I want to join Something Awful now

Engrish_Ivy

Thanks!

inkblot

@Inkblot: ...

 You're going Myrmidon on me.

Elbeem

@Miij: Ah, I think I see where you're going with this. You seem to have missed the YMMV tab, though, specifically the Values Dissonance Entry.

• Values
  Dissonance: Today's society is much less tolerant of the Confederacy and the
  KKK than the society of 1936 (or the society of the reconstruction era).
  
  • Not entirely true since the movie, which came out only three years later in
    1939, removed all allusions to the KKK.
    
    • Also, in the novel, the KKK isn't viewed in a particularly rosy light.
      Scarlett describes it as a meeting of half-baked fools who want to relive the
      war, and Rhett argues to them that they are only making their situation worse.
      Rhett and Ashley manage to disband the Atlanta wing of the KKK pretty quickly.
      Actually, the Confederacy also takes some blows in the book, and Ashley is
      repeatedly portrayed as out of touch for wanting to relive the beautiful parts
      of the old days, while pretending the bad parts didn't exist.
    • Scarlett is angry that the men involved in the KKK are engaging in vigilante
      "justice" rather than helping the people of the South to survive, which is a
      completely different problem than anyone objecting to the KKK would have today.
      
  • Values
    Dissonance is all over the book even if you write the KKK out entirely.
    Scarlett's servants refer to blacks who would rather be free as trash, and it's
    looked at as heroic when a black man is killed for so much as insulting a white
    person. Entire chapters are devoted to describing how free blacks are "tricked"
    into believing they're equal with whites and should be allowed to vote and sleep
    with white women. The post-war South is presented as a kind of lawless Badlands
    where white women are in danger of being flat-out raped in the street and the
    North would throw anyone who protested into jail. There's horror at the very
    idea that a well-bred white Southerner should work and that a black
    person wouldn't want to. Whether it's an Author Tract
    or just a reflection of the philosophies of the time, there's no opposite view
    shown to challenge any of these ideas that are horribly racist and highly
    disproven nowadays.
    
    • The Rape is Love scene also shows an example. Spousal rape wasn't legally a
      crime in all 50 states until 1993. Especially, at that time, Rhett forcibly
      taking his wife to bed wouldn't necessarily be seen as a problem. This doesn't
      make it any better though.

GLORIOUSLeader

Although bullets two through four are disconcerting, to say the least.  

MillerCross

the thing is, that's not YMMV

That tab should be called out of universe reactions by now, because that's what it is.

GLORIOUSLeader

But aren't there several hundred tropes for "out-of-universe reaction" anyway? 

Engrish_Ivy

@Meeble: Wait, why is that information in the YMMV tab? It's pretty much what the book's about.

GLORIOUSLeader

Because Values Dissonance is, for some inane reason, classified as a YMMV trope. 

Elbeem

I'd also like to point out that we technically have more written about the racial issues with the novel than even Wikipedia does, since "lol word counts matter".

^^^^ I agree that YMMV is a bad name for the tab.

MillerCross

But aren't there several hundred tropes for "out-of-universe reaction" anyway? 

So? YMMV is about stuff that is subjective. A book being badly received is not subjective. 

ClockworkUniverse

@GloriousLeader:It's an audience reaction. That's a legit place to put it.

There should be an explanation of the book's point about in its main description, though.

Elbeem

YMMV is a catch-all for Audience Reaction style tropes, which Value Dissonance is correct to be grouped under.

edit: ninja'd.

GLORIOUSLeader

^^ Except it's not that the audience is reacting that way, but rather that the values of the work in question clash with the values of present society. 

MillerCross

I know, I meant YMMV as in the trope, not as in tab. 

glennmagusharvey

Then can someone please tell them to rename the YMMV pages to Audience Reaction Tropes pages?

Also, should I rename this thread "The TV Tropes improvement thread, with comments from SA"?

Elbeem

Except it's not that the audience is reacting that way, but rather that
the values of the work in question clash with the values of present
society.

With present society being the "audience", and the values clash being the "reaction", yes.

GLORIOUSLeader

I guess you could argue it that way. I certainly wouldn't, but you could. 

From SA thread:

Among the criticisms not listed: Genocide.

So Hitler ruined genocide for everyone else?

Scrye2

^Not what I was saying. That caption gives off the impression that tropers are more upset with him ruining everything that was listed instead of you know, killing millions.

Elbeem

...except for all the references to genocide, eugenics, and jews on the page?

Come on, Scrye, you're really reaching at this point.

Scrye2

The caption, not the page.

Elbeem

Yes, what is intended to be a humorous caption does not list genocide on the "things that were considered good or neutral before Hitler came along."

You're right. Genocide was a totally alright thing before Hitler up and ruined it. How could we have failed to mention that?

GLORIOUSLeader

In that Gone with the Wind page, they link the word "Thermopylae" to "300."

They did? Really?

Do I need to choke a bitch?

Scrye2

^^But it totally was!

I actually don't have much of an issue with the article itself. I'm just surprised Fast Eddy hasn't removed the "genocidal fuckhead" comment. For negativity.

Myrmidon

Hey, it looks like a religion derail might happen in the SA thread.

Shlapintogan

One post about it doesn't constitute a derail.

And besides, people seem to be more focused on the whole genocide thing right now.

Miijhal

@Ebleem: To my knowledge, the entire 'enslave and massacre the natives' thing the Europeans had going on in the Americas wasn't terribly controversial for its time. Hell, history books still like to pretend it wasn't an atrocity.

The_Edge

Derailing is a team effort mostly. Unless your potential derailing comment will evoke the correct responses that is. For example, I successfully derailed this thread for about 30 minutes a while back. It was terrifying though... Juan changed his avatar to Pennywise the Dancing Clown. I learned my lesson about derailing.

Elbeem

@Miij: I agree, but I have no idea what point you're addressing with that.

Oh wait, you mean about Hitler ruining genocide for the rest of us?

Miijhal

Yeah. People have been surprisingly okay with genocide for most of our history, even during the 20th century.

Elbeem

Oh, I agree with that.

I was addressing Scrye's post on SA, which seemed to be making the point that it was a totally hilarious failing of TVTropes not to mention genocide on that list of things that would be "alright" for us today without Hitler's influence.