[Make-Your-Own Meme] Tropes ruin everything! Wait, no they don't

[justira]

Hey it's a post from that ridiculous/amazing/this is the worst idea/this is the best idea Make-Your-Own Meme "blog every day of November" thing! Original post/list of topics. Feel free to add more: LJ | DW — anon and openID welcome!

lassarina: the trope that irrevocably destroys a story for you (here)


So riding on the coattails of yesterday's entry, I guess my answer here is pretty obvious: probably no trope will, by itself, destroy a work for me.

Don't get me wrong, there are definitely tropes and clichés I'm predisposed against and I'll get to those in a minute, but overall I actually... tend to be more interested in a work if it has something I don't like in it but is good despite — or because of — that?

But let's back up a second. I said yesterday that I believe any idea can be done well. And I do think that's essentially true. But then for today's entry I realized that there ARE some tropes that just leave a sour taste in my mouth. I never really thought about them much before, and now that I HAVE I feel kind of... awkward? Cause it turns out that they're things like Wife Husbandry and Damsel in Distress and Magical Negro and Evil Cripple and Pet Homosexual and I kind of see a trend emerging =\

So I guess I don't like tropes that deny inherent agency or that disparage identity. And I guess that shouldn't be news to me, at this point — and in a sense it's not, because the more I've learned, the harder it's become to like things I once used to enjoy like, um, most Disney movies — but I still find myself wondering:

What IS the relationship between execution and idea?

Because some of these tropes sound less like ideas and more like executions. So I mean, a creator has an idea, something they want to express, and did they HAVE to express it by sticking a mysterious earthy black person in the story to guide the white protag along, or did they HAVE to have the person in distress be a lady or... etc. And I think I'm going to want to think/talk about this some more later, I suspect (now I am simply too TIRED), because this sounds really interesting to me, where idea ends and execution begins. LUCKILY YOU ARE ALL SPARED because ira needs some effing sleep.

INSTEAD, A CASE STUDY!

A short one >.>

So the first two Kushiel's Legacy trilogies are a study in contrasts wrt this post and the previous: I loved the first trilogy despite a lot of its content, but I just didn't like the execution of the second one even though it contained so many ideas I was predisposed to love.

I mean, the first book contained so many things I could have found irreparably silly or gross: courtesan spies, queer villain, racial superiority (I MEAN REALLY), SO TRAGIC love triangle (I love poly, but "oh gosh which man do I choose" tends to annoy me), earthy primitive people that are so in touch with mother earth, the submissive female... I mean really, this could have been a DISASTER. But I honestly loved the first trilogy — partly because it contained OTHER ideas, too, good ones, but also partly because the questionable ideas were done well or played with in cool ways. I actually especially enjoyed the submissive female one (the first trilogy is really so excellent for me in exploring submission) and the queer villain (which I won't spoil for those who haven't read the books — but those who have, I'm hoping you all understand this one >.>)

And I know that PART of the appeal of this trilogy IS that it took so many ideas I would have looked at sideways and made me have so much fun with them. I really appreciate that.

The second trilogy though! The second trilogy. There were a LOT of things going for it that I could have adored. Exploration of family dynamics, recovery from sexual abuse, Boy Discovers He Is Maybe a Little Gay And That's Okay (this is not a coming out story, fyi). A strong female love interest, and another female character who's AMBITIOUS in ways that I love (oh, Alais!). Further, deeper exploration of cultures skimmed over in the previous trilogy. ADDRESSING the racism. Friends Turned Enemies, Enemies Turned Friends. Basically I could have rolled in it. But the execution just... wasn't as solid or surprising. The second trilogy wasn't bad — I do actually like it — but even though it contained so many things that could have made me love it... I didn't. (Though, I will note one thing in particular that I think the second trilogy did well — I really liked the spiritual focus of the second book; for me, the protag's spiritual journey was seamlessly incorporated into the narrative and felt essential and natural. I really liked that.)

So I guess these two questions have given me a lot to think about. Also I am apparently very contrary: no amazing idea will save you from my GRUMPYFACE OF JUDGMENT if you can't execute it properly, but if you have some things I don't like and do them really well, you are apparently my friend. Everyone may begin despairing of me immediately.

Comments

[seventhe]

I - see - a favorite thing to do in my writing is the turning-tropes-and-cliches-upsidedownandmixingthemup until they look more like sauce thing?

AND NOW


I DEMAND YOU AND I WRITE A GAY VILLAIN BASICALLY: IMMEDIATELY

[lassarina]

I am doing this too. In fact my entire NaNo is all about doing this. (Also in the world I am writing, homosexuality, bisexuality, heterosexuality, asexuality, and other variations are about as remarkable as whether your eyes are blue, green, grey, or brown, and equally as relevant to your career prospects. There are totally masses of OTHER things that are fucked up about this society, but this thing that works RIGHT is my favourite. ....Also I'm pretty sure most of my protagonists are some variation on queer and the villain is one of two hardcore straight people in my book. Um.)