fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3811 ]

[ SECRET POST #3811 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3811 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

[resized, not a repeat]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #546.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The mentor who dies so the protagonist can outgrow him. It feels very Logan's Run. (I've seen it argued that the mentor needs to die so the protagonist no longer has someone to solve her problems, but if the mentor was ever capable of solving the protagonist's problems, then why isn't he the protagonist?)

Because not all protagonists are the Big Damn Hero to start.

I don't find this at all strange.

But if there was a person other than the protagonist who could handle the situation, then why did the protagonist need to become a protagonist? Why couldn't the mentor clean up this mess? Or alternatively, if the mentor couldn't clean up this mess, then why do they need to die to get them out of the way, when they're already out of the way by virtue of not being able to solve the problem anyway?

Because more often than not, the mentor dies as soon as the problem becomes an actual problem they're aware of. I'm tired of the protag already being the one who can solve the problem from the get-go. I like watching them grow. How does a character grow if they start able to solve the problem?

It's a metaphor for moving into your parents' place in adulthood. It doesn't apply to everybody. It is a pretty common and inoffensive trope.

'Inoffensive' is a poor word choice. I should say it's widely sympathetic. I can see how some people find it offensive, and there is a way of massively overplaying it (Obi-Wan) that has become offensively overused.

it straight up comes from the Hero's Journey (thanks a fucking lot Joeseph Campbell), which I studied in college, but I can't remember all the tiny details of his explanation. He coined it based on a common trope already in centuries of mythology, so it's not like it's a new trope. But I swear to god we're so over it and need to move on and couch our heroes' journeys in better framework. tl;dr I agree but check out commentary on the Hero's Journey to figure out where this trope comes from.

Honestly, I think the entire Hero's Journey is bullshit. It seems to me like it's built around the idea of maintaining the status quo by growing into the social role of a person who defeats outside threats. What if I don't LIKE the status quo?

What bugs me about the Hero's Journey, as a trope, is that people use it very prescriptively.

Campbell wasn't saying, all of these things must happen in such and such an order, he was saying, a lot of these things turn up quite a lot of the time.

He wasn't trying to make a hammer to beat writers with, is what I'm saying.

It would be neat to see a movie where the wise, old mentor actually turns out to be the protagonist, and the plucky young person you thought was being set up to be the hero gets left behind (the mentor can have a sidekick, but someone less expected than the plucky young person).

I actually read a book where that happened. It was cool.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3811 ]

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

...word choice

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE

Re: LEAST FAVORITE TROPE