TVTropes Successor Project

captainbrass

"And how would you prevent someone from cloaking bullshit in big words?"

You can't. Some real-life intellectuals make careers out of that sort of thing. My Dad, whose a retired sociology lecturer, will deliver rants on the drop of a hat on this (and to be fair, many other things too).

The main thing that strikes me about this is, how will it differ from the literature or art pages of something like Wikipedia anyway? If they're already doing something similar, why bother? I can't see myself contributing to this as I am currently trying to limit the time I spend online and get a real-world social life, but I might look in when it's up and running to see how they manage it. 

MillerCross

This initial focus is misguided, UNLESS these are meant MERELY to be "pilot" articles/analyses to get the ball rolling by establishing style conventions of the site and stuff like that.

That's the point of said beginning. As I said, most of us are majors in literature. It only makes sense that we start writing about what we know of and can explain in depth, rather than trying and experimenting with those literature concepts in works which we don't know if they posess. Gotta start with the secure and all that. 

As mentioned before, we do not intend to let this wiki be literature only. That'd be fucktarded. 

> Faux Symbolism

Part of me wants to read that page crefully as I feel that many of the examples in there do have an intention and a symbolic purpose, but they care criticized for it because clearly, striving for creating stories that go beyond simple text is dumb and should never be tried, no?

> Literary tropes

Yeah, we do know they exist and they are on TvT. That much is true. We just don't like how the wiki is basically "Here is a trend in media. Here are examples of it and how authors play with it"

What we want is a "Why" in the middle of this. "Why is this trend popular. Why did the author include it in the story. What function does it perform within the story" Does are question that interest me far more. 

As for laconic pages, I feel that we're gonna go with the wikipedia angle of separating "Definition" from "Examples" and "History" I'll probably get the ball rolling for a Simple English wiki like the one Wikipedia has in order to convey this three things in a short version. If this takes off, of course. Won't propose it now because it's way too early. 

LouieW

Vorpy,
After reading around it I found this:

1) Clear, Professional Style
2) Deep, comparative
analyses of trends within a broad range of literature, rather than
step-by-step "name the trope" breakdowns.
3) Initial focus on
"classics": The English Literature Canon, important World Literature,
important films, theatre, opera etc., to be broadened as time goes on.
4) Intellectual culture.
5) Notability guidelines with citations.
6) Articles written by experts.
7) Responsible moderation.

I am not even close to being able to comprehend intelectual culture, so I am on a miss for that.

I am not a major or expert in anything, so I cannot contribute to anything they put up. It also seems to revolve around advanced Literature, so that is something I cannot help with.

After reading some more I realized their project is not for me at all, regardless if I want to help or not. I am just....as the person DrSunshine was going back and forth to in the Admin Bluprint thread described....garbage.

I basically agree with Vorpy about this. While I did not want to say it earlier in order to avoid making it sound like I was bashing the project, I think Gelzo is right about the elitism part of this. I would rather this not become another source of conflict between tropers and other people and I do not want it encourage looking down on tropers or TV Tropes as a whole either.

In any event, I do hope that the project is successful, even if I unfortunately do not have much of anything to add to it.

MillerCross

I think that the project can be contributed by people who aren't experts. Many of us aren't even finished with ur education. We're just aiming for a different methodology where we have stricter standards. This doesn't mean we'll shoot down noobz if we see also a potential contributor in them.

glennmagusharvey

> That's the point of said beginning. As I said, most of us are majors in
literature. It only makes sense that we start writing about what we know
of and can explain in depth, rather than trying and experimenting with
those literature concepts in works which we don't know if they posess.
Gotta start with the secure and all that.

Fair enough, though in that case I don't think it should be posed as a mission statement, but rather just a pilot project plan.

> Yeah, we do know they exist and they are on TvT. That much is true.
We just don't like how the wiki is basically "Here is a trend in media.
Here are examples of it and how authors play with it"  What
we want is a "Why" in the middle of this. "Why is this trend popular.
Why did the author include it in the story. What function does it
perform within the story" Does are question that interest me far more.

I don't think that TV Tropes documents trends as much as it documents just recurring features.  Trends are harder to substantiate and sometimes hard to even get through YKTTW unless they're sufficiently notable; as such, trends tend to take longer to document, apart from those that are just concretely-observable recurring features.

I feel that one place you could really help out is to document recurring features that are NOT concretely-observable, such a story themes.  Often, the themes of a story might not be typical for its apparent genre based on setting and obvious features.  A good example is Evangelion, which is a coming-of-age story told as a giant robot action show--the mecha battles are an integral part of the story but not its defining feature at all.  (As much as some fankids would like to believe.)

(Also, i think you mean "Those are".)

And I never knew that [AOD] was a lit major...

MillerCross

Fair enough, though in that case I don't think it should be posed as a mission statement, but rather just a pilot project plan.

Hence why it says initial. 

I don't think that TV Tropes documents trends as much as it documents just recurring features. Trends are harder to substantiate and sometimes hard to even get through YKTTW unless they're sufficiently notable; as such, trends tend to take longer to document, apart from those that are just concretely-observable recurring features.

Yeah, miswording of mine. My apologies. 

I feel that one place you could really help out is to document recurring features that are NOT concretely-observable, such a story themes. Often, the themes of a story might not be typical for its apparent genre based on setting and obvious features. A good example is Evangelion, which is a coming-of-age story told as a giant robot action show--the mecha battles are an integral part of the story but not its defining feature at all. (As much as some fankids would like to believe.)

The problem is that that kinda thing couldn't be proposed in the current state of TvT. (How owuld you pitch it, for starters? Dissnance between theme and genre? Not to mention that that implies that a genre implies a certain set of themes, which it really doesn't, imo)

(Also, i think you mean "Those are".)

Yup, sorry. I was going with a different line of thought but forgot to change that word. 

And I never knew that [AOD] was a lit major...

[AOD] is a science major. pattersong, hazmatsam and randalf are lit majors.

Vorpy

Is there a no-tolerance policy for fanservice and burlesque pages? Just so people who don't think the pages are creepy at all, people who can tolerate the pages and the people who don't like the pages can't fight at all?

GLORIOUSLeader

I assume so.

MillerCross

We haven't established that. Someone mentioned that as porn is part of our culture, we should study it, but the fact of the matter is that we can't write about it without sounding like a pervert, so...dilemma.

Vorpy

Wikipedia articles are able to write about them without making the writers look like depraved panty-hunters.

GLORIOUSLeader

And there are really only a few pornos that are culturally significant (I'd say Debbie Does Dallas and... what else?).

vacasama

Deep Throat

MillerCross

Wikipedia articles are able to write about them without making the writers look like depraved panty-hunters.

Yes, but Wikipedia doesn't aim for analysis.

An article by us on porn would read like this:

"The director of this flick used boobs in order to convey the woman's innocence. And when the man grabs them, he grabs that innocence"

If you can't see how weird that sentence is, you need to get your boobs grabbed then you're really weird.

As if I didn't know Vorpy was weird. >_>

Vorpy

Well I mean, you know the shit that Goggs made fun of on the Panty Shots article? Like advice on how to look up vidjagame skirts or what colors the panties were from week to week on Lazytown.

You can analyze the whats and whys of some pornographic or erotic novels and works, just make sure they don't drift into depraved pervert territory, and stay in the civil pervert territory.

MillerCross

Welp, I think we can analyse stuff like Monster's Ball. By which I mean a sex scene. Or maybe even go deeper and analyse works with a clear erotic bent, rather than a dramatic one. But I feel that going into straight out porn (AKA works that don't have anything to them in a narrative beyond a simple setup) would be pretty unworthwhile

That's totally a word, stfu

Vorpy

I was going to mention something along the lines of Vasque de noces....or Derailed.

MillerCross

Vase de Noces (In my opinion, of course) falls under that territory of schlocky material that doesn't interest me in one bit. It doesn't aim for nothing but shock value. If someone else (You, maybe. Don't know if you're interested) feel that you could tackle on that movie and analyse it, then go aheaad and write it up. I'll read it over and give my input if you want to, even.

It needs to be said that there are literary famous works with an open sexual bent (Such as the above mentioned and 120 days of Sodom, by the Marquis de Sade) but I feel that none of it is...writeable. If you want to argue for us writing about it, then go there and do it. But I recommend you don't do it now. Right now, the whole thing still has problems about material and all that. 

I dunno. Those are my two cents on the matter. --shrug--

glennmagusharvey

Dunno what you mean by burlesque pages, but there should just be a general article on fanservice, which acknowledges the existence of catering to sexual fetishes, but doesn't go into detail about every one of them.

re "how would you pitch that?"

You can try pitching it, or you can just try developing the pages directly by yourself, possibly with feedback from some other members, and then just going ahead and launching them.

If they're substantial enough, and you have enough supporters coming out of the woodwork in case it gets challenged, then it's likely to end up staying put and even being expanded on in the future.

MillerCross

I dunno, I just feel that I don't agree with the general conception in general (Like I said, I don't think that a theme being uncommon in a genre is really a trope. --shrug--)

glennmagusharvey

It's a trope when you have creators intentionally taking one setting genre and introducing an unexpected theme into it.

It's a metacontextual device.

IanExMachina

Sooo according to this successor as long as you are an expert you'd be able to add to articles.

So I could in theory add sociological interpretations on various media themes in different media on their website?

(If I understand correctly?)

MillerCross

Yes, you'd be welcome to.

Actually, we're not aiming for only experts to edit so much for expert editing (AKA, every entry will be checked and verified and all that)

GMH: Like I said, my problem with it is that it implies that genres have expected themes to them. Which they really don't, imo

glennmagusharvey

Well, first of all, there are different types of genres--setting genres and plot genres are one distinction, for example.

Things like the slice-of-life plot genre tend to not have much in the way of themes, apart from possible life-lessons.  On the other hand, the coming-of-age plot genre has...well, a coming-of-age theme to it.  Certain settings tend to come with certain types of plots/themes.  For example, action stories, which are common in genres from martial arts movies to mecha shows, tend to have a quest or mission plot to them, where the main characters are good guys aiming to take down the bad guy(s) and in doing so save the town/city/country/world.  If such a story features romance, coming-of-age, or something like that, it's usually secondary at best to this main "good triumphs over evil" theme.  If, instead, these normally secondary themes take centerstage--such as in Evangelion or Eureka Seven--you have a sort of "thematic subversion" if you will (not the best of names; come up with a better one).

DarkerAndEdgier is a metacontextual trope that, when applied, tends to manifest by changing the themes of a story in a given setting.  For example, one easy way of doing this is to replace a good/evil distinction with a grey and grey morality scheme.

Nova

Just because there are more characters on one topic than another, on a single website, doesn't mean that a work is more influential.

I'm not complaining about how big the articles are in comparison to each other. I'm complaining about how much focus is given to each one.

RocketDude

Well, if people who are interested in classic literature don't put in the effort, there's nothing we can do but wait for them to put the effort in.

Sure, we could try rounding them up, but the only suitable venues are in the forums, and not enough editors venture in there to begin with.

MillerCross

Question: Who is Lyla?

I know all the other users except this one. Is she an IJBMer?

InsanityAddict

Lit major reporting in. Anyhow, will this be like DIY Sparknotes or Everyone-Is-Jesus-In-Purgatory: Wiki Version?

Are they actually going to use academic sources too? Do they plan to pimp it on Lit in the hope that Tao Lin will write the articles on his own books?

MillerCross

Plan so far is to use citations in reference to history related notes (Such as "Where does X come from?" and the like)

Academics sources will be encouraged too, yes. And I think that Sunshine is aiming to make them obligatory, as well. 

Don't know how we'll deal with publicity, but the fact that we're the spawn of two of the most popular sites I know of (TvT and SA) tells me that it won't be that much of a problem if we play our cards right. 

glennmagusharvey

> publicity

Your bigger concern should be making sure that you have a niche for yourself, rather than being CliffsNotes/Sparknotes-lite or something too close to an existing web offering.

> academic sources...obligatory

Something tells me that this is a bad idea.  Maybe it'll work early on as part of a pilot program, but I would...definitely not like this.  Then again, I'm not a lit major, and if you're a bunch of lit majors making a site by and for lit majors, it might be fine.

MillerCross

Well, we lready have an idea of what we want to be in mind (Basically a site for literature analysis where we analyse different mediums based on lit crit standards. Or at least, that's how I envision it)

Something tells me that this is a bad idea. Maybe it'll work early on as part of a pilot program, but I would...definitely not like this. Then again, I'm not a lit major, and if you're a bunch of lit majors making a site by and for lit majors, it might be fine.

It's on the early stage and many have already disagreed with that. But we do intend to encourage them whenever possible. 

In my opinion, I think they should be obligatory, but that unlike Wikipedia, we shouldn't delete info that isn't rerferenced and just add a tag that says that the info is not referenced. That way, the reader knows right away that what they're reading may or may not be bullshit and the editor knows that unless he finds a source, then the the text is lacking in either veracity or at least believable veracity.

...does this make sense?