![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Mary Sueage.
You know, 'Mary Sue' is fast becoming one of those overused terms, like 'Xerox' and 'Frisbee,' where the original meaning has nearly vanished. It seems that every time someone wants to criticise a character, they bring out the 'ol Mary Sue club.
It can mean everything from 'this character has magical powers that aren't believable' to 'I don't like this writer.' There are even those who dislike all original characters in fanfic and call them all Mary Sues. (Which makes no sense to me, because isn't every fictional character ever written an 'original character'?)
Do I want to rehabilitate the term, clarify the meaning?
No. That's a lost cause.
It's just time to be more specific. Why is the character a Mary Sue? What is it that bothers you? Try it on for size. Which critique is more effective -
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your super-human magical abilities are implausible.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your plot is thin and not believable. Everything works out in your character's favour, all the time.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your characterisation is flat. Your character has no apparent flaws to make them real and interesting.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your character seems self-serving. They seem solely to serve your agenda, rather than being real and independently working within the story.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your character seems to be a self-insert, with all the handsome men dropping at her feet.
All of these are Mary Sues. And not every Mary has all of these traits.
Yes, believe it or not, it is possible to have a self-insert in a story with an excellent plot, clear characterisation (and plenty of flaws), no super-human abilities in sight, and no agenda. You can also have an 'agenda character' in a story that is otherwise outstanding, where the obvious purpose of the character is to drive some political point.
And a Mary Sue isn't necessarily bad. There's even a very famous Mary Sue.
His name is Bond. James Bond.
Because of the other factors in the story, the zippy plot and winkingly fun Dr Evil bad guys, you're willing to suspend disbelief at this very obvious self-insert.
So be specific in your feedback. If something doesn't work in a story, tell the author exactly what it is. Calling the character a Mary Sue doesn't mean anything.
It can mean everything from 'this character has magical powers that aren't believable' to 'I don't like this writer.' There are even those who dislike all original characters in fanfic and call them all Mary Sues. (Which makes no sense to me, because isn't every fictional character ever written an 'original character'?)
Do I want to rehabilitate the term, clarify the meaning?
No. That's a lost cause.
It's just time to be more specific. Why is the character a Mary Sue? What is it that bothers you? Try it on for size. Which critique is more effective -
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your super-human magical abilities are implausible.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your plot is thin and not believable. Everything works out in your character's favour, all the time.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your characterisation is flat. Your character has no apparent flaws to make them real and interesting.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your character seems self-serving. They seem solely to serve your agenda, rather than being real and independently working within the story.
This character is a Mary Sue.
Or: your character seems to be a self-insert, with all the handsome men dropping at her feet.
All of these are Mary Sues. And not every Mary has all of these traits.
Yes, believe it or not, it is possible to have a self-insert in a story with an excellent plot, clear characterisation (and plenty of flaws), no super-human abilities in sight, and no agenda. You can also have an 'agenda character' in a story that is otherwise outstanding, where the obvious purpose of the character is to drive some political point.
And a Mary Sue isn't necessarily bad. There's even a very famous Mary Sue.
His name is Bond. James Bond.
Because of the other factors in the story, the zippy plot and winkingly fun Dr Evil bad guys, you're willing to suspend disbelief at this very obvious self-insert.
So be specific in your feedback. If something doesn't work in a story, tell the author exactly what it is. Calling the character a Mary Sue doesn't mean anything.
no subject
I've seen characters called Mary Sues because the critic doesn't like the writer, doesn't like the story or the ships, et cetera. I've even heard Tonks called a Mary Sue because she's a newly introduced, young, female character and she interferes with the critic's pet Ship (how? Tonks isn't romantically linked with anyone in canon yet and may never be). And I'm of the school that doesn't believe that a canon character can be a bonafide Mary Sue anyway - even Ayla or James Bond, though definitely canon characters can be over-idealized and larger-than-life.
I've seen "fear of Mary Sueage" used as a club to try to get writers to dumb down their own, original fiction characters. I followd a link from the Teresa Neilsen Hayden site to another, name forgotten, where people were discussing their original fantasy novels. The messages were full of "I made my character ugly so she won't be a Mary Sue!" "Well, I made mine OLD and ugly!" "Well, I made MINE old, ugly, and comatose, hooked up to a life support machine so she can't accomplish anything! That way I can be SURE she's not a Mary Sue!" I have news for those people: Dumbing down your character doesn't mean you won't have a Mary Sue; it just means you'll have a dull character who puts your readers to sleep. Gary Stu-ish James Bond may be, but people enjoy him as a character and love to watch his exploits. I would rather read about a Sue-ish or Stu-ish character who was exciting instead of a character someone tried hard to "keep real" and as a result was dull and boring. Who wants to read about the Life and Times of Schleppy McBore?
Your examples of constructive criticism vs. "Your character is a Mary Sue!" are right on the mark. Beauty, talent, etc. don't make a Mary Sue, lack of plausibility and rampant canon-rape do. As a writer I welcome concrit, but I want to hear specific, concrete examples of where I am going wrong and why, not "Your character is a Mary Sue" or "Your story sucks!" because how on earth is that going to help me improve as a writer?
no subject
Oh, that's awful. That sounds like people don't know how to create original characters -- because you have to have some reason to like the character you end up with, so that your reader will, too. There's a reason why all the fairy tales have beautiful wealthy princesses, etc., etc.
Icarus