Karakterizáció Flashcards
An Arm and a Leg
Relevant Dismemberment.
Essentially, limb loss as dramatic device. Can come about in a variety of ways:
Self-amputation: The character deliberately removes the limb themselves, under duress or otherwise. Accident: The loss is accidental, or occurs during battle. Deliberate: Another person/entity deliberately rips, cuts or otherwise separates the limb from the owner. It may happen in battle, but it's not a type 3 unless the amputation was deliberate.
May be the predecessor to Artificial Limbs, Arm Cannon, Hook Hand or Swiss Army Appendage. Frequently appears in the backstory of a Handicapped Badass. If played for laughs it’s Only a Flesh Wound. Characters with Appendage Assimilation will simply stitch a new appendage on the gaping hole. If it’s a severed hand, expect it to be be used in a Dead Hand Shot.
Note that this trope only applies when limb loss is deliberately used to advance the plot. It does not apply to preexisting conditions or incidental carnage amongst background characters. If the incident leading to the loss is featured in a flashback by all means include it, but if we only see the character after it happens it doesn’t count.
Compare Knee-capping and Agony of the Feet. Fake Arm Disarm is a bloodless version of this trope.
Arranged by medium as usual, but please note what type it is at the beginning of the entry.
Armor Is Useless
All weapons can easily injure or kill people wearing armor.
In fiction, armor has virtually no protective qualities. Characters who wear no armor to speak of are no more (and often less) at risk of injury or death than somebody who is “protected”. A single swing of a sword is enough to kill an opponent wearing full plate armor. All arrows are armor-piercing and will penetrate even thick armor like it was just a sheet of paper. Indeed, it’s often the case that people who wear armor find themselves far more competent after they either discard it or have it destroyed for them by the nice people out to kill them. In the latter case, it leaves one wondering why they bothered with it in the first place, if they can survive attacks that completely demolish their armor anyway.
This trope probably stems from the fact that armor — especially helmets — in movies, games, and other media often serves not to protect characters but to render them faceless and anonymous, dehumanizing them so they make excellent Red Shirts and Mooks (not to mention that an entire army can be portrayed by a half dozen or so stuntmen). Related to this, quality armor (such as the plate suit that stamps someone as “medieval warrior” on sight) ought to be quite expensive; mooks might be looked at as issued cheap protection that only looks like elite armor. The Unspoken Plan Guarantee may also be connected; the armor represents a plan to be invulnerable, which, once presented to the audience, has to fail or it’d be boringly predictable. (This helps explain why hidden Bulletproof Vests usually work.)
See also The Law of Diminishing Defensive Effort, Armor-Piercing Attack, and Anti-Armor. The logical extreme of this trope is the Full-Frontal Assault. For non-armor objects that make for bizarrely non-useless armor, see Pocket Protector. The best armor, of course, is Plot Armor. When armor isn’t useless, but it limits speed, see Shed Armor, Gain Speed. Contrast Body Armor as Hit Points.
See also Tanks for Nothing, if the armour in question has treads and a gun on it.
Animal Eye Spy
This character doesn’t just talk to animals and order them about; he or she can see through their eyes and experience the world through their senses. The range of this power goes from paranoia inducing to Superpower Lottery winner. On the low end, the character can see through one animal, usually a Familiar he or she is emotionally and spiritually tied to. On the high end, she can do this through more than one type of animal, or even several at once, making them close to The Omniscient. Depending on the level of control, she may only be able to go beyond seeing through their eyes and create The Swarm out of local fauna.
Typically the animals are vermin or smaller, since their “small minds” are easier to control though bigger types aren’t unheard of… but the tradeoff is they’re harder to control. Depending on the type of bond, having one of these living listening devices killed may cause the character to faint from the feedback.
When the host is human or a sapient animal, this becomes Seeing Through Another’s Eyes.
Compare Eye Spy. Contrast Surveillance Drone.
Asexuality
Character does not experience sexual attraction.
In fiction you encounter tropes such as Everyone Is Gay, No Bisexuals, Everyone Is Bi, Anything That Moves, or even Extreme Omnisexual. You hear Silly Love Songs about Intercourse with You, and see Love Dodecahedrons, Kiss Kiss Slapping, Slap Slap Kissing, and oodles of Shipping.
What you less often see are characters who are of an age or situation to get sexually attracted - but aren’t.
It is difficult to showcase a lack of something, so it is understandable that this orientation is often ignored, especially in works with No Hugging, No Kissing. However, this also leads to the common assumption that everyone is interested in sex.
This can lead to awkward feelings for the asexual audience when sex is shown to be something everyone does and wants. Both in-universe and out, fans and fellow characters alike will often dismiss their sexual orientation as a side-effect of depression, mental sickness, low hormone levels, abuse, immaturity, or even just plain old sour grapes* . This criticism will not stop until they’ve succeeded in getting them to bed someone so they can live a “normal” life at last.
It should be noted that, in Real Life, asexuals are not incapable of sex or falling in love. Asexuality is often the lack of sexual attraction rather than sex drive or emotional attraction. Many asexuals consider asexuality to be a spectrum, with “gray asexuality” and “demisexuality” residing somewhere between “full” asexuality and fully sexual.
Not to be confused with lacking sexual organs, being genderless or the biological term asexuality, which describes an organism that reproduces by itself without meiosis, ploidy reduction, or fertilization. See Truly Single Parent for characters who reproduce asexually.
The direct opposite of Extreme Omnisexual and frequently a victim of the belief that Good People Have Good Sex and Sex Equals Love. See also Celibate Hero and Chaste Hero. A possible cause of Married to the Job.
Likewise, some characters may be just too afraid of sex to actually seek it out.
This should not be confused with lacking sex appeal where the person in question is not deemed sexually attractive by others.
Note: Only include someone if they are explicitly asexual, not assumed to be due to lack of shown attention. Also remember that while they overlap frequently in fiction, asexuality and having No Social Skills are not the same thing. No Fanon, please.
Authority in Name Only
Someone who holds a position—possibly made-up—that has no authority or power.
Awesome, but Impractical
It’s awesome. It’s powerful. It’s unstoppable.
It’s also almost completely useless.
A cool weapon that isn’t all that useful.
Yes, it seems that the designers put so much time into maxing out the “ultimate” factor of the ultimate attack that they forgot to actually make it usable. Maybe it requires too many resources to use, causing its allure of “awesome” to be lost as fast as your party’s money. Maybe it requires some sort of bizarre set-up to enact, making your normal attacks and spells much easier to apply inside of battle. Maybe it has a considerable chance of failing or backfiring that makes it unreliable from the start. Or maybe in mathematical terms it doesn’t deliver as much bang for the buck as “inferior” alternatives.
Whatever the reason, it will get used once, as a test drive, and then never again. Yeah, it’s awesome, but you’ve got a game to win here. Keep in mind, Awesome, But Impractical is not Cool, but Inefficient, which is where something appears to be awesome, but has no real benefit to using. Sometimes Awesome, But Impractical moves carry a situational advantage, or are so Difficult, But Awesome that even highly skilled players have trouble using them - but there is an advantage over normal moves if you can afford to pay the penalties. Sure, maybe that mini-nuke will irradiate and possibly kill your party, but if you’re in a big enough pinch, possibility of death beats guaranteed death, so you may as well try it.
The very act of using a million tons of firepower on a few weaklings (a.k.a Overkilling) is also awesome but impractical.
Mind you, if you care about doing cool stuff over winning, they can be quite fun. A competitive player will never look at them twice; this can be one of the good things about being a Noob.
Related to the Bragging Rights Reward and Inventional Wisdom on occasion. See also Useless Useful Spell, Blessed with Suck. Contrast Too Awesome to Use, Boring, but Practical, Game Breaker. Compare and contrast Difficult, But Awesome; there, the focus usually is on Impractical turning out to be Awesome. Crosses with Death or Glory Attack when a miss will result in nasty consequences, and Powerful But Inaccurate when lack of accuracy is the reason for the impracticality. Scary Impractical Armor is a Sub-Trope, as well as Impractically Fancy Outfit. In Real Life, this trope is often the reason behind I Want My Jet Pack.
Awesome McCoolname
A character, thing, or place is given an awesome name to make it seem more awesome.
Sometimes, people grow up with boring names, and they imagine more exciting and exotic names for themselves. If you let this person write a piece of fiction, expect this flair for the exotic to show up in a lot of their characters. Try to imagine this person as a baby or as a toddler and everyone calling them this. Try to imagine the parents who would name them this.
The story is set in a modern-day city, where everyone inexplicably has “cool” names. There’s no one named Bill, Todd, or John. It’s all “Anubis”, “Scar”, “Bullet”, “Diamond”, etc. Even better if these aren’t nicknames, but their actual given names. It can double up as a Meaningful Name.
When a video game lets you do this to the characters you control, it’s called Hello, Insert Name Here.
The opposite of Unfortunate Names and Atrocious Alias, while Special Person, Normal Name lies in between these two.
Luke Nounverber and Johnny McCool Name are Sub Tropes.
Compare Theme Naming, Prophetic Names.
See also Names to Run Away From Really Fast, Names to Trust Immediately, Xtreme Kool Letterz, Punctuation Shaker, My Nayme Is, Aerith and Bob, Law of Alien Names and Who Names Their Kid “Dude”?.
An Axe to Grind
Using an axe as a weapon.
Useful for chopping wood and heads alike, axes are often pressed into service as weapons. An axe’s wide, cleaving head is effective against armor, making it a slower and more powerful weapon than a sword, though not quite as massive as a hammernote . Smaller axes, such as the tomahawk or the francisca, can be used as throwing weapons. In certain media, they may even return to the user’s hand like a boomerang, though they have the tendency to stick in enemies if they score a hit.
Historically, due to being somewhat easier to manufacture, their general familiarity to the peasant population and mobility (real-life combat axes were small and rarely weighed more than one kilo), they used to be the close combat Weapon of Choice of the common foot soldiers, as opposed to the officers and nobility, who wore swords (which were generally too expensive for commoners). While military weapons were often illegal for peasants to own, axes are tools, and avoid the prohibition. Franks used them extensively (lending their name to the francisca), and nowadays axes are associated with the following character archetypes:
Dwarves
Orcs
Vikings
Barbarians
Medieval executioners
Woodcutters
Firefighters
Psychopaths (Ax-Crazy taken literally)
However it should be noted that axes made specifically for warfare were fundamentally different in design from the common sort of axes a commoner might have lying around, with thin and almost sword-like edges designed for slicing flesh, rather than the deep wedge typical of axes used for chopping wood, making the latter type a case of Improvised Weapon. A proper battle-axe would not be a good choice for menial labor, any more than would a sword.
If the Big Guy isn’t using a hammer or his bare fists, he’ll generally use a gigantic axe as a weapon. For extra comedy, the Cute Bruiser may be given a head-chopper bigger than the rest of her body.
Sometimes axes are the most logical weapon simply because they’re available as an escape tool in almost every public building. See Deus Ax Machina.
May also include halberds and other poleaxes, which combine the chopping power of an axe with the range of a Blade on a Stick.
Not to be confused with Author Filibuster or Author Tract.
Face Death with Dignity
A doomed character faces death with serenity, as opposed to kicking and screaming.
Alice has gotten in over her head. She’s made mistakes, powerful enemies, or otherwise bitten off more than she can chew, and they want their pound of flesh. Running will only make things worse for her and her loved ones, so faced with the alternatives… she chooses to face death with dignity. She turns herself in, doesn’t put up a fight, and in so doing takes responsibility for her actions and gains a measure of control in the only choice she had left.
This is a sad, meaningful fate reserved for only the most tragic of characters, for whom even Redemption Equals Death is out of reach. The best they can hope for is to give their end some order or meaning. Rescue is not impossible, in fact the mere act of facing the music may be a cause for Redemption Earns Life and a chance to become The Atoner, but it’s a slim chance.
Another variant of this trope of a more messianic bent is when a character is offered a Sadistic Choice to save the hostage and MacGuffin if she trades her life for it. This is a Heroic Sacrifice with extensive premeditation, beyond merely being a Martyr Without a Cause to one with a very good one.
Of course villains who aren’t Lawful Evil won’t hold their end of the bargain, and the prospective martyr is usually savvy enough to tell this or is stopped. Expect the martyr to intone My Death Is Just the Beginning in either case.
Compare Better to Die than Be Killed where you shoot yourself rather than be executed. In this trope, you choose execution. Say Your Prayers may also have some elements of this, (depending on the case) as characters may give up on taking any action and just say a final prayer while letting the inevitable happen. See also Villain’s Dying Grace for a specific villainous version.
Contrast Get It Over With which also faces death with open eyes and Villainous Breakdown where they’ll completely lose their cool before possibly dying.
See also Obi-Wan Moment, “Facing the Bullets” One-Liner, Leave Behind a Pistol.
A Father to His Men
Fatherly figure in the military.
This commander cares deeply about his men and exhibits it constantly. A mentor to the officers under him, he takes a deep personal interest in their welfare and tries to keep them out of harm’s way. He would never say, “We Have Reserves” (unless it would save more lives in the long run- but expect him to be torn up about it, though he may hide it almost perfectly—and certainly never to make him look better). Staff officers, engineers, and the Camp Cook will be treated with respect and made to feel as valued as the troops on the front line, though he’ll not put up with bureaucratic nonsense. He will never lay claim to work actually performed by his subordinates, and will try to pass the credit to where it’s due if it is misattributed to him. He will accept responsibility for any mistakes, even if it was not entirely his fault, especially if the failure would result in severe punishment for a subordinate. He often follows up by treating his subordinate’s mistakes as Career Building Blunders. And when his subordinates actually die, he will make sure to remember all of their names and faces.
Usually a military mastermind who disdain wave attack carnages and instead will plan so that his faction will have the least casualties possible.
Strategic or tactical blunders are usually the fault of those above him or below him. His career is often handicapped or cut tragically short by the incompetent High Command, his true worth appreciated only by the men he commanded. Or at least, that’s the impression he projects to the troops.
This character generally cultivates a father-figure atmosphere. He is a source of morale, discipline and stability. Usually this is through a gentle reasoning tone, but sometimes he’s a more strict (read harsh) father figure. In this instance expect a new soldier transferred to the unit to hate him, and for one of the older veterans to take him aside and tell a nice Pet the Dog story about the commanding officer. Sometimes all his soldiers are new; this will result in hatred until the soldiers either survive something that could have killed them, or accomplish a difficult objective, and realize that they would have died or failed without his strict training.
He is often utilized more as a device after he has left the scene, as an idealized counterbalance to the incompetent who succeeds him. This is probably because he’s far more effective as a saint, and it’d be hard to maintain such an image when he’s actually coordinating operations, especially cursed with Hollywood Tactics like he is. Indeed, an officer who learns You Are in Command Now may find his troops are Losing the Team Spirit over this commander’s death—though he can issue a Rousing Speech reminding them that the dead commander would be So Proud of You if they soldier on.
Sometimes he’s used to make the troops unhappy with their new commander, even if he is a good one- similar to the “You’re Not My Mother” response given even to kind substitute authority figures.
Other times he’s a character who gets called in to deliver an Aesop after the soldiers mess up. Or he might be a mostly off screen character who gives the main characters a reason to try and do better, and to be embarrassed when they make a stupid mistake.
When an enemy, he is often the Worthy Opponent or Friendly Enemy. If he’s a subordinate, the Big Bad’s lack of concern for his men may be a source of Mistreatment-Induced Betrayal.
Despite the title and the use of a male pronoun, this trope is sometimes Gender Flipped.
Most of the movie and TV examples in The Captain are of this type.
Sister Trope to Officer and a Gentleman, and they may overlap. If he is a Blue Blood, he will not care that his soldiers are commoners. This often surprises other Blue Blood officers.
Related to The Last DJ, Benevolent Boss. Compare Papa Wolf and the aforementioned Team Dad. See also The Patriarch and Reasonable Authority Figure.
Contrast Sergeant Rock who is also super-competent, but his leadership style is nasty; The Neidermeyer who is nasty and incompetent; Drill Sergeant Nasty who is either competent or incompetent as the plot directs. The opposite of We Have Reserves.
A Friend in Need http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Sinfest
A profound test of character: someone is in trouble and in need of help. Will you stand by him? Help him? Give him moral support? Let others know that you do so, and face their contempt?
It will cost you. It may cost you a great deal.
While pre-existing friendship is possible, demonstrating The Power of Friendship in a Friendship Moment, the character may also be a Mentor, an acquaintance (perhaps nothing more than someone they are Lonely Together with), or even a stranger who sees the character in need and trusts him. It can create friendship and even the True Companions, and it is certainly the point at which a character knows he has friends. (If they are Vitriolic Best Buds, this may be the point at which the audience realizes they are friends.)
It can also be the way the Worthy Opponent demonstrates his worthiness, and the Friendly Enemy his friendliness, by some act such as acting as Character Witness for The Hero, or preventing him from being stabbed In the Back. In a Betty and Veronica triangle, Betty is the one who will come through — often the point at which Oblivious to Love trope stops.
Conversely, failing at this can be how such groups as the Gang Of Bullies or Girl Posse reveal that they are not really friends.
Chronic Hero Syndrome is a tendency to a certain type of this trope.
Super Trope of Good Samaritan, I Got You Covered, Changed My Mind, Kid, Gondor Calls for Aid, and Greater Need Than Mine. Compare Fire-Forged Friends. Contrast Fair Weather Mentor and Fair Weather Friend. In a more cynical series villains or even protagonists may wind up Dying Alone instead. Also cynical if the person in need happens to be a true odd man out.
Good Is Not Dumb
A character who is good gets underestimated because of it.
Good Is Not Dumb is the trope where a sincerely good, kind, and polite character is underestimated by others because of their kind nature.
Unlike Obfuscating Stupidity, Good Is Not Dumb does not involve any deception at all — the subject is genuinely nice and honest, but the cynicism of others lead them to misread the character as The Ditz, a Gentleman Thief, or some other gullible or deceptive archetype. After all, no one really gets through life being kind and trusting to everyone, right? Wrong.
Almost inevitably, the genuine goodness of the character will triumph, often accompanied by the comeuppance of the disbeliever. The Con Man will be thwarted, the sceptical cynic will be surprised by The Power Of Trust, and everyone will discover that “good” is not a synonym for “clueless victim”.
A direct inversion of Good Is Dumb and Dumb Is Good. Someone who is Good Is Not Dumb may realize that being nice to villains simply isn’t going to cut it, so they may incorporate Good Is Not Soft. The ultimate stage of this is the Guile Hero who can play The Chessmaster’s game without falling into the ambiguity or clear villainy of the Magnificent Bastard.
Compare and contrast with Wide-Eyed Idealist, Good Is Not Nice, Gentleman and a Scholar, Beware the Nice Ones, Crouching Moron, Hidden Badass, Evil Cannot Comprehend Good, and Good Is Old-Fashioned. Also see Rousseau Was Right, Good Is Not Soft and Incorruptible Pure Pureness.
Good Is Not Soft
A character is presented as kind and gentle to almost everyone, but won’t hesitate to punish evil.
Do not mistake kindness for weakness.
The character isn’t an Anti-Hero, Vigilante Man or even portrayed as Good Is Not Nice. He’s a genuinely friendly, sociable, caring person, always looking out for his friends and family and trying to do the right thing. Such a character would have to be compassionate to his enemies, right?
Actually, no. Unlike the Good Is Not Nice character, someone who falls under this trope actually is a nice guy or girl. It’s just that this niceness doesn’t extend to giving free passes to the truly vile and horrific among their enemies. S/he is the reason why the villain should Beware the Nice Ones, especially since s/he isn’t gonna wait to be angered or snap before the inevitable beatdown/killing begins. The Good Is Not Soft character will find them, will stop them and (if they’re lucky) will kill them before they can hit that Berserk Button. Then they’ll (usually) go home to enjoy dinner and settle in for a good night’s sleep.
Maybe The Hero knows that the criminal will break out of the Cardboard Prison. Maybe the villain has placed the Ideal Hero in a kill or be killed situation and the hero kills for the greater good, taking on the moral consequences of their actions. Or it may simply be the Well-Intentioned Extremist needing to Talk to the Fist before they cross the Moral Event Horizon.
This trope has the potential to slide into or be interpreted as Pay Evil unto Evil, if the hero’s method of ending the villain’s threat is excessively cruel. Different viewers will have different ideas about what qualifies as being excessively cruel to a villain. Even so, this trope will most likely lead to him being just as bad as the villain if taken too far.
This isn’t an unusual trait of the Technical Pacifist. Common in Good Is Not Dumb works. If the character is a Jerkass rather than a Nice Guy, then they fall under Good Is Not Nice. Lawful Good characters fit this trope perfectly, especially if their duty is to reward good and punish evil. See also Anti-Hero and Sliding Scale of Idealism vs. Cynicism. Compare Affably Evil where a villain instead of a hero has these personality traits. May result in the villain calling out a Not So Different speech when lampshaded.
Good Parents
Parents who are good to their children.
In television, parents are either dorky, busy, abusive, embarrassing, evil, overbearing, overprotective, neglectful, only human, absent or dead, squicky, lost, too submissive, or just plain useless.
But what about parents who get things right? The parents who are always there. The ones who support their children no matter what they do and attend all their events. They tell them how proud they are of them. They give out useful advice and help them on their homework. They keep their children safe without being overprotective. They punish them when they’re bad and award them when they’re good. But they will always love them. Through good times and bad, these parents are always there for their kids. They will sacrifice just about anything for their children, even their own lives.
These parents can be the Mama Bear or the Papa Wolf, and can even be the Action Dad, Action Mom or Battle Couple. They are often found in a Nuclear Family so will often consist of a Happily Married couple. They can even be a part of a Badass Family. They are also not against using Tough Love when necessary. They can also turn out to be an Open-Minded Parent.
And they can be a real pain to write about, since the story conflict has to be one that the parents can not fix for the children, and, if necessary, enough to cause a problem for the combined forces of children and parents.
When the Good Parents aren’t the actual parents of the character, it’s Parental Substitute. When the Good Parents are the adoptive parents, it’s Happily Adopted. If they were good parents at one time, but forcefully removed from this realm of existence, then they are Deceased Parents Are the Best. When the Good Parents aren’t against doing illegal or morally questionable acts to protect their children, they are the Knight Templar Parents.
Happily Married
A genuinely successful marriage.
Against all the odds, in defiance of the laws of drama, spitting in the face of the Awful Wedded Life, there is…the Happily Married couple.
This is a couple, Alpha or Beta, who are in love and not wangsting it up dysfunctionally all the time. They avoid Poor Communication Kills, won’t jump to conclusions, and treat each other with love and respect. In short, whatever troubles they have are minor and don’t lead to the misanthropy of No Accounting for Taste or The Masochism Tango.
Both inside and outside of Romance Parental Abandonment, Shipping Bed Death and the Cartwright Curse tend to kill them off like flies. Aiding this is that most drama considers the above “boring!” (remember, Rule of Drama) and will usually try to make things “interesting!” with “plot twists” that threaten to split them up, and otherwise fill their path with rocks to make them Star-Crossed Lovers. (Their safest bet is as the Foil to a more turbulent couple.)
The net effect of having a Happily Married couple in a series is one of stability. (As a general rule, Happily Married couples with kids will be depicted as more loving and more stable than those without.) Just having them around gives viewers and characters in the show an emotional anchor and safety net, as well as someones to root for while the Official Couple is deciding Will They or Won’t They?. (Occasionally, They Do!) Needless to say, most viewers will thusly become very protective of said couple and complain when authors needlessly torment them.
These couples benefit from The Power of Love. In addition, any time a sequel is set a generation later than the original, the main couple from the original will probably have this type of relationship to show that they did get a Happy Ending — and Babies Ever After to prove it.
Despite some fiction likening this to a Discredited Trope, a lot of people out there would call this Truth in Television, which is why we won’t list all those examples. (Congrats to you!) Apparently the secret is to understand that you will end up arguing at some point and that does not mean you are no longer in love but keep working at your marriage, talk to each other, do little things all the time, and never confuse falling in love and being in love; they feel different.
Not to be confused with Sickeningly Sweethearts, which is basically puppy love. They can overlap, but it’s rare. This trope usually gives viewers warm fuzzy feeling instead of tasting like diabetes, though the cynicism of the viewers still has to be taken into account. If and when they have kids, they will often become Good Parents.
When this overlaps with Arranged Marriage, it’s a Perfectly Arranged Marriage. When this overlaps with the characters being unrepentant villains, it’s Unholy Matrimony. When it turns out that they’re not really as happy as they let on, it’s Happy Marriage Charade.
Perfectly Arranged Marriage
Arranged marriage leads to true love.
No one likes an Arranged Marriage, especially those so betrothed. They’ll rip their clothes, gnash their teeth and swear to… was that them necking in the atrium?
Despite their initial opposition, the couple who have been betrothed discover they not only like each other, but love each other, and make it perfectly clear that even if they weren’t in an arranged marriage they’d still choose to marry or at least start dating. Drama being what it is, you can expect their earlier attempts to undo the arranged marriage will mature and succeed, and their parents set them up with a new fiancée or fiancé that they do hate. Expect one or the other to have to swallow their pride and come out and say they do love the other.
Another variant is that both meet outside of the home environment (before or after the declaration) without immediately recognizing each other. Maybe they ran away from home entirely, only to happily embrace “a fellow in misery” — and later commiserate about their bossy parents. Eventually, once they recognize one another their shared common ground helps them fall in love.
Sometimes this perfectly arranged marriage doesn’t come about randomly, but intentionally by parents. One or more of the parents involved who knows both well enough has arranged the marriage since both are highly compatible and could naturally fall in love. In fact, this is the purpose of an ‘arranged marriage’ in the first place. It is akin to a matchmaking service, and the couple will generally have some sort of courtship before tying the knot, and it’s very rare for someone to be forced to marry a person they despise. Even a Gold Digger would want a decent relationship if for no other reason than to help in securing the knot.
This trope is frequently used as a justification for the use of the Arranged Marriage trope to audiences with Western sensibilities. It’s not an imposition or violation of free will if both want to get married, after all.
Hero with Bad Publicity
A heroic character is hated by the public.
Being a Superhero isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. The heroes’ lives and those of their loved ones are constantly in danger from their archnemeses—and sometimes from their own powers, too. Sometimes someone else takes credit for their heroic efforts. But perhaps the most hurtful and confusing drawback comes when the people they’ve sworn to protect hate their guts.
This could arise for any number of reasons:
Resulting from the hero's actions:
Late payments on her Hero Insurance.
The hero Does Not Know His Own Strength.
The Hero is in the middle of a Conspiracy Redemption.
The Hero is taking on the mantle of a reviled Legacy Character.
He's a jerk.
He deserves it.
He pulls a Zero Approval Gambit.
Because people just plain want to pick on the hero:
Shooting the dog.
The public doesn't agree with the hero's lack of dog shooting.
Just because they're different.
Just because they have powers.
People like pissing off someone above their Super Weight category.
Other:
Freedom of Speech, which is a common justification used.
Anonymous rumors, perhaps planted by a Villain with Good Publicity.
The Hero is centerpiece to some disastrous prophecy.
The hero's constant proximity to awful events makes him appear suspicious.
The news media just needs to sell some copies.
The news media/corporations/government really hates his guts for doing something anti-establishment.
The latest fashionable ideas rule out the idea of him being anything other than a villain.
But whatever the reason, public sentiment is against these heroes, and there’s usually nothing they can do about it. Sorry - you can’t please everyone.
Usually serves as the grass-roots support for a Super Registration Act. Can be a reason that Hilarity Sues. Especially ironic when it happens to the Slave to PR. Think of it as a tamer situation than Beware the Superman, where the only people who are acting like the supers are the ones to be feared are individuals and not society. The permanent version of the Untrusting Community. The inverse, where the hero’s problems are evident only to intimates, is No Hero to His Valet, while the complete opposite - a bad guy that people like - is Villain with Good Publicity.
What one may view as a Hero with Bad Publicity, others feel to be a Villain with Good Publicity, so No Real Life Examples, Please!
Heroes Prefer Swords
Heroes. Swords.
Want to know who is The Hero and The Leader of a group? Look for the guy with the sword!
The sword is a sign of the mighty warriors and nobles. It’s a central part of codes of honor like chivalry and bushido, symbolizing nobility, leadership, justice, and power. In a group of fighters, the one wielding the sword will be the leader, with his subordinates wielding axes, spears, bows — all weapons more associated with the commoners.
This trope can take two main forms:
The leader or hero of the group carries a sword, while other characters carry other weapons. A character receives a sword as a symbol of their status as hero, similar to a Knighting ceremony. Inversely, losing their sword signifies the loss of that status, similar to a Sword-breaking ceremony◊.
In European settings, it will usually be longsword or an Archaic Weapon for an Advanced Age. Larger two-handed swords, smaller daggers and short-swords, and curved swords like scimitars will be given to other characters. In Japan, it will be a Katana. An especially heroic sword will likely be a named weapon.
Sometimes The Lancer will be armed with a different weapon to differentiate him from The Hero, or just a more unusual type of sword. The Big Bad and The Dragon are nearly as likely to use swords as The Hero, but will also sometimes use more “evil-looking” weapons such as morning stars, battle-axes, or maces, especially with spikes.
Compare Weapon of Choice, Red Is Heroic. Sister trope to Standardized Leader, since swords are the most “standard” of medieval weapons.
Famed in Story
People ought to remember The Hero. His heroic deeds, particularly a Heroic Sacrifice, should be commemorated in story, song, and art.
And what’s more, they frequently do, and they frequently are.
Not always — being forgotten is one threat of What You Are in the Dark — but often. Some, indeed, become a Living Legend. The heroes can encourage themselves with the thought of getting it, they can inspire themselves with the examples they have heard of, they can actually receive it, they can be embarrassed by it, or it can be a convenient source of legends to be true.
May be regarded as Due to the Dead.
Shrouded in Myth can stem from Famed in Story, through Gossip Evolution, but it can also be Infallible Babble, and usually is unless we have direct access to the events being told. The Magnificent results when the hero gets a byname describing his deed; Badass Boast, when he can reel it off himself.
Contrast The Greatest Story Never Told and Dude, Where’s My Respect?. Indeed, this may lead up that, as the character learns that fame is fickle, or that the good opinion of people of good character is better than the opinions of the crowd.
Heroes in love with In Harm’s Way often long for this as well. Conversely, heroes seeking out Home Sweet Home may dislike it and actively avoid it because it interferes with getting and staying home.
Note that the Cool Sword, Cool Horse, castles, battlefields, etc. can also be Famed in Story. It’s a contributing factor to coolness. Such a weapon is a Legendary Weapon.
Super Trope of News Travels Fast. See The Dreaded for the villainous equivalent.
Fatal Flaw
The ultimate problem with a character.
Heroes have a Fatal Flaw which they wrestle with on a consistent basis. This may open them up for specific conflicts later — when a protagonist’s fatal flaw is encountered through the course of a plot, the audience’s reaction is very tense.
This is not to be confused with what Aristotle calls hamartia, also a key part of Tragedy. A hamartia is a mistake or error a hero makes which leads to his undoing. It is NOT the same as a fatal flaw. This confusion arose from the misunderstanding of Aristotle’ Poetics in the 19th Century.
In classic literature, a Fatal Flaw is often what prevents a Tragic Hero from succeeding, or serves as the cause of their Tragic Mistake. It is usually some sort of character deficiency listed below or, in conventional television, an addiction of some sort. In modern television, the Fatal Flaw is more likely to lead to a Very Special Episode.
Some specific Fatal Flaws:
Ambition
Cruelty
Envy
Gluttony
Greed
Hypocrisy
Lust
Pettiness
Pride
Selfishness
Selflessness
Self-reliance
Perfectionism
Wrath
Blamelessness
Sloth
Note the resemblance to the Seven Deadly Sins note . Also see Virtue/Vice Codification for a more comprehensive list of vices identified by various authors throughout history.
If the Fatal Flaw doesn’t play any role in the story, it’s an Informed Flaw. If the flaw isn’t quite so fatal, you’re likely dealing with Mr. Vice Guy.
A literal fatal flaw, as often seen in science fiction and fantasy, would be Phlebotinum Breakdown and/or Achilles’ Heel.
Honest Advisor
The advisor who doesn’t sugarcoat the truth.
You’ve got to pick yourself an advisor, but, you have a problem. Everyone around you is a Yes-Man: spineless, coddling, and/or too concerned with gaining your favor or attaining their own aims to give the truth. Luckily, there’s at least one person who isn’t afraid to tell it like it is.
This kind of advisor isn’t cruel, just blunt and outspoken. They’ll never let their charge take the easy way out, never sugar coat the truth, and never be afraid to criticize. As a result, their wisdom is either completely appreciated by their students, or violently rejected if said student is the egotistical type.
If he isn’t a mentor, but a regular part of the group instead, then he’s usually the Deadpan Snarker, the constant criticizer, and more or less the one that annoys everyone but still gets their complete respect. All in all, this is who you want when it comes to finding a most trusted ally, and it’s probably better to find people like this than your average minion.
The Good Chancellor is this as a matter of course. Often the role of The Jester in a royal court, getting away with mouthing off to the king either by couching criticism in satire, or by being (or appearing to be) mentally incompetent and thus not a threat. Another term frequently used in the past was “Naysmith” (which survives in the modern surname Naismith), meaning the one person in a royal court who could openly say “no” to the king’s plans without fear of censure, forcing the king to accept criticism—the opposite of a Yes-Man.
See also Hire The Critic and The Consigliere.
Honor Before Reason
Doing what’s right, even if it’s foolish.
Being a good and honorable person is anything but easy; it requires personal sacrifice that most normal people aren’t willing to make, either out of self-interest, self-preservation, selfishness or any other number of reasons.
Heroes who abide by this trope more often than not act in a manner that, while morally sound and honorable, is far from the most practical solution. Quite often this kind of decent, chivalric behavior will come at a great cost to the hero’s happiness, kill him outright, or similarly leave him a destroyed human being. A villain aware of such a gallant hero is bound to use Flaw Exploitation against him as well.
Put another way, a character who adheres to this trope, is someone who is more committed to a particular code of abstract ethics, than they are to their own self-preservation. They believe in a pre-defined set of rules which universally apply, and they will not break said rules, even if their own death results in adhering to them in one particular instance. These types will usually justify that, by claiming that living with the shame that results from having broken said rules, is worse than death itself.
In other words, they have character.
In stories on the idealistic end of the Sliding Scale of Idealism Versus Cynicism, the more the insistence of honorable behavior seems impractical, or even insane, the greater the chance that it becomes the thing that turns a hopeless situation into victory. As a result, the honorable hero is vindicated and the cynics are left completely stunned at what happened.
In stories on the cynical end… well, not so much.
An especially poignant situation is Turn the Other Cheek. Often, and perhaps running counter to the theme of honor besting all, the hero has to be aided by Big Damn Villains, who are able to cross that final line that his integrity would not allow.
When done well and/or consistently, such acts of decency fan the flickering flames of idealism in the viewers’ hearts; they make them cheer even harder for the hero and inspire a desire to be just as pure and honorable. When done poorly… well, the term “Lawful Stupid” comes to mind, as does Martyr Without a Cause.
This trope is also subject to some degree of Values Dissonance, as some actions will be seen as both honorable and reasonable to a society with a certain set of beliefs. For instance, a society which believes in an afterlife ruled by a Higher Power that judges according to a rigid code of morality would see the “honorable” choice as being also “reasonable” by virtue of the fact that the person making it is sacrificing a temporary advantage in this life for a permanent one in the life to come.
Often features in I Gave My Word, In Its Hour of Need, Rebellious Rebel; the Proud Warrior Race Guy typically follows the rule, as well. What You Are in the Dark always reveals the same character as when they are seen. When a character does this to the point that it angers their more corrupt superiors, expect them to become The Last DJ. The McCoy is the personification of this trope. More Hero Than Thou disputes are sometimes this, when only one character is really suitable for the sacrifice. Can lead to the hero being prone to fall to things like the False Innocence Trick. See also Victorious Loser and Small Steps Hero.
Shoot the Dog is this trope’s opposite: Reason Before Honor. Usually not a trait of a Combat Pragmatist due to their approach to fighting.
Compare/contrast with Incorruptible Pure Pureness, Good Is Old-Fashioned, The Fettered, Noble Demon, Martyrdom Culture, Revenge Before Reason. Contrast No-Nonsense Nemesis and Blind Obedience.
Horrible Judge of Character
Implicitly trusts Mr. Chronic Backstabbing Disorder who is more or less Obviously Evil.
Manipulative Bastards are terribly hard to write and even harder to act. Really hard. And even then, most audiences simply cannot wrap their minds around the fact that this apparently sweet old lady or that elegant young gent actually are terrible jerks with a total disregard for the well-being of others — without it coming off like a Face-Heel Turn or a sudden Villainous Breakdown. Real Life manipulators appear convincing and interested in your own good, and soothe one in by being nice, kind, getting your sympathy and if that doesn’t suffice for them to get everything they want, they begin pushing buttons as they lie whenever they can get away with it. All of that is so subtle that it usually escapes the people who it is happening to.
As a remedy for being unable to write such a character convincingly, writers instead make the manipulated victim carry an Idiot Ball. That means that everyone else, especially the six-year-old target audience, can and will immediately identify the manipulator as evil. How does this work? The manipulated victim is simply a Horrible Judge Of Character! Do we even have to say Unfortunate Implications? Compare to when only the protagonists see through the manipulator and everyone else holds him in high regard, in that case it’s a Devil in Plain Sight. Compare to The Alpha Bitch who is quite often also transparently mean, abusive and treacherous to everyone (who doesn’t have the authority to punish her for it), yet inside her clique (read: “popular” and/or upper-class people), magically everyone likes her.
When the plot requires for this Horrible Judge Of Character to regularly make Card Carrying Villains his most intimate confidants, they’re The Ingenue — or Too Dumb to Live. Innocence and helplessness may attract guardians and friends, but will also make them vulnerable candidates to get romantically involved with Troubled, but Cute or The Vamp. On the extreme end, the Friend to All Living Things will also be intensely loyal to their friends, so they’ll ignore all evidence that the Manipulator means them harm. When true friends try to point them to suspicious behavior or even show outright damning evidence, they will get a pouty “You’re just jealous of our friendship!” and be blown off as The Cassandra, probably earning an earful about how Baron Bloodlove is a wonderful human being who just happens to be around whenever someone’s bloodless corpse is found.
It usually takes a point blank Evil Monologue from their “friend” over the True Companion’s corpse to even faze them into considering the possibility they might not be as hug-tastic a friend as they thought. If it doesn’t break them, then they’ll just turn right back around and follow their “friend” around, say he forgives them for killing off thousands and betraying him completely, and insist the Power of Trust and Friendship will redeem them.
This may or may not work.
If it’s romantic, expect a Love Martyr, Love Makes You Dumb or Mad Love. If the “friend” is a Chessmaster, then they’re an Unwitting Pawn. If the horrible judge of character causes a horrible plot development by doing this, they are an Unwitting Instigator of Doom. Contrast Evil Cannot Comprehend Good. In larger numbers, expect to get Gullible Lemmings.
Killed Mid-Sentence
Exactly What It Says O—AAAAUGH thud
No matter what the medium or genre of a work of fiction is in, there are a few general rules that are usually in place. One of them is that if a character isn’t a Red Shirt, it doesn’t matter if they’re in a situation of dire peril as long as they’re speaking. Because as long as they’re talking, nothing bad is going to happen to them. Oh sure, they can die after saying some Famous Last Words or important Final Speech, but dying in the middle of a sentence, especially if it’s an ordinary, unimportant one? That’s not going to happen, ri—GHAAAAACKKK!
…Let me step in for him. WRONG.
There are any number of reasons to kill a character, whether major, minor, or mookish, in the middle of a sentence. Firstly, in an Anyone Can Die story, it’s a great way to show that not only can anyone die, but they can die at any time. (Which can make for great drama and suspense over the fates of your favorite characters). Secondly, it can be a great way for an Anti-Hero to show off his no nonsense Badass nature by killing an antagonist in the middle of some sort of threat, or as a more lethal version of Talk to the Fist. (Likewise, it can be a way to show a villain is truly Dangerously Genre Savvy and avert the classic Why Don’t You Just Shoot Him? scenario). It can be a way of showing that a story is on the gritty and cynical end of the Sliding Scale of Idealism Versus Cynicism. Lastly, it could just be that the author doesn’t care much for interminable Final Speeches, and chooses to subvert that trope.
One thing is for sure: when this trope happens, you know that this is for real. If the story was a light, not too serious sort before, it’s just gotten a whole lot darker and more serious after this.
See also Deadline News when this happens on the other side of a TV screen (though not necessarily in the middle of a sentence).
If a character is killed mid-word, there’s a good chance of it being a Curse Cut Short. The Almost Dead Guy will invariably die mid-sentence, and there’s a good chance of the sentence beginning “His Name Is…”
If this is a sci-fi story and the scientist figures out how to destroy the alien monster, expect him to die halfway through his explanation, just as he’s about to say that it can only be destroyed by—
Contrast Talking Is a Free Ac— BLAM!
Unmarked spoilers aho—
Modest Royalty http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Anime/GoLion
Royalty prefers to cut down on the wardrobe extravagance.
This is the opposite of the Ermine Cape Effect, where persons in power, usually members of the royal family or the ruling monarch, prefer very simple clothing and will often refuse to wear anything but the simplest crown. They still won’t dress like slobs or peasants — that would be King Incognito. You might mistake them for well-mannered commoners in the right situation. Color-Coded Patrician is possible.
Sometimes the Princess Classic can go this way, but a Rebellious Princess almost always will. The Boisterous Bruiser, if a royal, usually does; fancy clothing interferes with drinking life to the lees. It’s not uncommon to see the King walk the streets as a King Incognito while their Decoy Leader handles the day-to-day.
This trope is usually confined to good fictional royalty. Evil royalty tend to go overboard with their costumes and impressive crowns. Common exceptions are conquerors from Proud Warrior Races and Barbarian Tribes, who tend to dress in a simple but badass fashion, and those who insist they are Just the First Citizen. A possible example of this exception might be a Magnificent Bastard who dresses his Praetorian Guard up in gorgeous Bling of War to emphasize his power while he wears grimly simple garb himself to emphasize what a Badass he is.
Largely Truth in Television, if only because you’d have to be extremely sybaritic to walk around every day wearing a fortune in irreplaceable jewelry and fancy clothes, although in the past, some came close. This is especially true if the royals actually personally lead armies or otherwise do something useful besides running the country.
There is even a correlation with good monarchs: all those dresses, furs, and jewelry cost money, which had to come from taxes, unless the monarch is a miser or, in more recent times, exports some natural resource over which the state has a monopoly. However, those monarchies tend to become corrupt, too.
Compare Royals Who Actually Do Something, Simple Yet Opulent.
If the character is humble in their personality, not their clothing, it is not this trope.
Contrast with the Ermine Cape Effect, Costume Porn, Pimped-Out Dress, Bling of War, and some other Luxury Tropes.
Unrelated to publishing deals that make the writer a Starving Artist.
My Master, Right or Wrong
This is when a leader is cruel and, perhaps, incompetent, and the underling obeys him out of adherence to some ideal, while hating every minute of it.
The trope is mostly used in vaguely medieval settings. Feudalism, after all, is based on personal obligations to a liege-lord (in other structures, the loyalty is more impersonal, usually based on a community or an ideology). The underling usually is a minor noble of a warrior caste, a knight or Samurai or such.
To make certain that the public understands that this character is not following out of Blind Obedience or sadism and in fact disagrees, he will get a lot of Pet the Dog moments, appeal to his liege to re-think a decision, beg for the lives of others, angst visibly when he’s alone, and try to twist his orders a little if possible. He often doesn’t even consider the heroes his enemy and is an honorable opponent. Also, he might be seen as suffering as much under his lord as the next subject, for sympathy points.
These types tend to be The Fettered who have sworn an oath to unreliable leaders and refuse to break their word. Such characters are prone to Heel-Face Turn because all they need is to broaden their ethic horizon a bit. It’s also popular for some Deliberate Values Dissonance, presenting feudal ideals and showing the modern public how an obviously compassionate man can be made to freely follow obviously cruel orders. (However, their actions can also be interpreted as the way of The Unfettered: their goal is clear, remaining loyal to their master and doing whatever they want, ranging from recycling garbage to mass genocide, even though their hearts may not be into it)
Of course, in many real feudal systems, trying to force a vassal to act dishonorably—or making him jeopardize the value of the land-grant that secured his service in the first place, e.g. by overworking his serfs—could jeopardize his vassalage itself. In “High” Medieval Western Europe, also, a vassal could hardly be said to have a “master”; vassals were obligated to show up with troops when their liege asked, and stay for a term (usually 90 days or so). After that term, they could leave, and while they were obligated to generally assist their liege they were (in theory) their liege’s equals—hence why nobles are called “peers”—and thus didn’t have to take orders, so battle-planning involved negotiations over who would do what.
This deals with such questions as: What is an oath worth? What are wrong and right, personal mercy or abstract principles? What is honor? The liege is evil, how evil is the vassal?
Liege and vassal are great foils for each other and for the relationship of a leading hero and his followers.
Especially tragic when the vassal is also more competent than the liege. Very similar to My Country, Right or Wrong, only more personal. A common characterization of The Dragon. Contrast Rebellious Rebel, Mook-Face Turn, Mistreatment-Induced Betrayal, Secret Test of Character. Compare Blind Obedience, where the character follows their liege because of a belief they can’t be wrong and shouldn’t be questioned.
Nerves of Steel http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Webcomic/ZebraGirl
Calm and collected at all times.
Everyone has a tipping point, a Berserk Button, a threshold of shock and joy and weirdness that once crossed collapses all emotional reserve like a Fawlty Towers Plot. Some, however, have such an exceptionally high threshold that they’d probably greet the impending collapse of the universe with the same equanimity as cold tea.
Characters with Nerves of Steel are of steel in the same way a physical body can be Made of Iron — they are nigh-unshakable.
Someone who has Nerves of Steel thinks when times are tough. He makes decisions efficiently; he pushes his emotions aside, and so his decisions are not overly affected by them. He may be The Stoic, or he may be perfectly normal emotionally. Either way, his mind is never shoved aside when his emotion is. It is always thinking, a weapon as sharp as a sword. Characters with Nerves of Steel aren’t intimidated by screams from those with a Hair-Trigger Temper, won’t get upset if his Evil Plan is foiled (this is a morality neutral trait), he isn’t likely to burst into tears when it turns out The Hero is Not Quite Dead and got better, and very probably won’t even raise his voice to the man who murdered a Bus Full of Innocents unless the sound of his righteous ass kicking is loud enough to require it. Even happy news and emotions aren’t likely to cause exaggerated reactions of joy (though he probably enjoys a nice hearty laugh every now and then). When captured, they are defiant and likely planning their escape.
Reasons for this demeanor vary. He’s probably Seen It All, is naturally Spock-like, has an iron-clad Stepford Smiler facade (though on the inside they probably are banging his head against his cage) or emotionally can’t be made to feel extreme emotion, such as the Tin Man. This doesn’t count if the character is an Empty Shell, since there isn’t anyone home to excite. The Extreme Doormat may count depending on the individual case (some are just too listless to care at all, not requiring any emotional control at all). Affably Evil villains and The Chessmaster are always composed as a result of everything going according to plan.
Even if this person doesn’t have Psychic Powers; their control over their OWN brain often makes them resistant to those who do.
In short, someone with Nerves of Steel is immune to the Heroic BSOD, Villainous BSOD and Villainous Breakdown. God help us all if this proves untrue.
A good trait for a Badass Bookworm to have, at least if they want both halves at the same time. Note that nerves of steel may be hard to distinguish from Tranquil Fury at times. Showing a Stiff Upper Lip is a good way for a character to convince other people that they have Nerves of Steel. Compare Heroic Safe Mode, where the emotional/thinking part of the brain “shuts down” to allow for instinctual survival mechanisms to work unclouded by emotions. Post-Dramatic Stress Disorder is when a character fakes having Nerves of Steel, but breaks down as soon as the danger passes. Contrast Nervous Wreck.
Naïve Newcomer
You don’t know anything ‘cause you just got here.
Character whose inexperience with the world presented by the show allows them to act as the Audience Surrogate. Often it is through their eyes that we are introduced to the show’s principal characters and milieu (see Welcome Episode). Sometimes incorporates qualities of The Watson and Fish out of Water. May lack Genre Blindness.
They may be Trapped in Another World, new additions to a Wizarding School, the fresh recruit, or just The Intern, but the device is the same.
In dangerous situations, this character may condemn himself as a coward for feeling fear, until a sager head tells him that only the Fearless Fool avoids that.
A popular character type in Speculative Fiction, because it allows the reader or viewer to explore the world as the character does, meaning the character is still an Audience Surrogate, but is a little more instrumental to the story because of the greater amount of details being presented.
Done poorly these characters may just become flimsy justifications for an Info Dump, making them a sort of inverse Mr. Exposition.
Can overlap with Country Mouse, Kid-Appeal Character (who is also there to draw in younger audiences), Welcome to the Big City (their usual introduction to city life), Ordinary High-School Student (impressionable person applied to an odd situation). Accidental errors may lead to a Bewildering Punishment.
A Super Trope to Rookie Red Ranger (the newcomer is also The Hero and/or The Leader), Ensign Newbie (the newcomer is an officer presiding over a more experienced enlisted crew), and The Watson (the newcomer’s purpose is to get information for the audience by proxy).
