "someone who hates everyone". Proactivity and evilness don't qualify or disqualify someone.
I'm a Troper!!!
This is not officially listed as one Batman is a Trope Namer for, but ti's clearly a pun on The Dark Knight
Hide / Show Replies
:D
banjo2E: Why is the description exclusively female, exactly? Please enlighten me.
Edited by banjo2E Always think outside the box. Because the box is full of scorpions. Hide / Show Replies
It's related to the previous name. The trope got renamed because of the tendency to try to stay away from "The X" type names—and for once, this is better.
Q: What Pokémon is good at treating colds? A: Cyn-Day-Quil®
How is "The Snark Knight" different from "The Daria"? It looks like a false positive and you have achieved nothing in changing it to stay away from "The X" type names.
Morgan Wick: It's descriptive rather than just being a name from a show not everyone knows with other personality traits.
EDIT: Although it's not terribly descriptive of the trope, either, and STILL makes one wonder before reading the description, "What's the difference between this and Deadpan Snarker?"
Edited by 67.171.36.151
This is NOT a good trope name change. It changes something people already knew or could easily find out into something easily confusable with other tropes and not descriptive of the trope itself. Really, Daria is the quintessential example, why change it if it just makes things more difficult?
(in case anyone else asks the same question)
Because the TV show Daria has been off the air for a decade, the show had limited market penetration even when it was on, that is not the only character in history to have that name, and that is not the intended Daria's only personality trait.
It is TV Tropes policy to avoid naming tropes after characters whenever possible, for these and other reasons.
I really don't see the point in this page's existence.
It's just a Knight in Sour Armour mixed with a Deadpan snarker. Does this really need to be a seperate trope?
Hide / Show Replies
From what I understand, the deadpan snarker simply uses snark for humor, whereas the Snark Knight turns it into a world view.
...Because Jeb Bush is all in my house with disease.
I'm confused by the trope. The laconic description implies that the snark is a coping mechanism similar to that of the StepfordSmiler's, but the desciption itself says nothing about hiding emotions with snark (outside of a brief refernce to Stepford Smiler that says that, while the snark can be a mask, it isn't always.) and implies that the character snarks because she is thinks everyone else is stupid. So which is it? Does she snark to hide her feelings or to "crusade against idiocracy"?
Edited by ElleWednesday
I'm the black sheep
I don't see how Sokka, Toph, or Hermione fit this trope. Can someone explain this to me?
I don't want realism, I want magic!
I really don't like the differentiation from Deadpan Snarker. I get that they're two different tropes, but "smarmy bystander" is badly misleading, and the standards central to the character don't really sound impossibly high. I'm not quite sure how to change it, but this has bugged me for a long time.
I'd like to speak to the person who added Shadow. One part of the Daria trope, as I understand it, is a blanket morality that is universally and consistently applied to the self and others. Shadow seems to have no sense of morality, just a visceral need to protect soft-spoken girls and women. His complete lack of morality outside of that and his tendency to expect people to mind their business outside of competition or fulfilling promises would seem to be an opposite to this philosophy... unless of course you see that amorality as a code of its own. I guess I just want to hear what you have to say on it before I ponder looking into procedure to delete and inaccurate example.
The trope name doesn't differentiate well from Deadpan Snarker imo. Some of the characters on this page simply seem to be "heroic character who is snarky". Some fit the "has high standards and is disappointed in everyone else/surrounded by idiots/commenting on how stupid and nonsensical the world is" motivation part of the description but not the self-deprecation part. Others are as self-deprecating or even self-loathing as the description implies. Is the self-deprecation/considering themself to fail to meet their own standards aspect essential? A character like Wednesday Addams, for instance, described as this trope all over the wiki, certainly fits the "considers herself to be surrounded by idiots and pointing out people's stupidity/hypocrisy/other flaws" aspect of the page description very well, but isn't notably self-deprecating. If self-deprecation isn't essential for the trope, then the description might need a rewrite, but without that element it becomes closer to Knight in Sour Armour (though I suppose a Snark Knight could look down on people for failing to meet their standards of INTELLIGENCE, without having much in the way of MORALITY—but there's definitely a lot of overlap as many characters on this page are partly motivated by strong moral principles.)