The Unbuilt Trope
The difference between exploring story tropes and simply imitating them.
Why do certain situations occur so readily in all types of fiction? Why do certain character archetypes appear with such regularity? The simple answer is that humans tend to think in similar patterns, and this results in certain story and character frameworks, or ‘tropes’ becoming codified in fiction. Furthermore, when we write, we tend to replicate and build upon the fiction we enjoyed. Tropes are frameworks which we know work well, so it’s natural that writers often stick to what works.
But there’s a difference between understanding that a trope works, and understanding how it works. And, in my opinion, this is also the difference between a competent author, and a truly great one. Because the literary landscape is constantly evolving with the passing of time, societies changing and the bubbling pot which is the world of fiction. Which brings us to what is known in some circles as the ‘unbuilt trope’.
The unbuilt trope is TV Tropes’ term for a work of fiction which began, or at least popularized, a story trope. These are works which inspired a legion of other works to imitate them, but have some significant differences compared to their imitators. This is because the originator/popularizer was organically exploring a situation or character type, and thus were thinking about the causes and consequences of it. Meanwhile, the imitators are simply following a codified version of the trope and so, a lot of nuance tends to be lost.
For a clear example, I’m going to reference Tolkien for the second time in three articles. The Lord of the Rings popularized Tolkien’s version of elves at the forefront of pop culture. Ageless, powerful beings, wiser and more in touch with nature than easily corrupted men. The imitators have replicated, parodied and deconstructed this formula so many times. And yet, if you’ve read Lord of the Rings (and especially if you’ve read the Silmarillion), you’ll know that this is a very shallow reading of Tolkien’s elves. Rather than blandly serene, they are often portrayed as cheerful good-natured people. When Frodo runs into some high elves early into ‘Fellowship’ he remarks that there’s a saying that going to the elves for advice will result in them saying both no and yes, which the elf in question finds hilarious. They’re not unfailingly moral and perfect either. Celeborn (Galadriel’s husband) is stressed out and quite rude to the Fellowship when they meet him before he catches himself. And Fëanor , from the Silmarillion, is the most talented and powerful of all elves, but he’s also arrogant, hotheaded and not especially wise. His temper, selfishness and arrogance cause huge problems for his tribe of elves (the Noldor). And he dies very soon into his quest for vengeance against OG dark lord Morgoth because he was too hotheaded and ended picking a fight even he couldn’t win. Tolkien’s elves are generally wise and moral because, by the time of Lord of the Rings, they have thousands of years of wars and kin-slaying to learn from. The elves written by imitators are wise because Tolkien’s elves were wise.
Now, this isn’t to say that good writing has to be wholly original concepts, nor that these existing tropes are bad. If that were true, there would be almost no good writers. Creating something which alters the literary landscape going forward is exceptionally rare. And the reason these tropes became codified is that they’re literary devices which work well. But writing simply by carefully reproducing established tropes means you’re working your way down a checklist rather than considering the causes and consequences of what’s happening. And that second option is where the really rich and engaging fiction comes from. If you want to use a particular trope well, you simply need to build a story where you organically arrive at the trope. Let’s consider an example of this.
Suppose you want to write a character who is a paragon of virtue; a pillar of heroism who many people look up to. They always strive to do the right thing, and they always stick to their principles. This is a perfect example of a character who can seem a bit flat and uninteresting if you simply go down the list and meet the basic criteria without exploring what they really mean. Why is your paragon so determined to do the right thing? Did they have a good childhood which instilled strong moral values in them? Or did they suffer through horrific trauma which left them determined that no one else should have to go through that? This helps to build a logical line of action and consequence which adds depth to their motivation. It also helps to define the flavour of paragon they are. They could be earnest, cheerful champions of what is right, or grim, dour defenders of the victims of evil. And the reason and method don’t have to match up in the most obvious ways. Suppose your paragon had a wonderful childhood full of caring mentors who taught them what was right. And then they go out into the world and are exposed to its various cruelties. They resolutely fight for the goodness they believe in, but they become sour and bitter that the world is this awful. Meanwhile, someone who goes through trauma could become a cheerful and friendly champion of the oppressed because they know that’s what would have comforted them when they were a victim.
And that’s just the start of how you can play with the archetype. The paragon is often used to embody the qualities the author considers to be most worthy. But there’s nothing stopping you from having them champion principles the audience won’t view as heroic. Because the core of the paragon archetype is about resolutely sticking to certain principles. Which means a paragon is a terrifying antagonist if their principles diverge from those of other characters. A famous example of this spin on the paragon is Inspector Javert from ‘Les Misérables’. He is an inflexible, uncaring enforcer of the law who is also incorruptible and will never break the law in pursuit of his duties. And all of this is barely scratching the surface of the different ways you can play with a character archetype people some people reflexively consider bland.
So, the next time you sit down to write something, be sure to explore the story tropes you’re using and really think about the implications and consequences that would come with them. It may take your story in unexpected directions, but it will almost certainly be all the stronger for it.