Fan Myopia: Difference between revisions

Fans of a particular work or medium see things differently from people who aren't fans of the same things. For instance, a fan might assume that the work they are a fan of is much better known than it actually is. Or, conversely, they might assume that nobody knows a different work simply because they and their circle never heard of it. The fan's perspective is a little warped because they are so close to certain materials and so distanced from others.

 

 

Even when an interest is shared by a young person's entire generation, it might well be unheard of in other, older demographics and vice-versa. This, too, is a kind of fan myopia. Fan myopia also can lead to over-enthusiasm for the work and related works ("This show is the best thing ever!" "Every other medium is garbage!") and so on. This happens more easily to younger fans than older ones who have, over time, seen works come and go and who have even seen ''media'' come and go.

* With franchises that last several generations, it is inevitable that the reins of power over creation and production will be passed on to new individuals, some of whom may not have been born when the franchise began and are tasked with keeping said franchise up to date and relevant. Typically, the original creator/producer is deceased so fans take it upon themselves to decide whether or not "he" would approve of the direction the current producer is taking with "his" creation. This includes the obvious nerd fare like ''[[Star Trek]]'', but also - and somewhat surprisingly - kids' shows like ''[[Thomas the Tank Engine]]''.

* In anticipation of angry reactions to the above sentence, refusing to acknowledge that a work was intended for children. Many perfectly respectable works were intended for children, and many of them are still enjoyable when you're an adult, yes, but (to pick a random example) ''[[Sonic Sat AM|Sonic the Hedgehog]]'' was still a kids' show, and acknowledging that doesn't reduce the work's quality. In fact, one might even argue that attracting a [[Periphery Demographic]] is a symptom of ''higher'' quality. But let's not argue too hard.

 

== Bad Troping ==

* Adding images that are [[Just a Face and a Caption]].

* [[Trope Namer Syndrome|Naming tropes after a character or quote from their favorite work]], without realizing that people unfamiliar with the work will not understand the trope name or quote, or without realizing that ''most people on the planet'' are in fact unfamiliar with that work.

* Using the phrase "in a recent episode", which [[Examples Are Not Recent|is useless to anyone who doesn't know what the episode is, and dates quickly]]. It's better to use the episode's title and/or number if you know it.

* Quoting or referencing a show or video game on a page that has nothing to do with it, out of the assumption that everyone will get the reference.

* Assuming that a show which provides a [[Subversion]] or [[Deconstruction]] of a particular trope is somehow automatically superior to a show which doesn't -- and, by extension, that their favourite show is a subversion / deconstruction of this trope [[Not a Subversion|when it patently isn't]].

* Assuming that their favored work (or media, or genre, etc.) is the ultimate example of everything—or at least, the ultimate example of everything the fan thinks is good. On this wiki, at least, this tends to lead to misguided [[Entry Pimp]]ing and forced attempts to present the show as an example of a particular [[Tropes Are Not Good|'good' trope]], even if the show in question does not actually use or reflect that trope, whilst over-protectively making [[Justifying Edit]]s or even outright deleting a show's entry in [[Tropes Are Not Bad|a 'bad' trope]] regardless of how fair or accurate the example from the show is.

 

{{reflist}}