What are your most hated sci-fi/fantasy tropes?
What are your most hated sci-fi/fantasy tropes?
I have a few:
- Chosen ones, fate, destiny, &c. When you get down to it, a story with these themes is one where a single person or handful of people is ontologically, cosmically better and more important than everyone else. It's eerily similar to that right-wing meme about how "most people are just NPCs" (though I disliked the trope before that meme ever took off).
- Way too much importance being given to bloodlines by the narrative (note, this is different from them being given importance by characters or societies in the story).
- All of the good characters are handsome and beautiful, while all of the evil characters are ugly and disfigured (with the possible exception of a femme fatale or two).
- Races that are inherently, unchangeably evil down to the last individual regardless of upbringing, society, or material circumstances.
You're viewing a single thread.
- Unnecessarily horny and/or going into detail about SA.
Yes, I'm looking at you Ann McCafferey and whoever the fuck wrote The Reality Dysfunction series.
Runner up.
- Shoehorning in a romantic relationship where it feels incredibly out of place for the narrative and the established character interactions.
Reality Dysfunction was Peter F. Hamilton.
Oh yeah damn, I hadn't even thought about that. ick. : p
I have vague memories as a teenager reading The Night's Dawn books under the desk at school, getting really embarrassed by the multi-page hardcore sex scenes and the protagonist being, uh, a pretty bad person.
There's just something about Doorstop Sci-fi books that seem to lead their writers into trying their hand at fancy space smut.
It contrasted to Melanie Rawn's Dragon Prince series, which I read around the same time, where (IIRC) it's either wholesome romance or very obviously intended as something deeply unhealthy... although there was a lot of that!
Reality disfunction was hornt? Why don't I remember that. Weird. Oh wait. I looked it up. I fell off that one. Wasn't it terrible politically?
Less horny *from memory) that SA... I started reading the series at the second book probably over 10 years ago. I don't remember how horny the rest of the series was, but I recently found and tried to read the first book and there's was too much graphic descriptions of sexual assault that I had to stop reading it.
Like... I get that SA is a way to identify the "bad guys", but I really don't need it described.
Politically? I don't remember. There were some really nifty things that were described at how humanity had split itself into two factions but I don't remember it being anything that stood out as "oh shit this is bad".
In the way of old sci-fi it was pro monarchy, specifically anti union, libertarian, somewhat objectivist. Pro collectivist insofar as it allowed for orgies. So just a mess all over.
I remember the royal family was specifically referenced as trustworthy because they were too rich to bribe. Which is the most powerful reddit brained idea.
If I ever get back into trying the first book and rereading the series, I'll be sure pay attention.
My memory is foggy but I thought the Edenists were the collectivist branch of humanity and the Adamists had the monarchy. (I'm also very lazy and am not going to look this up right now.)
But yeah, "too rich to bribe" is kinda juvenile thinking.
At one point they go to planet that recreates a 1800s England and there a scene about how unions ruin everything. Also some weird sexual violence so the politics are rough. I seems to me the book isn't worth going back to but if you feel different I'd hear your assessment.
At one point they go to planet that recreates a 1800s England and there a scene about how unions ruin everything...
That sounds like what the "baddies" of this series were doing with their undead soul powers.