Rally the Tropes!

Horkheimer and Adorno were on to something, they argued that pop culture relies too much on repetition. Genres keep repeating the same tropes, stories become somewhat predictable, and audiences just consume without thinking. From that perspective, popular culture sounds like it’s easier to swallow and harder to question. I agree that there’s truth in that critique. You can’t argue that genres absolutely depend on repetition. But my experience as a professional comedic improviser line up much more closely with John Fiske’s argument that audiences are not passive dupes. Instead, they are active participants who use cultural material in SO many creative and meaningful ways. I’ve seen it up close and personal in stand-up comedy and improv for the past 20+ years.

In improv, genre tropes are not a failure of imagination. They are specific tools we use to bring an audience of all demographics along for a ride that connects and delights everyone… If our improv team is asked to replay a scene in different genres, everyone in the room already knows what is coming even though we’re making it up on the spot. For a western genre we’ll always either include a high noon standoff, or a tumbleweed blowing across the prairie while using southern accents. A Horror genre will inevitably have a jump scare or a creepy face that appears through the curtains. Sci fi will always have futuristic technology or a cyborg as part of the scene. Film noir will bring in a cynical detective who always has an audience aside and a smoking, sharp tongued woman who clearly knows more than she is saying. These tropes work because performers and audiences recognize them instantly (I still am trying to figure out anime as it too has a ton of different genres). The fact that we can use these tropes to create new stories and fit them into a suggestion that the audience supplied makes us look like magicians.

This is exactly what Fiske means when he argues that pop culture can be productive. People don’t simply receive meaning, they make it. In improv, the audience is constantly anticipating, interpreting, and judging how well the performers use or twist genre expectations. The pleasure isn’t from surprise alone. It comes from recognition. When a trope appears, the audience feels smart for spotting it. When it is subverted, the audience feels rewarded for understanding the rule before it was broken.

Here’s another example. One of the most popular adaptations of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is the 2005 Kiera Knightly version. Most Austen fans have seen it. Today I watched a reel from a guy who takes the tropes, distorts them and retells the story in his interpretation. It’s hilarious. This brand of comedy wouldn’t exist without tropes. If you’ve seen the movie take a moment to watch this reel:

Tik Tok Pride and Prejudice retelling

I believe that predictability is not a flaw. It is a shared language. Genre tropes create a shortcut that allows creators and audiences to meet in the middle. Because the framework is familiar, us improvisers can focus on relationships, emotional stakes, and playful variations. Meaning is created in the moment. 

This does not mean the Frankfurt School is completely wrong to worry about standardization, though. I also agree that too much standardization can kill creativity, engagement and even enjoyment. However, I think we should give tropes more credit than we do. There’s a reason they are so popular, and there’s a reason we want to see them again and again. It works! What would it look like if we stopped thinking of tropes as lazy predictability and instead looked at them as comforting entertainment? I watch the same shows and read the same books that I love again and again, not because I’m lazy but because of the comfort of familiarity. Tropes can do that for use. They not only create a structure of familiarity but they also can produce engagement, creativity, and even critique, depending on how the material is used. I say bring on the tropes!