An issue with the term "Mary Sue" I've notice...

[matt0044]

After reading this post, I've been questioning claims about who's a Mary Sue. It seems to be used a lot for female character people just don't like.

Am I the only one here?

(Note: any derailing discussions on DW or AOS must be left out. Go to the Entertainment section for that)

 

[Beth Pavell]

Two things I've noticed about the "Mary Sue" terminology. Firstly, and most obviously, is that no-one's really sure quite what it means. More or less everyone uses the term in a different way, and that inevitably muddies the waters.

And yes, there is something of a double standard. People seem to generally be less bothered about Marty than Mary (A good example that I can think of is Petyr Baelish of A Song of Ice and Fire, who sticks out in the series as the only infallible character)

 

[ShyOctopus]

It is DEFINITELY used too much to mean female characters someone doesn't like. Besides that, you almost never hear people complain about the male equivalent in mainstream media.

 

[kintsugi]

I've never actually heard anyone use Mary Sue for mainstream media, male or female (or anyone whose opinion I take seriously, at least, but I don't follow the internet-sphere as closely as I could). This is typically because main stream media writers are, surprisingly, much more skilled than the average fanfic writer, and they actually write good, multi-faceted characters of both genders. Barring complete train wrecks such as Eragon or Twilight, I would hesitate to drop the M-word on any mainstream media character, male or female.

Can't say I'm well-enough versed in tumblr/internet-verse to speak for anyone else.

 

[TrainerRyan]

Not sure if I'm the right Person to Judge, but here's my 2 cents.
Another definition of a Mary Sue isn't just a "Perfect Character", but a "Perfect Character" who is clearly based on the Person who Created the Fiction, and a number of people don't like it because they feel like the creator is rubbing their Narcissism in our faces. It's the main reason by Hardcore Fans of Eugene Wesley Roddenberry's Star Trek hates Will Weaton's Character.

 

[Persephone]

I'm not sure why the term is as prevalent in the fan fiction community as it is to be honest. I think in its purest form it means a bad character that is clearly meant to serve as wish-fulfillment, but it's kind of been expanded well beyond its original limits. Rather than looking for genuine character flaws and strengths there's definitely a tendency in the community to go Sue-hunting to denounce any character that meets the definition, however narrowly, while ignoring or praising poorly built or developed characters that don't meet it.

I really only view a character as bad if their presence does not increase the quality of the work. Characters, like almost everything else in fiction, are devices to be used to improve the whole. If they don't, they failed and shouldn't be there. The bad Sues are bad because their lack of depth is painfully obvious and they never have a serious enough challenge to build suspense, which lowers the quality of the writing.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Capricious Equilibrium]

The most accepted term of Mary-Sue is a 'flawless' character, who will always have the story bend so they're portrayed in a good light and seem... Well... Flawless. If they do have flaws, other characters in the fic tend to be endeared by them, such as clumsiness. It's especially noticeable when the writer breaks up a couple in the original media who're portrayed as very close, just so one half can date their Marty/Mary. They are often 'inserts' of the writer.

I agree that the term is used too much, especially when someone has some vendetta against some character. But sometimes, it's just bad writing or an inexperienced writer... *cough*Twilight*cough*.

 

[Elric von Bek]

The term has no proper usage outside of fan fiction.

 

[Instrutilus]

Mary Sue is a term that refers to a character that has a massive skill unnaturally at an early age, such as graduating a prestigious academy incredibly early, while having a close relationship, either familiar or romantically, to a main character, be it of the series or another that could conceivably be tied to the one being portrayed (such as a sister of a Power Ranger becoming the Doctor's companion, since apparently Gallifrey was in Power Rangers: Lost Galaxy). Their relationships to others are universal, be it of love or hate, and is usually designed around the author's perception of the relationship around them as a MS is designed to be a fantasy self-insert, rather then a straight self-insert. They're often flawless in their stories, though critical thinking would quickly show many flaws, because of this and thus rarely developed.

So yes, there is an major misuse of the term "Mary Sue" to characters that don't deserve it. Dawn from Pokémon isn't a Mary Sue, she was just a flat character. Bella Swan from Twilight is, being special by being immune to vampire powers, being important to a plot that she has no real reason to be, having close relationships with two major characters and never really having any flaws described (despite many being able to point out several flaws in her personality). Perhaps someone should compile a standardized Mary Sue Test, like a Bechdel Test, and run through media finding and figuring out who are MS and who are just flat characters.

 

[Drakon]

The term has no proper usage outside of fan fiction.

Actually it does. The term usually refers to an overly idealized and flawless character who has the plot bend to their will/everything goes perfect for them. It is irrelevant whether the story is an original story or fan fiction.

However, a problem I find with Mary Sue tests is that they seem to obsess over a character's traits (why the hell is a non-Japanese character using a katana considered a Sue trait!?). As a result, they are bogged down with meaningless questions.

Consequently, I feel that a Mary Sue should be evaluated on the basis of how the character interacts with the other characters, the setting and the plot.

Also, here's a character for y'all to determine if he's a Mary Sue (in this case, Gary Stu).

He's always described a stunningly handsome with particular emphasis on his eyes; he always gets the women; he's rugged; he has a huge antique car collection; he's a skilled diver, pilot, captain, fighter, gunslinger, swimmer and engineer; he thwarted numerous evil plots and he's pretty much never made a mistake.

Click here to see who he is:

Spoiler

Dirk Pitt from the eponymous novels by Clive Cussler.

 

[Lord Kyuubi]

The term has no proper usage outside of fan fiction.

Actually it does. The term usually refers to an overly idealized and flawless character who has the plot bend to their will/everything goes perfect for them. It is irrelevant whether the story is an original story or fan fiction.

Agreed with this definition. I'd say generally, a Mary Sue character seems to be perfect, to the point the world seems to be based around them, not the other way around. Partly why 'Chosen Ones' are usually strong candidates, at least for consideration. And also similar things like the character being of special importance in other ways. So, yeah, I don't see how it makes any difference whether it's fanfiction or original fiction.

However, a problem I find with Mary Sue tests is that they seem to obsess over a character's traits (why the hell is a non-Japanese character using a katana considered a Sue trait!?). As a result, they are bogged down with meaningless questions.

If you're referring to the test I think you are (ie, this one), then that's just an example of giving characters exotic characteristics or something, and an equally valid one would be a Japanese character using a longsword. The point is that the character has something (in this case a weapon) to draw attention to them and separate them from everyone else, hence they're made to be 'special'. But yeah, there are a fair few irrelevant or at least partially-irrevelant questions.

Actually I suspect it may also be playing on the popular image of the katana as being some sort of 'perfect sword', or something ridiculous like that. Despite the fact that they're short, heavy and take two hands to use well. They do cut well, though.

Consequently, I feel that a Mary Sue should be evaluated on the basis of how the character interacts with the other characters, the setting and the plot.

Yes, I largely agree with this. I think details like the above are still relevant to an extent because they make a character seem special, and draw attention to them over other characters, but I agree what you're saying is largely what actually makes someone a Mary Sue.

Also, here's a character for y'all to determine if he's a Mary Sue (in this case, Gary Stu).

He's always described a stunningly handsome with particular emphasis on his eyes; he always gets the women; he's rugged; he has a huge antique car collection; he's a skilled diver, pilot, captain, fighter, gunslinger, swimmer and engineer; he thwarted numerous evil plots and he's pretty much never made a mistake.

Yes. Definitely.

 

[matt0044]

There's also Mikey Kudo/Taiki Kudo from Digimon Fusion/Xros Wars. Even if I like him, he's too perfect of a character.

 

[Elric von Bek]

I thought the term originated from some old Star Trek fanzine fiction. If I'm wrong, then I'll rephrase my initial point: "Mary Sue", like "Grimdark," has no place in academic discourse. There is, of course, simple bad writing. Which may or may not be the case for the Cussler character mentioned a few posts above. Having not read anything by the author, I can't offer any further comments.

 

[Misfit Angel]

I'd argue that the term grimdark is perfectly valid when it comes to writing, just overused by angsty teenagers who have no understanding of what's truly evil and dark about the world, its people and the things we do to each other.

Now, I'm not a fan of AMC's The Walking Dead at all, and I think it's a poorly written storyline hyped up by brainless masses (how about that?), but the setting is a perfect example of grimdark. Society has fallen apart, every character has been personally and deeply affected by it, and most importantly, there isn't hope. The only thing that sees the characters through is their determination to survive and rebuild, or survive and conquer what little remains. It's a story where there are deep divides between people that have extreme consequences that often end in more misfortune.

People like to claim that Twilight, or even Lord of the Rings is grimdark. Twilight is a bad romance, while Lord of the Rings is high fantasy. I think that's where a lot of people take issue with the term, it being misused rather than having no merits itself.

 

[みさあき]

Sometimes I think people use mary sue to mean "strong female character, me oh my"

 

[kintsugi]

Media aimed at children (ie Digimon, Pokemon, etc) is full of Mary Sues. I'm okay with that, because I don't think that five year-old me would've been able to understand the deeper nuances of human nature, and I don't think that especially young children really should have to. In a sense, you kind of want the shows/books aimed at young children to have "flawless" characters, because then the kids watching/reading can aspire to be good/brave/friendly/kind. When the kids are older, sure, they can understand that everyone is secretly an asshole and part of growing up is learning that everyone has flaws, but that's for later.

I think that the propagation of the flawless character (if the term Mary Sue is really so awful) archetype that you see, primarily in fanfiction, is a flaw of new writers who are simply trying to imitate the media they absorbed as children. Yeah, Ash Ketchum's pretty flawless and boring; the fanfiction from new writers that derive from him encapsulates the same sort of thing. Pretty sure my first experiments with writing involved a massive sue, too, because it's goddamned fun to go around writing an extension of yourself that actually wins in life wow that last bit sounded a lot more depressing than I intended

I don't know if there's an actual definition for "Mary Sue" (somehow, I doubt there is), which makes this difficult. Some people will draw the line at "character who has everything;" I prefer to draw the line at "plot bends to make life easier (or in some cases harder, with no real impact on the plot; see Angst Sue) for the character." People with the first definition, yeah, can sling that all over anything they want. The second definition is a lot harder to stick to anything outside of fanfiction. However, given that there isn't (to my knowledge) any legitimately pinned-down definition of "Mary Sue," I guess it's silly to even call it an overused term in the first place because no one knows for sure what it even means.

 

[Lysson]

Hardly anyone seems to know how to use the term, it's usually critics using it to show their disdain of a character in a fan-fic or such. Even OCs that have no story can get it if they have 'too many powers' or such even though they could have complete character flaws. I'd say this video explains what a Mary Sue is quite well.
[video=youtube;qnokGcoUOmE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnokGcoUOmE[/video]

 

[Beth Pavell]

That's a good exploration of the "Mary Sue". The funny thing is that I think the Mary Sue Classic isn't nearly so common as it's parody, partly due to the huge awareness of the concept now. But it's for the reasons explored in the video that I don't see it as a term that can only apply to fanfiction - circling back round to my previous comment, Petyr Baelish of A Song of Ice and Fire is the best example I can think of a Mary Sue in original fiction (Aside from one failure in his backstory, Baelish never fails at anything he sets his mind to and is never seriously challenged by either random circumstance or rivals)

I think what's now obvious is that by itself, "Mary Sue" isn't even really very useful as shorthand. If you were to usefully critique a character using the term you'd inevitably have to explain how and why it applies anyway

 

[Misfit Angel]

Petyr Baelish of A Song of Ice and Fire is the best example I can think of a Mary Sue in original fiction (Aside from one failure in his backstory, Baelish never fails at anything he sets his mind to and is never seriously challenged by either random circumstance or rivals)

I would argue that he's not. He's a man so secretive, so manipulative, so suave, that nobody would expect it from him. He is a man who does not appear to have any motivations, while everyone around him is publicly making a fool of themselves, which makes it easier for him to get his way without people looking at him. As far as random circumstance, perhaps he's just good at analyzing situations on a larger scale, knowing when it's best to move along with his plans while risking the least. He's been in King's Landing for nearly two decades and he's gotten quite good at playing the game, only nobody realizes it.

To me, Petyr Baelish is a man who's worked hard for what he's accomplished, and generally is someone who has had fortune smile on them. The same can apply to people in real life. Look at Dave Thomas, the guy who founded the Wendy's restaurant chain. He was adopted by a well to do family in his youth, took a monumental risk by dropping out of high school (which he later said was the greatest mistake of his life), but still went on to turn a failing KFC brand around as well as establish one of the most well known fast food chains in the first world. Now, would you describe his character a Mary Sue?

Probably a terrible analogy, but it was the best I could think of.

 

[Beth Pavell]

Petyr Baelish of A Song of Ice and Fire is the best example I can think of a Mary Sue in original fiction (Aside from one failure in his backstory, Baelish never fails at anything he sets his mind to and is never seriously challenged by either random circumstance or rivals)

I would argue that he's not. He's a man so secretive, so manipulative, so suave, that nobody would expect it from him. He is a man who does not appear to have any motivations, while everyone around him is publicly making a fool of themselves, which makes it easier for him to get his way without people looking at him. As far as random circumstance, perhaps he's just good at analyzing situations on a larger scale, knowing when it's best to move along with his plans while risking the least. He's been in King's Landing for nearly two decades and he's gotten quite good at playing the game, only nobody realizes it.

To me, Petyr Baelish is a man who's worked hard for what he's accomplished, and generally is someone who has had fortune smile on them. The same can apply to people in real life. Look at Dave Thomas, the guy who founded the Wendy's restaurant chain. He was adopted by a well to do family in his youth, took a monumental risk by dropping out of high school (which he later said was the greatest mistake of his life), but still went on to turn a failing KFC brand around as well as establish one of the most well known fast food chains in the first world. Now, would you describe his character a Mary Sue?

Probably a terrible analogy, but it was the best I could think of.

Well, other opinions are available. My main argument is that he always analyses the situation perfectly. He never makes a mistake in a story which is built upon lots of clever characters plotting against one another and making mistakes.