Does Rich Burlew read TvTropes?

[Mystic Muse]

I'm actually more curious whether or not the giant reads the crack pairings thread.

[Wikimaster]

It's the same for me, too.

Edit: That was in response to B. Dandelion's post from last page.

[factotum]

The discussion page also includes lots of talk about how so many people have always heard it as, 'hang a lantern on it.'

But that still doesn't indicate that the TV Tropes website came up with the "hanging a lampshade" variant, which is the only way you could prove that Rich got that reference from that site rather than having heard it somewhere else. (And what's all this stuff about "tropes" being an odd word? I'd heard it long before TV Tropes existed).

The reason people are perhaps being a bit defensive about this is because we have had threads on here before where people have come on and pretty much said, "Oh, Rich Burlew is just ripping off TV Tropes." This particular thread may not be saying that, but I guess the memory of the ones that do rankles a bit!

[Turkish Delight]

But that still doesn't indicate that the TV Tropes website came up with the "hanging a lampshade" variant, which is the only way you could prove that Rich got that reference from that site rather than having heard it somewhere else.

It doesn't 'prove' it, but what astonishes me is that I need to prove it as if it were a criminal accusation. As mentioned, amongst a whole slew of possible phrases, many quite different, he uses the exact same phrase widely popularized by TV Tropes. He does it in such a way that indicates he suspects his viewing audience is well aware of exactly what he's talking about. If we brought the man to court, no, we could not try and convict him of reading TV Tropes, but for those of us who aren't hyper-defensive on the subject it's enough to think, 'Ha! The Giant is a troper!' with reasonable confidence...and without the accusative tone some people here seem to think goes with that.

I could probably scour the comic and come up with about five or six other examples, at which point someone would use all kinds of wacky twists to prove that either Rich used it first and TV Tropes got it from him or it came from somewhere not TV Tropes and Rich used it without the slightest intention of implying that there ever was a web site known as TV Tropes. I could do that, but what's the point? If it pains people to acknowledge the idea that Rich is a troper, then run free in your Giant-the-non-troper beliefs. I'm not going to force the idea down your throat.

(And what's all this stuff about "tropes" being an odd word? I'd heard it long before TV Tropes existed).

I'd never heard it before, and TV Tropes has a page somewhere mentioning how obscure the word was previously which I don't feel like searching for. It's certainly a word that is rather intimately linked with that particular web site now.

The reason people are perhaps being a bit defensive about this is because we have had threads on here before where people have come on and pretty much said, "Oh, Rich Burlew is just ripping off TV Tropes." This particular thread may not be saying that, but I guess the memory of the ones that do rankles a bit!

Well, with respect, it's not a point of shame to read and reference TV Tropes and anyone who gets upset at the possibility that (*gasp!*) Rich pulled a joke by referencing TV Tropes is taking things a bit too seriously. We're all ripping off somebody. So drop the defensiveness.

[busterswd]

Well, with respect, it's not a point of shame to read and reference TV Tropes and anyone who gets upset at the possibility that (*gasp!*) Rich pulled a joke by referencing TV Tropes is taking things a bit too seriously. We're all ripping off somebody. So drop the defensiveness.

Well suggesting a creative work is largely plagarized on the forums meant for fans of said creative work isn't exactly asking for a positive response. The last time I recall something like this came up was someone suggesting he ripped off the idea "1 in a million is a certainty" from Discworld and a similar backlash was had (though in that thread the author was a bit more argumentative).

Plus, sure, a lot of writers are well versed in their area of writing and have drawn from a lot of sources, but it's irritating when someone has a "giant revelation" thread that concludes coincidence is causality. Also TVTropes has had a polarized reputation on these forums; some people think it's a great way to waste time and quite enjoyable, other people have a bone to pick with the attitude of certain TVTrope community goers who act as it's become a definitive, authoritative resource, and that since it exists, most newer creative works must stem from it, when the opposite is largely true.

[Turkish Delight]

Well suggesting a creative work is largely plagarized on the forums meant for fans of said creative work isn't exactly asking for a positive response.

But no one has said that here. If you're feeling really defensive, as people apparently are, I guess you could read the initial post as, "the Giant has a big checklist of Fantasy tropes copied off TV Tropes and is just a huge hack who is going down the list copying each one in turn." More relaxed readers might simply read it as, "the Giant seems to draw some inspiration and jokes from TV Tropes every once in awhile." If being inspired by or getting a laugh out of something and deciding to play with it is plagiarism, everyone who has ever written something is a plagiarist.

Otherwise, it appears people are lashing out at a long-dead thread rather than a presently existing one. It's silly and it's made me rather defensive, since I've been called on to 'prove' something about three times now I felt was rather innocent and self-evident and did not require a peer-reviewed source.

[Zxo]

TVTropes didn't invent the tropes - it is merely describing them. The tropes existed long before TvTropes did - TvTropes itself often gives very old (sometimes centuries old) examples of a trope. There were also books, written earlier than TVTropes, that attempted to list character archetypes, plots, plot devices and the rest. I remember there is even a list of those books on TvTropes somewhere. So, you cannot "rip off" TvTropes, the only thing you can do is refer to a name given to a trope by that website, as the only original (=new) thing on TvTropes are some of the trope names, everything else is a description of ideas that have already existed and been used many times (which actually is a requirement to be a trope). So, I do not get how anyone can mention plagiarism here.

[OITS]

TV-Tropes definitely already jumped the shark...

[Kish]

Rich Burlow reads[...] TV Tropes.

I think you're taking too much for granted. You're not Rich. I doubt very much he's told you he reads TV Tropes, or you would have mentioned that, instead of just repeating your assumption that anyone who questions that he does must be feeling defensive. I don't know when the site went up, but I think there's a good chance OotS used tropes just as much before the site existed.

[hamishspence]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tropes

It lists the site as going up in April 2003.

Didn't OoTS come out in 2003?

Going by this:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7333

the first strips appeared in late September 2003.

[Turkish Delight]

I think you're taking too much for granted. You're not Rich. I doubt very much he's told you he reads TV Tropes, or you would have mentioned that, instead of just repeating your assumption that anyone who questions that he does must be feeling defensive.

It's not the question; it's the hand-waving away of blatant clues when they lead to the conclusion 'Rich reads TV Tropes', with what now seems to be the underlying belief that accepting that assumption means Rich rips off TV Tropes. I've already presented one, but we've got others.

How about the reference to Cerebus Syndrome? It's possible the deliberate reference specifically to Cerebus as a comic which went from funny gags to serious business is something long predating TV Tropes. It's also possible that Rich created the term right then and there, leading to TV Tropes taking it from him.

Then there's the possibility he made a joke reference to an existing trope he saw on TV Tropes with the expectation that readers of that site would find it funny. But I guess we can't really prove that.

Or Good is Dumb, which has since been renamed to Redemption Demotion. It's possible the Giant was making a reference to the old Space Balls quote or some other piece of fiction I don't know about. It's possible that the Giant simply felt that concept of 'Good being dumb' is so prevalent, TV Tropes or no, that everyone would recognize it.

Then there's the possibility he made a joke reference to an existing trope he saw on TV Tropes with the expectation that readers of that site would find funny. But I guess we can't really prove that.

I can't really prove anything, and I honestly don't stay away at nights worrying about it. It never even occurred to me that suggesting there is a connection might bother some people. But those references, and others, have always given me the strong impression Rich knows about and consciously makes links to TV Tropes, no more 'ripping it off' than he rips off G.I. Joe or Dune when he's using them for a joke. For me, it's always come across as pretty obvious and is a sign that Rich is someone who enjoys throwing out references to popular things, which is to his credit.

I don't know when the site went up, but I think there's a good chance OotS used tropes just as much before the site existed.

According to Wikipedia, TV Tropes launched in April 2003 and OotS in September of the same year, so no.

[Haven]

Cerebus Syndrome was coined by Websnark, which I'd be more inclined to believe he's heard of.

And "trope" is not really an obscure word, especially not for someone as well-versed in literature as the Giant.

So far he's yet to use anything that is particular to TV Tropes. If Xykon talks about his Crowning Moment of Awesome, that'd do it. Until then, I will continue to feel that people who make this argument are not, themselves, reading TVTropes, or else they'd notice that all the terms used were preexisting.

Mostly the amount of myopia in the assumption that he "obviously" reads TV Tropes bothers me. It's the same as the people who keep using the words "subversion" or "deconstruction" (or, of course, "trope") in ways that make it clear they only learned them from the context of that site, which is fine when used there, but quite strained in more general usage.

[Kish]

How about the reference to Cerebus Syndrome? It's possible the deliberate reference specifically to Cerebus as a comic which went from funny gags to serious business is something long predating TV Tropes.

Not possible. Factual.

Then there's the possibility he made a joke reference to an existing trope he saw on TV Tropes with the expectation that readers of that site would find it funny. But I guess we can't really prove that.

I would be surprised to learn that anyone who wrote a comic didn't know the term "Cerberus Syndrome" before reading it on tvtropes.

Or Good is Dumb, which has since been renamed to Redemption Demotion. It's possible the Giant was making a reference to the old Space Balls quote

Again, what you treat as a barely-worth-mentioning possibility strikes me as nearly certain. Originated in a popular parody movie, zinged all over the Internet...It's possible that Rich never saw Spaceballs himself, doesn't interact with anyone who ever talks about tropes, and the specific place Rich found "Good is Dumb" was the TVTropes website. But it's not the way to bet.

I can't really prove anything, and I honestly don't stay away at nights worrying about it. It never even occurred to me that suggesting there is a connection might bother some people.

Suggesting there is a connection doesn't bother me. Insisting that Rich bloody well does read TVTropes regularly and it's obvious and there are all these clues and anyone who doesn't consider it obvious that Rich references TVTropes is denying the obvious? That mystifies me. And that's what you've been doing here, not "suggesting there is a connection."

[Turkish Delight]

Not possible. Factual.

I would be surprised to learn that anyone who wrote a comic didn't know the term "Cerberus Syndrome" before reading it on tvtropes.

Ok, I'll take the fall on that one, since I haven't read offline comics in years and never followed Cerebus even when it didn't plunge into misogynist insanity.

Again, what you treat as a barely-worth-mentioning possibility strikes me as nearly certain. Originated in a popular parody movie, zinged all over the Internet...It's possible that Rich never saw Spaceballs himself, doesn't interact with anyone who ever talks about tropes, and the specific place Rich found "Good is Dumb" was the TVTropes website. But it's not the way to bet.

It was a good clue to me, given how often it's used and linked on that site. Space Balls is a decades old movie; that doesn't by any means mean it isn't his central reference, of course, but the relevance of the quote shoots up quite a bit when it's linked to modern usage, and given it's recent prominence on TV Tropes it strikes me as a nice little clue. Not proof, of course.

Suggesting there is a connection doesn't bother me. Insisting that Rich bloody well does read TVTropes regularly and it's obvious and there are all these clues and anyone who doesn't consider it obvious that Rich references TVTropes is denying the obvious? That mystifies me. And that's what you've been doing here, not "suggesting there is a connection."

I began with the assumption that that statement wasn't even a controversial one. Huge numbers of OotS fans have found the comic through TV Tropes, including myself, and around that site at least OotS is one of the most troped-up pieces of fiction around. Before I ever came here, I had read that the OotS forums were almost an informal gathering of tropers. The idea that the relationship is not mutual and the Giant barely knows anything about the place, with all references and links to TV Tropes purely accidentally or imaginary, is one I've only seen forcefully argued in this thread.

So in the face of that, I will back down one level: I think it highly, highly likely and probable that the Giant reads, enjoys and consciously makes reference to TV Tropes, or has done so in the past. Is that statement one that leaves you a bit less mystified?

[Turkish Delight]

And "trope" is not really an obscure word, especially not for someone as well-versed in literature as the Giant.

I'd be curious to see just how well known that word was prior to 2003 outside of those specifically interested in literature. The TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Vocabulary entry mentions it as approximately the 67,470th most common English word, right between 'Llangefni' and 'Lusitania.'

That's changed now, apparently. It's now between 'privies' and 'milliners'!

[Nimrod's Son]

Mostly the amount of myopia in the assumption that he "obviously" reads TV Tropes bothers me.

That's my main issue too. Rich might read TVTropes, and I'd be astounded if he'd never spent at least some time browsing it, even if only once... but as far as in-comic evidence goes, there's nothing whatsoever to indicate that he's ever visited the site in his life. Sure it's ARGUABLE that he's referenced it at times, but it's a very long way from being "obvious".

Space Balls is a decades old movie; that doesn't by any means mean it isn't his central reference, of course, but the relevance of the quote shoots up quite a bit when it's linked to modern usage, and given it's recent prominence on TV Tropes it strikes me as a nice little clue. Not proof, of course.

Rich is pretty much the exact right age for Spaceballs to have been a staple of his adolescence, like it was with many people of that age. I think you're seriously underestimating how big that film was, and overestimating the percentage of jokes that Rich is aiming exclusively at the internet generation and TVTropes crowd.

As a general rule, if I had to guess whether any given reference is to either a classic sci-fi/fantasy work or a single (overrated, poorly-executed, too-many-cooks mess of a) website, I'd go for the former.

Gosh darn, I nearly kept my personal feelings about TVTropes to myself then, too. So much for neutrality...

[Turkish Delight]

The main problem is how difficult it is to prove anything, since the entire foundation of TV Tropes is that all of the tropes are from someplace else, as well as a majority of the trope names. TV Tropes has no real original content of it's own beyond the specific trope names; if you want to definitively nail down a direct connection, you have to catch someone in-comic saying something like 'Xanatos Roulette.' Even then, does a character in a 3.5 comic calling a race 'Always Chaotic Evil' mean that the writer has read TV Tropes and is making a reference, or is it just a coincidence due to that race being...well, always Chaotic Evil? If a villain is called a 'Complete Monster'...well, that's certainly happened quite a lot well before any web sites popped up, which is actually why it supplied the trope name in the first place.

Beyond that, any of the bazillions of tropes OotS loves to indulge in could have come from anywhere. And even if we were able to catch Rich Burlow sitting down and reading TV Tropes and enjoying a specific entry, it doesn't mean that entry was the one that inspired any given use of a trope. As such, everything comes down to feel and specific wording, references to tropes that may mean nothing at all or may be a sly wink to the TV Tropes reading audience.

I never really noticed until now what a pain it is pinning down specific and direct references rather than a broad whole which gives nice little clues to readers of that site. Rather frustrating.

So do I believe that Rich Burlow reads TV Tropes, or has done so regularly in the past? With a tiny bit less certainty than I did at the start of this thread, but with still an overall feel of certainty. But ah, I can prove nothing and neither can anyone else unless Mr. Burlow tells us directly.

[Turkish Delight]

As a general rule, if I had to guess whether any given reference is to either a classic sci-fi/fantasy work or

I'd say it's both. Two with one stone. Rich makes jokes appealing to young and old, and best of all both at once; that's part of why the comic doesn't suck.

But this entire line of argument makes me feel old, since while I'm of the age that had a lot of fun with Spaceballs. Let's move on.

(overrated, poorly-executed, too-many-cooks mess of a) website

There's a lot of crap and lot of great stuff. It all depends on your tolerance for sifting through it.

The site is chaotic. I like chaos.

[Nimrod's Son]

So do I believe that Rich Burlow reads TV Tropes, or has done so regularly in the past? With a tiny bit less certainty than I did at the start of this thread, but with still an overall feel of certainty. But ah, I can prove nothing and neither can anyone else unless Mr. Burlow tells us directly.

I prefer to assume he doesn't, until evidence arises to the contrary. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that.

After all, plenty of people assumed he was a Pratchett fan until he came out and said he'd deliberately never read any.

In War & XPs, Rich gives his primary inspirations as Babylon 5, Starman, The Seven Samurai, and MythAdventures - with some other notables being Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Gargoyles, Red Dwarf, Buffy, Watership Down and Farscape. With a selection of influences that wide, and clearly plenty of literary, cinematic and pop-culture nous besides, Rich doesn't need to scour TVTropes for ideas. Hell, he doesn't even need to glance.

There's a lot of crap and lot of great stuff. It all depends on your tolerance for sifting through it.

Undoubtedly true, but then I already learned most of the good stuff in film school, and I don't want to go sifting through dreck on the off-chance I may discover some titbit.

[Petrocorus]

Not only it seems obvious to me that The Giant read TVTropes, but this troper would not be wondered if he were an active troper.

And on a related note, we can say that TVTropers are fond of OOTS. I found far more reference on TvTrope about it than about the Vorkosigan Saga, some famous TV shows, etc..

[Nimrod's Son]

And on a related note, we can say that TVTropers are fond of OOTS.

Quite so. To the point that it's got everyone blindly assuming it's a two-way street, it seems.

[Turkish Delight]

With a selection of influences that wide, and clearly plenty of literary, cinematic and pop-culture nous besides, Rich doesn't need to scour TVTropes for ideas. Hell, he doesn't even need to glance.

I understand now this is the fundamental reason why the suggestion raises such controversy, but one can be perfectly aware of a whole variety of tropes and still get great amusement out of seeing people try to explain them and then start throwing out examples from all kinds of media. TV Tropes isn't a school of any sort; it's just a fun web site. You can be intimately familiar with a trope and still find the way it's named and described and played with hilarious.

There is not the slightest shame in Rich acknowledging that he reads the site, only in the unrelated accusation that he rips it off. I don't believe the latter for a second and I don't think anyone else in this thread believes such either, regardless of whatever past accusations have been made.

[Optimystik]

And on a related note, we can say that TVTropers are fond of OOTS. I found far more reference on TvTrope about it than about the Vorkosigan Saga, some famous TV shows, etc..

It's also a lot easier to read a free webcomic (even just one page) than to find an old TV Show or movie, and then dig/sit through it until you find the Trope Namer within. Tropes work better if more people get your reference - they are communal affairs by necessity.

[Jimorian]

Actually, Rich really gets his references from the Turkey City Lexicon.

(Just kidding, but TVTropes is at least a decade late to its own game.)

In reality, TVTropes is simply redundant to anybody regularly immersed in the pop culture of their day. Combine that with Rich's deep deep DEEP understanding of the writing process and the foundations of literature, and you can see why thinking that such a superficial site as TVTropes as anything more than maybe a glancing source of his insights, is seen as dissing his abilities.

Because a trope is simply a pattern, and anybody who pays attention to the storytelling in all forms of media, as a writer like Rich would do, is going to pick up those patterns in the wild with just a few exposures to them. All TVTropes does is take each of those obvious patterns and beats it with a very non-vivacious equine.

[Turkish Delight]

Actually, Rich really gets his references from the Turkey City Lexicon.

(Just kidding, but TVTropes is at least a decade late to its own game.)

In reality, TVTropes is simply redundant to anybody regularly immersed in the pop culture of their day. Combine that with Rich's deep deep DEEP understanding of the writing process and the foundations of literature, and you can see why thinking that such a superficial site as TVTropes as anything more than maybe a glancing source of his insights, is seen as dissing his abilities.

Because a trope is simply a pattern, and anybody who pays attention to the storytelling in all forms of media, as a writer like Rich would do, is going to pick up those patterns in the wild with just a few exposures to them. All TVTropes does is take each of those obvious patterns and beats it with a very non-vivacious equine.

Now you guys are almost starting to sound like Rich wouldn't read the site because it's 'beneath' him. Pfft. I, at least, have never accused the Giant of being a snob.

You don't read tropes because you want a deep understanding of the storytelling process. You read tropes because they're time-passing fun even if you already have a deep understanding of the storytelling process. The purpose is fun. Is it dissing the Giant to suggest he might find something fun?

[PallElendro]

I estimate an 81.76% chance this thread will be locked.

[Nimrod's Son]

There is not the slightest shame in Rich acknowledging that he reads the site, only in the unrelated accusation that he rips it off.

Absolutely. Until such time as he does acknowledge that he reads the site, though, I'm going to assume he doesn't.

I don't believe the latter for a second and I don't think anyone else in this thread believes such either, regardless of whatever past accusations have been made.

This thread is fine. But I remember arguing on one occasion with someone who not only thought that Rich got all his ideas from there, but that the entire pupose of the comic was not to parody D&D, but to tick off each trope from the site one at a time. He even insisted that TVTropes' definitions of good and evil were more relevant to the strip than anything from D&D's actual alignment system; it was quite a sight to behold.

Until all his posts were scrubbed and he got banned, that is.

Now you guys are almost starting to sound like Rich wouldn't read the site because it's 'beneath' him.

Not at all. But as you said yourself, TVTropes is an ENTERTAINMENT website. As a creative resource it's pretty much useless, and I just don't feel comfortable speculating on what Rich does in his spare time for fun.

[Jimorian]

Now you guys are almost starting to sound like Rich wouldn't read the site because it's 'beneath' him. Pfft. I, at least, have never accused the Giant of being a snob.

You don't read tropes because you want a deep understanding of the storytelling process. You read tropes because they're time-passing fun even if you already have a deep understanding of the storytelling process. The purpose is fun. Is it dissing the Giant to suggest he might find something fun?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if he does indeed go to TVTropes for fun, or to see why so many playgrounders mention it here on the boards, he's already going to recognize 99% of what is there.

Heck, when I read it, there are very few things that I haven't already identified from my own experiences, I just rarely give them names and classify them. And in many cases I'll have forgotten the particular references where I originally noticed the pattern, but it's still already in my memory banks.

Which is why it's very safe to assume that when Rich pops open a trope within OOTS, he's doing so from his own reference frame and not as a shoutout. Heck, if he read it on TVTropes, he's more likely to NOT use it in the comic because that's just how writers' minds work.

[Petrocorus]

and I just don't feel comfortable speculating on what Rich does in his spare time for fun.

Playing DnD with the Snarl ?!

[Haven]

Even then, does a character in a 3.5 comic calling a race 'Always Chaotic Evil' mean that the writer has read TV Tropes and is making a reference, or is it just a coincidence due to that race being...well, always Chaotic Evil?

I know this was supposed to be a rhetorical question, or failing that a question that is supposed to one or the other, but the answer is "neither, because that exact phrase has been in the Monster Manual for decades." The same general idea applies to literally all the rest of your "evidence". TVTropes is just making the same references that the Giant is making; the Giant is not referring to TVTropes' references to some other things. I suspect part of what people find offensive here is that it's not crediting those things.

Though the part where you'd know this if you were clicking on your own links is also probably a factor.