Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×

:iconmakingfunofstuff: More from MakingFunOfStuff


Featured in Collections

rants by AwesomeHellee9

Literature by MythologyNut01

Writing by SELI-book


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
April 16, 2012
File Size
9.1 KB
Submitted with
Sta.sh
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
10,058
Favourites
425 (who?)
Comments
392
×
                                  Clarifying Mary Sue


So, I realize that everyone has heard of Mary Sue characters, but the thing that bothers me is that Mary has never really been as clarified as she could be. Girls go around crying Mary Sue at every character with long pink hair, then go and create even worse Mary Sue characters in the false illusion that they're making nonMary Sue characters (or even anti-Sues) when in fact they're doing the opposite. Allow me to explain how this seems to happen.

First of all the term "Mary Sue" desperately needs to be clarified to these people, so this brings us to the very important question: What IS a Mary Sue?
At least everyone can agree on one thing. Mary Sues are characters that are so perfect it's annoying.

But. What do they mean by perfect? Everyone has different ideas of that, naturally. Unfortunately, this is how many fanfiction (and other) writers make their biggest mistakes.

When you hear the name Mary Sue what pops up in your mind? A beautiful princess who gets everything she wants, has magical powers and is loved by all the other characters around them? Is that really perfect to you?

Are you sure that in your heart you wouldn't rather be the mysterious emo that everyone else dislikes and is seriously misunderstood or the tough butt-kicking karate girl with short hair? These kind of characters can just as easily be Mary Sues as the girly girl Mary Sues that writers seem to be under the impression are the only ones.


"But my character has faults!" some might point out. Granted, this may be true, but your idea of perfect might in fact include these faults.


A common example of a Mary Sue fault that isn't really a fault is that they get into trouble because they are too caring or too nice to everyone. Well. . . This is an obviously stupid way to go about giving your character faults, BUT it's definitely not the only stupid way. You see, many people only pretend to give their characters "faults" by giving them something supposedly bad that they actually think of positively. Someone who thinks it's cool and funny to be sarcastic might make their Mary Sue character sarcastic, thus making them even closer to their personal definition of perfect.


Heck, if the author thinks shooting a gun off in an orphanage is a good thing and makes their character do it, then their character is STILL a Mary Sue, so long as it's portrayed as good (whatever "good" means. More on that soon).


Why do we hate Mary? While some of the writers might hate her because they hate girly girls in general (and labor under the impression that only girly girl characters are Mary Sues) true authors find her degrading not just because of her (usually) corny looks, background or history. Oh, no. That's the least of the problems with Mary Sue. We hate her, because she can do no wrong.


Mary Sue cannot do anything wrong. Sure, she can trip over a rock if it's funny and cute or maybe even accidentally press a button that blows up a city if it adds to the plot (naively assuming there is a plot). But she can't do anything that makes her a bad person. She cannot do anything morally wrong. At least, (and this is the most disgusting part) what's morally wrong according to the author.


"Ah, so as long as I make Mary do something unchristian she isn't a Mary Sue?"
No. Remember, this is perfect according to you. Even if you use the words "morally wrong" we all know that you're not thinking of it that way. You're not thinking, "This is the part of the story where Mary Sue makes a mistake that the audience knows is wrong and doesn't want her to do!" Give me a break. You're thinking, "This is the part of the story that makes Mary Sue more deep and mysterious and interesting!"


Also, it doesn't help that a lot of people skate over describing Mary Sue as sweaty, smelly, fat or anything like that even when it would be the realistic thing to do. Still, I'm not saying that just because you did use one of those words you're character isn't a Mary Sue either.


Mary can be your own twisted, lame or just plain pathetic idea of perfect.
Everything she does is your type of perfect. Basically reading about a Mary Sue regardless of what person's type of perfect she is feels like reading "BE LIKE ME, BE LIKE ME, BE LIKE ME," which is both tedious and insulting.


Then there are the "self-insert Mary Sues." There is nothing wrong with inserting yourself into a story. However, when people do this, they tend to make themselves seem (admit it) cooler than they really are. This could be by focusing on or emphasizing the (in some cases exaggerated) most interesting things about themself (which sometimes even leads to them getting big-headed and sometimes even believing they're really this mysterious, great person in real life). No wonder the phrases "self-insert" and "Mary Sue" usually go together.
How can you possibly try to portray yourself this way and not get a Mary Sue?


I guess, what I'm really trying to say, is that "perfect" is a very very very broad word to use as a definition for Mary Sue and if that's the definition you're going to use, don't you dare turn a blind eye to your own Mary Sues just because they don't fall in line with someone else's idea of perfect.


It doesn't matter whether they have long, flowing pink hair, special abilities, or who they fall in love with (it doesn't even matter if the author personally believes they ARE perfect). It doesn't matter if they're a tomboy full of flaws either. A Mary Sue is a character who is plainly, mercilessly and unfairly worshiped by the author (directly or indirectly, usually indirectly or even unintentionally so watch out). It's in the portrayal. What could be a Mary Sue in one author's hands could be a perfectly reasonable character in another's.

Real people could take a so-called "Mary Sue test" and score as a Sue. What then? Is the person unrealistic? Perfect? Not at all! How then do so many "self-inserts" get labeled as Sues? Because of how they are PORTRAYED.

How can stereotypical perfect characters in cartoons be bearable? Because the cartoonist is not worshiping them; they are making fun of them.

Mary Sues are not so much characters who are "so perfect that they are annoying" but characters that authors worship. "Perfect" is merely a differing opinion among everyone in the world. So Mary Sues are types of characters *portrayed* as perfect.

One could even go on to say that "perfect" isn't the only thing characters can be unfairly portrayed as. Instead of perfect, maybe evil, mysterious, deep, interesting, random, tough, or funny. It all comes down to how much the author is forcing their opinion on the audience (by doing so, they are either worshiping their character or a view of their character that we may or may not share, in an obnoxious and unfair way).

(I do have to admit at least, it seems that negative opinions are generally more tolerable than positive ones. Everyone loves to hate, but nobody likes a goody two-shoes, and calling a character out every so often can be good for a story).

One could go even FURTHER to say that not only characters can be unfairly portrayed, but THINGS in your story as well. Emotions, objects, lyrics, perhaps even the plot... The list is quite infinite.

One way to avoid doing this is to show and not tell (not even show AND tell. Worry about showing). Be fair. It's almost as simple as that: keep your opinions out of it.

While super-strong, beautiful, all-holy princesses can be corny and obnoxious that's not always the stuff Sues are made of and certainly not the only.


FALSE IDEAS OF MARY SUE:

Many people who claim they hate "Mary Sues" actually just hate girly girls. Most of these people tend to be girls themselves, who are bitter at the stereotype and mistake it for Mary Sue or vice versa.

Others mistakenly believe that Mary Sues are girls who don't fight for themselves or rely on men. Regardless of whether that's stupid or not, it's NOT what Mary Sue means. One of these characters wouldn't be a Sue if the author portrayed them as an idiot. They would be however, if you were supposed to look up to them.

Yes, that's right: stereotype Sues made to make fun of Sues are contradictions, for Sues never make fun of themselves.
Also, Sues are not "characters who are underdeveloped." That is simply a bad character. Underdevelopment and Mary Sue characters, while they tend to go hand in hand, are not the same thing, and the absence of one doesn't necessarily mean the absence of the other.

When all is said and done, perhaps what we need to realize is that Mary Sue isn't a type of character, but a type of attitude.




Oh, and you know all of that goes for Gary Stus too, even though I used Mary Sue as the example instead of the less heard of male-version, right?
I tend to go back and add to this from time to time.
I'd LOVE to hear your feedback on this. Long comments are especially welcome!!

Proud Mary Sue hater forever!

EDIT: Another thing I thought of... It seems like Mary Sues boil down to the problem of narcissism especially since many people think of their Mary Sue characters as themselves (or something they want to be). I saw this stamp [link] and I highly recommend thinking about the point behind it. It falls into the same category as the whole Mary Sue/self-obsessed culture that there seems to so much of today. This is a rather excellent stamp as well [link]

Just for fun I'm gonna make a list of the most common types of Sues:
The "crazy psychopathic murderers"
The "sexy, butt-kicking ones that no one can get the better of" [link]
The "Random, crazy, hyper onez" (99% of the time being "random" really means being cliche).
The "depressed, deep, dark emo/goth/same-difference-always-dresses-in-black type"
The "warm/caring/friendly/a-million other adjectives that no one pays attention to" aka no personality kind.
For further cliches [link]


Fun fact: there is never, I repeat NEVER a need to state a character's breast-size. The end.
(In other words, avoid making things up out of narcissism and/or lust. It's unprofessional and lame).

I made a separate deviation on self inserts for more clarification: [link]
Add a Comment:
 
:iconlozgamer316:
LoZGamer316 Featured By Owner Edited Jan 11, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Someone made a SNK OC named Veena Civiliana (I think I botched the last name) I'd say she's a Mary Sue after reading this and looking at her stats. I do think her physical appearance looks kinda cool though. cherrypikkens' Just Be fic was wonderful and didn't portray the reader as someone "stronger than Reiner, kinder than Christa and Marco, more skilled than Mikasa, and more". It also made me cry... A lot :iconcraiplz:
Reply
:iconmetaknighta:
Metaknighta Featured By Owner Jan 4, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
So, a Mary-Sue character is a basicly just one of these ''super-mega-strong-sexy'' OC Girls?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015
Well, it could be, but there are lots of different types.
Reply
:iconladeary:
LaDeary Featured By Owner Dec 16, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Bravo. :iconclapplz: I shall strive for improvement, thank you.
Reply
:iconsda-messengersoracle:
SDA-MessengersOracle Featured By Owner Apr 1, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
So in summary, what I'm gathering from this and from some comments below, is that "perfect" characters, whether Mary or Gary, are those that have no need to grow/change, are always right in whatever circumstance, and are based off the personal motive of the author to promote the author's agenda. Is that about right?
Reply
:iconedenevergreen:
EdenEvergreen Featured By Owner Feb 1, 2014
Hmm, I usually heard the male version of "Mary Sue" called "Marty Stu" ... but either way, the same principles apply. :nod: That rose, by any other name, still has thorns! ;P

One way that "Mary Sue" types always stand out to me is if they steal the spotlight on a constant basis.

Yes, the main character (if there is one) should get more attention than the minors. However, a balance is still needful. Every character should get a little time in the spotlight, even if it's only a short turn.

The spotlight thing is usually what separates readable fan-fiction (you know, the type that actually has a plot and keeps all of the canon characters mostly "in character") from vapid nonsense.

Also, as you mentioned, the "show don't tell" part is crucial. Show the characters to the audience, and let them think what they will.

I saw a forum signature you might also appreciate: "I am willing to suspend my disbelief, but not hang it by the neck until dead." :)
Reply
:iconlozgamer316:
LoZGamer316 Featured By Owner Jan 11, 2015  Hobbyist General Artist
Pfft... Marty Stu? I think I laughed a little too hard at that
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Mar 11, 2014
Thanks for the comment.
Haha, that's a great quote. :XD:
Reply
:icontherebeunicorns:
therebeunicorns Featured By Owner Nov 15, 2013
[Wall of text warning!]
I really enjoy reading your essays. They're short, simple and make their points well.

I believe that Mary Sue is a character that the *author* thinks is so perfect that the character does not have to do anything but show how perfect they are for the entire story. The character does not need to change--- because she's perfect! She doesn't need to grow--- because she's perfect! The same can apply to characters that are purposefully given so many flaws it's unbelievable, such as the depressed emo. The emo does not have to overcome any of her faults! She's totally awesome being her depressed, lonely self throughout the *whole* story!  This Sue-author will beat me over the head with her precious character until I 'get' how perfect she is, even if she isn't perfect but flawed. This author treats her flaws/struggles as endearing qualities and doesn't let me form my own opinion. Thus something that is supposed to be a flaw or challenge the character becomes something the author thinks is (or portrays as) a positive point. Like you said so well here:

"You see, many people only pretend to give their characters "faults" by giving them something supposedly bad that they actually think of positively."

When I see a Mary Sue of course I start to dislike the story. Not because of the Mary Sue. But because of the story itself. The story does nothing for me. It doesn't go anywhere. I'm stuck in a loop of perfection with a character I don't like--- I don't like perfect characters, and I don't like perfection either.

"(naively assuming there is a plot)"

There is rarely, if ever, a plot in a Mary Sue story. The author thinks that once their OC is done, 99% of the work is done. XD Yeah, because coming up with a plot takes only 1% effort....lol, NOT.

There is one point you made I'd disagree with, unless I am totally misunderstanding you, and that is this line:

"One way to avoid doing this is to show and not tell (not even show AND tell. Worry about showing). Be fair. It's almost as simple as that: keep your opinions out of it."

I agree with keeping my opinions out of it, but if I only did showing in my original novel, it would be a million pages long. In order to keep pace while I'm writing my novel, I have to do both showing and telling. I show the things that are important, the things that add to character or plot, and sometimes I even show things like setting when I feel it plays an important role.

But there are many occasions when I find it most appropriate to tell instead of show. Let's say my character needs to run down the street to the house on the end. The running down the street is not all that important, it's what happens when she gets to that house that is important. Now, I could pointlessly describe every step she takes and what she feels while she's running, or I could sum it up in one sentence: "She ran down the street to the house on the corner." (which is telling) and save the showing for more important moments in the story.

A better example would be that I could easily get away with (or even prefer) 'telling' what happened to a character during her day rather than showing it all when it wasn't important (aka summarizing):

"I spent most of the day at school slumped over my journal and doodling. On the way home, I stopped and got a coffee.

When I came to the front door of my apartment, I noticed it was open just a crack. Heart fluttering, I just stood there staring. It was dark inside there, and the first thing that came to mind was not Oh my God! but Did any snow get on the carpet? I don't want any mold!"

Ahem. Maybe not the best sample of my writing ability ;_: but I kind of forced it out just for this comment, lol. As you can see, the first two sentences are 'telling' or 'summarizing' what happened during her boring day, while the next sentences go back to 'showing' or 'being in the moment' because something interesting has come up.

Err...now that I've written that wall of text I'm wondering if I misunderstood you. Maybe you were referring to only doing showing when it comes to portraying to the main character? If that's the case, I agree with you. My main character did not introduce herself by stating her personality. The first chapter shows her personality in what she does and thinks. There's a bit of telling in the second chapter, where she simply mentions that she is diagnosed with a disorder. But it is done as a part of a longer introspection that, with her constant worry and doubt, only proves that she does indeed have this disorder. The small bit of telling was done to make a point.
Reply
:iconyelinna:
yelinna Featured By Owner Oct 9, 2013
I think that famous anime characters like Utena (Revolution Girl Utena) or Ash (Pokemon) are Maries and Garies. You can feel the creator behind, trying hard to make them their idea of perfection.
Reply
:iconscourge728:
scourge728 Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2013  Hobbyist Artist

no no no

ash is just a lucky idiot

RED is the Gary stu

Reply
:iconzvarika1:
Zvarika1 Featured By Owner Dec 27, 2014  New member
You've got a point there.
Reply
:iconyelinna:
yelinna Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2013
Ash is a "Lucky Idiot", he he, I really like that :dummy:
Reply
:iconscourge728:
scourge728 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2013  Hobbyist Artist

 its true

 

Reply
:iconbiscuitdude:
BiscuitDude Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
If a character is predefined by the author as a Mary-Sue, then it's the writer's challenge to not glamourise those aspects that make them so.

At least, I think that's what you're getting at. Otherwise I'd be questioning my own characters. A case of it's all in the execution, not the concept, I suppose?
Reply
:iconhinata0321:
Hinata0321 Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
Another nicely written guide; again, really sheds a different (but still relevant and meaningful) light on the typical criticisms of "Mary Sues."

The only criticism I can give is that your language gets a bit convoluted at times; I've spent a minute eyeing the sentence "stereotype Sues made to make fun of Sues are contradictions for Sues never make fun of themselves," and while I think I can guess at the meaning just figured it out, but a comma after 'contradictions' might be very helpful :) Otherwise, the general... flow? Syntax? I think something about the sentence leads to difficulty in expecting that that 'for' is being used in the 'because' sense, but a comma would easily clarify the start of the new clause. Either that, or I was just too sleepy to figure it out promptly ^^'

On another note, in your artist's comments, at "there is never, I repeat NEVER a need to state a character's breast-size," I just about died of laughter. So true X'D
Reply
:iconlollipopwentpop:
lollipopwentpop Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
I HATE MARY SUES! ALL TYPES IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY! DIE! DIE! DIE! I AM GONNA CHOP YOUR HEAD OFF! sorry i gotta bit carried away. this is good it tells all those prats what a marysue is :) i hate it when people make a charecter and make them really perfect and then say this isnt a mary sue! it is!!! die mary sue! thank you for going this i m gonna shove it in all thoses people who make mary sues for normal (not for sue bashing though cios me and my friends write a lot of that).

hurray ! 

Reply
:iconcannedmadman66:
CannedMadMan66 Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
Pretty good input. I'll be sure to check out the updated version. But how would you categorize a Gary Sue aka a male version of a Mary Sue? I mostly create male OCs and I try not to make them out of this world and give them enough problems to start off on so that they can develop into being better people while still having some core faults.
Reply
:iconsome1eleven:
some1eleven Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013
You mentioned that you love to recieve feedback, so I hope you don't mind if I add my two cents... When reading it, I feel that you're very close to the point, but at the same time you keep missing it. You keep coming back to certain tracks, noticing that they're important leads to what a Mary Sue really is, but something still stops you at 9.8 before you can hit a 10. If you don't mind, here are some personal views of the issues. I hope they could prove helpful :)

First of all, it's a major mistake to consider a Mary Sue to be a type of character. In truth, it's rather a specific situation. That's why so many people get totally side-tracked when trying to define a Sue: they keep looking at the characters themselves. While certain character traits and archetypes do correlate with Mary Sues, the true reason lies with the author and their motivation.

Second thing is, the situation itself. You said it yourself, you just forgot to put a fullstop. A Mary Sue happens whenever an author wishes to impose his/her impression of a character onto the reader. Basically, the individual impressions of the reader don't matter. A Mary Sue is presented in a way the author believes her to be, and leaves no leeway for the reader to judge the character on their own.
That's exactly where things get tricky. A lot of authors do manipulate the image and presentation of various characters, often highlighting or exaggerating various traits. The thin line that separates these characters from genuine Mary Sues is whether the author can leave things just as a presentation, and then wink at the audience: "Well, that's all she wrote. So, what do you think? What's your verdict? Do you buy it?". A Mary Sue writer skips that last step. S/he knows better. S/he knows not only how s/he wants to present the characters, but also how the poor devil is supposed to be percieved. S/he has a list of all the correct adjectives that the reader has to use when describing the character, and s/he won't take a "no" for an answer.

These don't have to be any specific types of traits, the image doesn't have to be positive, and a Mary Sue doesn't have to be a girl. The essence is in making the assessment of the character for the readers, presenting this assessment as a fact and shoving it down the reader's throat. It doesn't apply if the descriptions or narrations are provided from a specific character's point of view, rather than author's own (an opinion of a single person is not a fact, it's an opinion. We're still free to disagree). This makes the line between a Sue and non-Sue so thin and hard to notice, and gets a lot of characters accursed of being Sues just because someone in the story presents them in a very positive light. 
At the same time, some authors are able to stretch the line in the opposite direction by creating exaggerated, over-the-top characters that are presented in a detached, impersonal manner. I remember once finding a discussion on whether Alucard from manga Hellsing was a Mary Sue. It ended with someone stating: "Alucard is not a character, he's a plot device". It shows pretty well how much a Mary Sue depends on the presenation core. Even an indestructible and seemingly almighty monster-on-a-rampage of a character can still be loved by the audience- as long as the readers are allowed to discover just how indestructible and seemingly almighty the character is on their own.

Third, it's not the character themself that we find so annoying. It's being robbed of our right to make up our mind about them. It's the feeling that the author tries to force their feelings and beliefs onto us. What we really hate is not the characters, but the situation itself.

Well, that's all I wrote :) So, what do you think? What's the verdict? Do you buy it? :D
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Aug 21, 2013
Interesting, so are you saying that Mary Sue isn't really a character... but an attitude? I like that (I added a line about it toward the end).

I also like what you're saying about characters who are presented too impersonally as well. I got that feeling about Katniss Everdeen from the Hunger Games. The author didn't seem to have a biased opinion, in fact, she seemed to have no opinion at all (in my personal opinion, it made the story a little bland actually). It seemed as if it might have done the story some good for Katniss to be called out in some situations, (if not praised at others). I'm leaning towards the view that negative opinions aren't as degrading as positive ones (and in fact, can be healthy in a story, i.e calling a character out every now and then, etc.). Of course, you have to be careful that you aren't giving them a "fake" negative portrayal, and that it's truly done so that the audience will think less of them.
In the same light, perhaps even positive opinions can sometimes play a healthy part (though maybe more rarely than negative ones, and carefully done). Everyone loves to hate, but nobody likes a goody two-shoes. That's why I think negative opinions are generally more tolerable (from what I've noticed. What do you think?)

I think you have a point about stating other characters' views. That only leaves us with the question: how do we portray the characters' views? In a way that the reader is meant to agree with them, in a negative way or neutral? The author would have to be careful about how they portrayed the thoughts lest they fell into the same trap of unfairly portraying the character themself.

Interesting points, I liked your comment a lot. Thanks.
Reply
:iconsome1eleven:
some1eleven Featured By Owner Aug 22, 2013
Very much so, yes. The same character traits can be used very successfully by an author with the right attitude.
Even with the examples I already gave, my personal favourite is Roland Deschain of Stephen King's "Dark Tower" series. The man has every single trait of a genuine Mary Sue: almost supernatural skills, unreasonable strength of character, is always- always- right and can get any other character in the story, no matter the gender, to fall in love with him unconditionally (to different ends, true, but still). Yet, all of these make him impressive rather than annoying. The reason? Stephen King himself seems to consider his over-powered character friggin' scary rather than amazing. Because of that, he never tries to convince the audience that Roland is the most amazing guy they ever read about. He just describes him with a healthy, "what-the-Hell-is-this-man?" attitude. The audience is free to buy Roland for themselves.
It all seems to boil down to an old good rule: 'Show, don't tell'. As long as you're presenting the positive traits of your characters instead of claiming s/he's got them, everything will be alright. People love strong, capable characters. It's something that never changed across millenia, even if you look back at Illiad, Oddysey, ancient Asian epics or old Viking tales. The whole trick is to show your audience that the character is strong, about providing believable proofs to that. When an author sounds so desperate to convince us how awesome their character is that they don't want to leave us any choice... It's only natural we start to suspect a hoax.
Frankly speaking, I find Hunger Games pretty bland in general. Most of the characters, Katniss included, feel more like plot devices than genuine people to me: I can't see their feelings, motivations, wishes and thoughts beyond the basic, surface ones that push the story onwards at the moment :/ Katniss definitely got saved from the Mary Sue label, but I feel it happened at quite a big cost. The whole story could use a little more of a human touch. Besides, it's not that it's not okay for the author to like their characters. It only becomes a problem when s/he thinks s/he's got a monopoly on telling people what their character is really like.
As far as the negative opinions go... Did you ever see a villain who is so pointlessly evil it just makes your eyes roll? One that tries to put Darth Vader out of the pedestal of the arch-villain of all times by killing babies, burning whole towns for no reason at all, executing his underlings for being in a bad mood and generally acting like his whole existence is based around proving what a horrible debased person he is? ;P
Yup, that's a Mary Sue too. Actually, I think it's the most common type of a Mary Sue in all fiction together. The basics are the same: The author thinks s/he's got a better idea than you do as to what to think about the character, and shoves it down your throat to the point where you just find it lame.
Portraying the character's views is all about just showing what they think, and why. The only trick is to leave your own mindset aside for a while and to imagine what your character would think in this or that situation. You're not trying to talk to the reader, to convince them of anything. You're not presenting a positive, a negative or a neutral point. You're just showing the truth. "This is what this character thinks. This is what s/he said. And given his/her personality, it makes sense." The author just needs to remember they're not the part of the story. The characters are. The author's job is to give a solid, objective relation on what the characters themselves see, think, feel, say and do. And whether the readers will agree? It's up to them. After all, the characters are merely presenting opinions, not a "one-and-only-truth". Whether they can convince the readers- that's another story. And that's what makes reading fun.
Reply
:iconlunawerewolfy:
Lunawerewolfy Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Your advise is kindof confusing? I mean, what would you like me to do to stop myself from writing Mary Sues? Would you like me to only write a stoires with characters I hate/dislike/have no opinion of? What if I really want to write a character who I know I am very attached to in one of my stories? Should I take a very long hard look at my characters to see if I really am in love with them? Do I get someone else to? Do I have to analyse my own writing in the editing stage to force myself to see if there's a Sue lurking there?

Your messages are a bit mixed, I see that it's not just perfect princesses who are mary-sues, but just annoying characters on the whole, but...? Should no-one acknologe their power? Should they not have friends? Should they always have apperance/personality flaws like being fat, smelly, ugly, annoying, bitchy, mean, vile, cruel, ect...? I mean, if characters are meant to be at least loosely based on real people, I know for a fact at least some of them have these traits, some of them really are quite nice. I'm not trying to be rude or mean or anything of the sort, your tutorial really is top-notch and something that needs to be on DA, but you just seem to be repeating the same message over and over, but basically all you're really saying is "Don't make bad characters," over and over. I understant that you're getting the message across that it's not the perfect princesses and humbly amazing schoolgirls that are Mary Sues, but it turns out more of an preach against Sues rather than anything that actually teaches you what you need to know.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013
Thanks for the comment, I'll try to explain my point the best I can.

First of all, I don't believe that the "character" is ever the actual problem when there's a Mary Sue. The problem is with the way that the character is portrayed. Honestly, it doesn't matter if the author does personally think the character is perfect; what matters is that they accept that their audience might not agree with their opinion. All that matters is keeping your opinion out of it (directly and a lot of times indirectly, as can happen in a story).
Example: someone could write a fanfiction about an already existing character (say, Harry Potter), and make him a Gary Stu, even though in the books he wasn't. It's never the characters we have to change, it's our attitudes.

I say to "keep your opinions out of it," but that mostly only goes for favorable opinions, whereas negative opinions (or calling a character out for doing something wrong) is somehow not considered as annoying. Most people don't like a goody two-shoes, yet love to hate. Just an interesting thing I realized...

As for "giving your character flaws," I don't necessarily think that it's essential to do so (though it can be helpful). If a character... for whatever reason... doesn't have any flaws, so be it. Odds are what you might consider flawless, someone else might find flawed anyway. It's only if you portray them as flawless that people will start getting annoyed. I'd say, just make your characters act however you want, just show people the way they are instead of telling them. And if your audience doesn't always come to the same opinion as you... that's perfectly fine and don't worry about it.

I hope that helps. :)
Reply
:iconlunawerewolfy:
Lunawerewolfy Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks that clears it up nicely. Don't be your own No. 1# fan, 'cause else no one else can. Okay. :3 
Reply
:iconkigamin:
KiGaMin Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I think one of the definitions of a Mary-sue, in a fanfiction at least, would be to make the canons totally OOC.
I mean, even if the character is fat, smelly, obnoxious, bitchy, immoral and such, if her behavior still makes the badass canon character behave like a total wuss, then that character is a Sue. If that character surpasses the canon characters in their special fields (for example, manages to tame an animal not even the animal-loving and animal-loved canon character could handle) or steals their script, then that character is a Sue.

Some people tend to think giving flaws to a character is enough to save her from the Mary-Sue land, except it's a trap; the point isn't to give flaws for the sake of it, but to create a realistic character and be careful about how the people around her react. Even in real life there are people who are fairly good and some other who are simply terrible, except even if they're saints, they still do wrong stuff and take bad decisions, make mistakes and have strive in order to improve. They're still insecure and have their fears and their thoughts that make them human.
Reply
:iconkeifeto-mccormack:
Keifeto-McCormack Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013  Student General Artist
okay im just saying this as friendly gesture. while i understand that you don't care for Mary sues, the way this is written in the beginning comes off as condescending and helps no one if they take offense. i understand of making people aware but it accomplishes nothing if some quits reading this because they don't agree with something. so I'm just suggesting a simple combining of clarification with main portion so it seems more friendly. because condescension hinders than grow others. my thoughts take it or leave it. i know I'm no saint and that my writing still needs a lot of work. but i know the characters enough to know where I'm headed and its a long journey to get there.
Reply
:iconsockgirl1126:
Sockgirl1126 Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013  Hobbyist Writer

Damn, this has taken the wind out of my sails as a writer. ):

 

As someone who creates bios for OCs for fanfictions (almost as much as I write them into stories, I enjoy writing the bios), this fear always scares me to death that I'm somehow writing a character who inevitably will be a Mary-Sue despite my efforts not to have her be one. Then, I find myself overcompensating for writing her into existence by changing a million things in an attempt to "un-sue" them, I end up changing them so much that I no longer write them or enjoy using them anymore. Then I abandon them. It seems the term itself lends a complex of discouragement to writers like me.

 

I do understand your deviation and I find many of the points to be valid, if not all of them. I do hate characters that lack dimensions or seem to be too perfect with no explanations.

 

I will say this: I wonder, is it ever truly possible to write characters the author doesn't sympathize with? Or feel is perfect to some degree? For some reason, I don't really feel like that is possible.

 

Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013
I know what you're saying, and I hope you don't think that the point of my deviation is to say that an author can't sympathize with their character (or yes, even think that they're perfect. There I said it). 

I was trying to bring the whole "Mary Sue," term to a new light. It's about understanding that, no matter what you personally feel about your character, you have to accept that other people may not share that opinion (since whilst writing for an audience we generally care about their opinions). I don't think the point is that we should change how we feel. I think that's a mistake a lot of people make.

The thing I am trying to say is that we have to be careful about how we portray them. That just means keeping our opinions out of it. I don't believe that any character is "an incurable Sue." I think that what any character is, no matter who they are, is all up to the author whose hands they're in. (Example: someone could write a fanfiction of Harry Potter and make Harry a Gary Stu, even though he wasn't in the books).

It's not so much about the characters, or how we feel about them, or even what we make happen to them as it is about how we portray them that determines whether or not they're a Sue. 
It's basically just about not letting people know your opinion. Being neutral. Showing instead of telling. That's why we read stories: to see what happens, not just to be told.

I hope that helps... :P Thank you for commenting.
Reply
:iconsockgirl1126:
Sockgirl1126 Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013  Hobbyist Writer

I can see where you are going with what you said.

I do apologize if what I said sounded like I was angry or upset, neither of which was true. I was more bemused and a little shaken when I read it.

So, if I understand correctly, its about being neutral in tone and not showing favor towards any one character over the other that has as much of a hand in whether an OC is considered a sue, as is the character itself?

 

Thanks again for replying.

Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013
No, you didn't sound like that. I hope I didn't sound like that or anything.  :P

Yes, basically. I said neutral, but I think it's mostly favoring that needs to be avoided, whereas calling a character out or otherwise negatively portraying them is somehow considered less annoying. (Maybe because people love to hate, but nobody likes a goody two-shoes?) That's just something interesting I've noticed xP

Anyway... I hope that makes sense. :P

Reply
:iconsockgirl1126:
Sockgirl1126 Featured By Owner Aug 17, 2013  Hobbyist Writer

No, you didn't either. I appreciate you taking the time to explain to me.

 

I would agree with your idea. People have no problem hating but I find, from personal experience that goody-two-shoes are just as hated. It all makes sense.

 

Thanks for everything! It all makes more sense now

Reply
:iconstram-shock:
Stram-Shock Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2013

This is really interesting. I love to write, but i always fear that my characters became the horrible «Hollywood style» cliché. When i read this, i realise that it's very difficult to create a character without create a «perfect imperfection». Even if i will have some difficulties to apply your advices, thank you.

 

ps: sorry for my English, i'm a french canadian...

Reply
:icondreanora:
Dreanora Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Nice to see someone who pretty much thinks like me ^^' Everybody has different aspects of what a Mary Sue is, but mine is basically the same as yours; somewhat clichéed characters whose "downsides" make them look even better. For example - it was a while since I roleplayed last time, but I've seen to many of these Mary Sues/Gary Stus who are mysterious, deep, depressed and the author really tries to make it seem like she/he is just innocent and needs to be taken care of. Then the author add a sad childhood and heartbreaking past just to get even more attention and make it seem like the whole world is spinning around her/his character :I Don't misunderstand me now, it's fine having a bad childhood, but some of these roleplayers make a very big deal out of it to get attention. It gives no space for the other roleplayers. I mean, since I try to NOT create characters who are Mary Sues or Gary Stus, my characters often end up being the ones trying to cheer up these depressed, mysterious people. Since that is pretty much what I would do in real life. However, it gets tiring after a while.
When someone makes an oc, I hope they make sure to pick a bad habit that SHE/HE considers bad. Not anyone else. Lies a lot, brags, has to rely on someone and therefore clingy, jealous, somewhat narcissistic, gives up easily etc. Once again, it's fine being depressed because of bad parents, but usually you've got ANOTHER bad habit that can NOT be blamed on a sad childhood. It makes a character a lot more realistic, and I do think many roleplayers appreciate that.
Just my thoughts. Please don't kill me.
Reply
:iconfrida2000:
frida2000 Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2013
Are you basically saying every oc is a Mary sues no matter what? Other than that this is very well put together and I agree with many people creating Mary sues base on what their interruption of perfection is.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2013
No, I think every existing character has the potential to be either. It's all in the hands of the portrayer.
Thanks for the comment :)
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Jun 19, 2013
If you do not mind, I would like to express my scepticism. Personally, I find the concept of Mary Sues problematic. The term itself looks loosely defined, everyone seems to have their own ideas of what it is. But then, I'm not sure it even matters whether something is a Mary Sue or not. But I guess the most important thing is that it seems to instill some complexes on budding authors. So maybe I don't get something and you can clarify to me.

Maybe we can start with this. Why does it matter whether something is a Mary Sue or not? Some may like them, some may not. But that's how it always is with characters, isn't it?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2013
Actually, the point is that Mary Sues are poorly written characters. It's a fact. Whether we like them or not is irrelevant.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2013
Ok, I see. So if taste is irrelevant here, what is it about them that makes them "poorly written"? In other words, it could be asked: how did one determine that this type of character is bad?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2013
A story that goes, "The boy walked down the street, the end," does not compare to Lord of the Rings.
In the same way, a Mary Sue character does not compare to a nonMary Sue character. They're cheap, shallow, obvious (note how most beginners tend to use them). They take no talent to write.

In the same way that some people may "like" the story about the boy walking down the street, that doesn't mean that it's a well written story, just as the fact that some people accept Mary Sues doesn't mean they are well written.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Jul 1, 2013
So then, if I understand you correctly, the problem is essentially that they are simple. So, if, again, we disregard tastes, I would ask what is wrong with simplicity. I think you would agree that there are many simple things which are also good.
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2013
The point isn't to say that anything is wrong. The point is the point: that they are poorly written.
Reply
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2013
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying everything is fine with them?
Reply
:iconmakingfunofstuff:
MakingFunOfStuff Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013
It depends whether or not you enjoy reading about poorly written characters. Generally people don't, no.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconsumgie1:
sumgie1 Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2013
Because, you see, it's like this. You are against Mary Sues. So that implies there is something wrong with them. And that's what I'm asking: what is wrong with them. I say it might be a matter of taste. But then, you say it isn't. So that implies there is something wrong with them objectively. And, if I understood you correctly, in your opinion, that would be the fact that they are simple. And now I question whether simplicity is wrong. And now you tell me "The point isn't to say that anything is wrong".
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconrakshiel-mogaidren:
Rakshiel-MoGaidren Featured By Owner Jun 17, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks for the clarification dude. I am *trying, and probably failing* to write a story where there just so happens to be a female and two guys who travel across a land doing stuff, and NOTHING romantic ever happens between them. It is difficult to keep the interactions at a subtly not-stated brother/sister relationship line. Then the fact that none of them are saints, and the main female is memory-wiped and my unknowing dupe/catspaw for dark seeming organisation that eventually turns out to be something like chaotic neutral leaning towards the good side. One of the dudes she travels with knows this, he is the one keeping an eye on her, both to try to make sure that she doesn't go insane from the (personal) memory loss, and keeps the narcotics to a minimum (as she has bad sleep paralysis and only one type of dream, so she uses a LOT of uppers to keep awake for as long as possible, falling unconscious or being knocked out seems to negate the dream) Dunno if she's sue, but I am doing my best to keep her from that. she is deeply flawed and I am trying to portray her as a human being, not a role-model. She fucks up later on, goes ballistic at her buddies alot (temper side effect of drug use) She has some heavy sue-related elements that I need to keep in check, but other than that I think she's ok as far as keeping the juvenile self-inserting role-model I-wish-I-was-this-person to a minimum
Reply
:iconeverydayartist:
EveryDayArtist Featured By Owner Jun 10, 2013  Student General Artist
I think you've really hit the nail on the head here. One thing I'd add to the 'never truly do wrong' thing is that I co-author with someone who has a total Sue and her character will change depending on how she can get sympathy in the scene. One minute she's helpless and cute and flirty and the next she's tough and anti-social and bad-ass. Personally, my fear is making a Sue and I think this little essay is something I'll come back to to evaluate my characters.
Reply
:iconshadowzabimaru:
shadowzabimaru Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2013  Student General Artist
Okay, while this is a good reality check for all the 15 year old trying to write fanfics or RP characters out there, the one problem i have with it is that you're making it sound like the only way to make a character NOT be a mary sue is to have them mess up big time with something. And that's not true. There are many ways to make a character be not-mary-sue and a lot of times it's in the little everyday details and don't need some big mess up. Don't get me wrong, big mess ups are good, but you don't need every single character in a story to blow up a building because they were careless or something and have it actually be their fault and everyone gets mad at them to make them not-mary-sues. Like you said, it's all in the portrayal and how the other characters react to it. But you also make it sound like if you love your characters, they're mary sues. Which is definitely not true, i love almost all my characters but i don't believe they are mary sues (at least not most of them, geez i sure hope not! @A@). They all have their faults and these faults cause friction with the other characters. And i don't mean they all hate each other or anything like that, but everyone has little squabbles once in a while and i think this is one of the keys of making characters NOT mary sues.
Also, i don't think you meant all these things i said. I just think that's what they kind of sounded like you implied.
Reply
:iconicanthinkofgoodname:
icanthinkofgoodname Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2013  Student Writer
Dammit! Now I have no idea if my characters are mary-sues or not!
Reply
:iconmissmiku-chanx:
missMiku-chanX Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2013  Student
finally! somebody explains what a Mary Sue is!
I've heard the term more than once on here, but never knew exactly what it meant. Thanks so much for clarifying! :D

I just hope none of my Ocs become Mary Sues... ^^;
Reply
:iconthaliat:
thaliat Featured By Owner Jun 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Glad I read this because it made me reevaluate my characters for my novel.

I have one character, and I kind of hate her, intentionally written to seem perfect so that the main character despises her for this near perfection. And said character is kind of a bitch in that backhanded complimenting kind of way. Except in the end she gets tricked into helping the baddies of my book, believing she is doing good. Meh, political power hungry baddies, they actually aren't terribly remarkable but quite good at going unnoticed in their deeds until it is too late...so said character has to deal with the guilt of betraying the actual good guys and that she was actually really wrong in her choice. Not really a Sue, but a bit of a mockery of a Sue.

The bad ass elf. She's broken in so many ways due to her back story (which is not in the book, it would never end if I told everyone's back story, lol) but travels with a small child who seems to be the only thing that keeps this elf from going completely berserker. Far from perfect, and I don't idolize her, and she becomes mistrusted by the group for the actions of another, which no one ever apologizes for. She is not a major player in this book, but if I write out the whole series she will be. She becomes more of a mentor, though. Not a Sue.

The child. She is kind of a Sue, currently, because she is adorable and even when she makes a mistake, she can do no wrong. Well, to all but one character. She suffered a trauma, but is still super happy...this will get fixed, the happy is more of a mask to hide her inner fears and nightmares which will be played out more. This doesn't get resolved. Salvaged former Sue.

The soldier. Guilt-ridden, brooding, and a bit of an arrogant jerk to a certain character. Also protective, mentor like figure for the main character. He lies, he has made mistakes, and still will because he doesn't want the main character to know how they are related. Saves the groups asses a few times, when they listen, but almost kills the child when they first meet (and a few other folks he meets). Not a Sue.

The thief. Might be a Sue, despite the flaws and mistakes and the fact the he repeatedly fails the main character's expectations...and spends quite a few chapters absolutely hating the main character for a mistake she made because everyone else around her lied to her and she believed them. Granted, if I were in his shoes, I'd hate her too. But, eventually another character makes him realize that some lies where told in an attempt to protect the main character, despite the cost to themselves, while others lied to her to have them removed. Maybe if he continued to hate her he wouldn't be a Sue, but the are the OTP for this series so eventually he has to get past it and forgive the main character. True she tries really hard to regain his trust but he stonewalls her, but he crumbles slowly and we see he still cares about her by the little ways he watches out for her even though he tells her she is a horrible person for what she did. Eventually he realizes he can't really hate her if he still cares enough to worry about her, and it does take another character to get him to fully realize this. But he is sort of the "perfect man" in these books, he is mostly funny and caring and kind and resourceful and hot looking to the main character. He's likely a Sue for me just because he is my idea of a good man but I don't portray him that way in the book, he is just shown from the main character's confused and, later, hurt point of view. I think for a lot of other folks he would not be a Sue.

The main character. Borderline Sue. Originally she was who I wanted to be, but as I began writing she, thankfully, evolved beyond that. She gained flaws that I hadn't originally intended on, she makes mistakes...she fucks up pretty big on two different occasions in book one, and makes some other big mistakes later in the series. She is hated and loved and some character's opinions on her change from bad to good and good to bad as the story goes on. She is gifted... in one field. She needs some help, but there are times she emerges as the hero/leader. She's good but not perfect and I try not to always show her in a favorable light, which I think just saves her from becoming a Sue. I may still tweak somethings on her to move her a little further from Suedom.
Reply
Add a Comment: