All The Tropes

Lost Aesop: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Lost Aesop (view source)

Revision as of 16:06, 25 November 2022

48 bytes removed ,  1 year ago
m
Formatting on WW example, fix SK examples
VisualWikitext
m (clun/ky)
m (Formatting on WW example, fix SK examples)
Line 53:
* ''[[Fly By Night]]'' is a film that doesn't know whether to praise hip-hop or condemn it. It tends to flip flop when it comes to criticizing [[Hardcore Hip Hop]], but it also seem to chastise [[Conscious Hip Hop]], and [[Political Rap]] as well.
* ''[[Camp Nowhere]]'' seems to have ''some'' kind of Aesop at the end, but good luck trying to figure out what the heck it is. It could be that kids shouldn't worry about having potential and growing up, but the film's hero stands up to his father and says that it's "okay to be stupid sometimes." It could also be about how [[Growing Up Sucks]], but the hero ''does'' learn some responsibility during the movie and even looks forward to dating his love interest when they're older. Maybe the lesson is that it's wrong to fool your parents and start a phony summer camp, but that was a borderline [[Fantastic Aesop]] even in 1994, and everyone ends up thanking the hero for the fun summer anyway, so THAT can't be it...
* The [[Wonder Woman (2017 film)|2017 ''Wonder Woman'' movie]] almost ends with the titular character realizing how naive she was to believe that Ares had to be behind the events of WWI and learning from Steve Trevor that [[Humans Are Flawed|humans are inherently faillible]], the causes of large-scale atrocities are more complicated than a single evil mastermind's plan, and you cannot magically fix everything by getting rid of a single person you believe is behind all the events. Then Ares reveals himself minutes later and throws the lesson out the window.
 
== Literature ==
* In his book ''On Writing'', [[Stephen King]] said one of the characters in ''[[The Stand]]'' was going to make an observation about the purpose of the events in one part of the book... only for King to realize he didn't have a convincing message handy. The character eventually ends up saying that he simply doesn't know.
** AnotherIn King example: In his's nonfiction horror analysis ''Danse Macabre,'', he notes that Mary Shelley in ''[[Frankenstein]]'' never makes clear whether Victor Frankenstein's fatal sin is in presuming to create life, or in refusing to take responsibility for his creation afterwards... neither of which is mutually exclusive. ToThis is one occasion where the book[[Death of the Author]] is provably beneficial, as Mary Shelley ''was'' writing for the Romantic movement, so at minimum the former can be taken as implied, and in fact both may be one and the same: When he gained the ability to create life, Victor became obsessed with making an artificial man, but his motive was purely ''self-centered''. Prior to animation, everything he visualized about his creation was in reference to himself, how his creations would think of him, the importance of his role in the history of the future... there was no concept, no recognition, of the reality of his creation as a ''separate'' entity, with a life and nature and role of its own separate from Victor's benefitwants and needs. When face-to-face with the ''actuality'' of that separateness, arguablyas opposed to the fantasy that had obsessed him, Victor was repulsed and abandoned his creation in disgust, but would later come to look back and recognize his own obsession, albeit far too late. Victor was the "parent" that planned every step of their child's life during pregnancy, with no thought whatever for the actuality of the child.
* In his novel ''[[Podkayne of Mars]]'', [[Robert A. Heinlein]] was trying for an Aesop about the dangers of [[Hands-Off Parenting]]. However, until the [[Character Filibuster]] at the end, there's really nothing in the novel that suggests that the characters' parents lack of involvement was to blame for their problems - or even that, [[Values Dissonance|by today's standards]], the parents were uninvolved to begin with.▼
** This is one occasion where the [[Death of the Author]] is probably beneficial. Mary Shelley ''was'' writing for the Romantic movement, so the former can be taken as implied.
** In Victor's case, they are one and the same thing. When he gained the ability to create life, Victor became obsessed with making an artificial man...but his motive was purely ''self-centered''. Prior to animation, everything he visualized about his creation was in reference to himself, how his creations would think of him, the importance of his role in the history of the future, there was no concept, no recognization, of the reality of his creation as a ''separate'' entity, with a life and nature and role of its own separate from Victor's wants and needs. When face-to-face with the ''actuality'' of that separateness, as opposed to the fantasy that had obsessed him, Victor was repulsed and abandoned his creation in digust. In later time Victor comes to look back and recognize his own obsession, but too late. Victor was like a couple that planned every step of their child's life during pregnancy, with no thought whatever for the actuality of the child.
▲* In his novel ''[[Podkayne of Mars]]'' [[Robert A. Heinlein]] was trying for an Aesop about the dangers of [[Hands-Off Parenting]]. However, until the [[Character Filibuster]] at the end, there's really nothing in the novel that suggests that the characters' parents lack of involvement was to blame for their problems - or even that, [[Values Dissonance|by today's standards]], the parents were uninvolved to begin with.
* ''The Gods of the Copybook Headings'' by [[Rudyard Kipling]] is about terminal failures to learn, and notes that for those who ''did'' learn it's rather predictable by now…
{{quote|That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
Retrieved from "https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1991136"