There was no response to this, so I asked on the Is This An Example? thread on the 7th March. I was told to go ahead and cut the trope from the page as the entry is not an example, not even a downplayed one.
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.So I noticed a small detail at the end. When Ruby reaches out to comfort Penny she stops to look at her hand to see Fiona's blood on it. She looks rather surprised by it. Would that be Blood-Splattered Innocents?
Hide / Show RepliesNo. The reason the blood is on Ruby's hand is because she ran over to Fiona and used her hands to apply pressure to the wound. The trope is when an innocent character gets covered in blood splatters from the actions of someone else as a way to emphasise how traumatic the scene is for the innocent character.
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.
Both Sides Have a Point was removed for being trope misuse and re-added. I've brought it here to discuss.
The reason it's trope misuse is because it's not an audience trope. There needs to be a third party who is trying to make a decision but is struggling because they can see that both sides of the argument have valid points; as a result, they will not take either side and need to find another solution. Because it's not an audience reaction trope, the audience cannot be that third party.
While the heroes are sympathetic to Robyn and want Ironwood to find a way of working with her, they've chosen a side — they're currently on Ironwood's side. As a result, they don't meet the trope requirements.
As a result, the trope is not in effect.
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. Hide / Show Replies