Welcome to Gaia! ::

Please note: Mary-Sue, for the purpose of this thread, is referring to a character that unrealistic (not in the 'fantasy' sense, either) or otherwise seemingly implausible simply because that's what the author wanted.

Well, for those of you who have been stalking my epic voyage through the writer's forum, you'd know that this is the third time I'm had a thread relating to the Mary-Sue. I will proudly admit that the first was a failure for reasons that are quite simple: I was an idiot at the time who barely understood it and needed help figuring it out. As I generally do, I wanted information from the public in creating a nice guide. Well, it failed about as massively as possible.
And then I wrote a nice (if not long winded) rant about character development that pertained to the Mary-Sue, and, while about half of the readers liked it, half of the readers it not. So again, I consider it a failure.

BUT! This time will be different. Do you know how I know? Becuase A) I know what I'm talking about now. And B) I am not writing a long winded story-version rant about characterization. So, I can't fail! Right? RIGHT!?!?!

Moving on to the point: The dreaded, accursed, horribly teriffying, most herrendoues creation in Writing history: THE MARY SUE!!! (and her half-brother and husband: Gary Stu)

So, what could Ryiel possibly have to say about he Mary-Sue that hasn't already been said in the three rants about Mary-Sue's he found in the links list before making this guide? Well, I'm glad you asked.

Picture with me. A man, long brown hair, and a beard. He comes into the earth without a human father. As this man grows up, it quickly becomes apparent that he is the epitome of perfect: kind, generous, humble, and unlike every other living soul on the blue planet known as earth, he has magical powers and is the son of a god. He spends endless hours imparting seemingly heavenly wisdom to everyone who follows him and his new faith, and he heals people both body and mind. Know who I'm talking about (We'll call him Jesus)

Now look at his life. Look at how he came back to life. Look at how he was perfect in virtually every way. Now treat the bible like a novel (despite the heresy in that request). By the definition of the Mary-Sue (the one saying that they have no flaws, and the one used by the Litmus test) he is a Mary-Sue. NOT JESUS! NOOOOOOOO! I have shaken the very foundation of your christian faith. All these years! All of them. You've believed in a MARY-SUE! (well, a Gary-Stu). HOW CAN THIS BE?! *a mob forms to burn down the church*

WAIT! WAIT! He's not a Mary-Sue (well, Gary-Stu!) I MEAN IT! He's NOT! I swear it to you.

So then, now that I've called Jesus a Mary-Sue and the entire foundation of the Christian church a terrible, evil, and vile creation of writing and probably committed the worst sort of sins imaginable *looks to sky for lightning bolts,* I'm going to teach you why I did not just do any of that.

The reason is simple: the definition of a Mary-Sue that calls Jesus a Gary-Stu is not the real definition of a Mary-Sue. *mob puts down the torches and sit quietly like good little children to listen to what the real definition is*

Alright, let's adress this question: Why does the definition of a Mary-Sue that says that a Mary-Sue is a perfect character without any flaws not work? Why? Well it's simple, a Mary-Sue is not a problem with characterization, it's a problem with setting (and I've recently come to the realization that bad reasoning is also a determinant of Mary-Sue) but characterization is a problem entirely independant of Mary-Sue. You may now gasp. *gasp*

So then, what is a Mary-Sue, and how can I be so sure. Well, the answer is simple, a perfect character (such as Jesus) is not a Mary-Sue. How do I know? Because everyone adores the Mary-Sue (in their world at least) everyone loves them despite that hideous scar and missing eye and the terrible peg leg that clicks every time they step. But Jesus, HE GOT NAILED TO A CROSS AND KILLED! (Which reminds me of my favorite quote from House: "Don't pin this on Jesus, he has enough nails in him" wink He can't be a Mary-Sue (well, Gary-Stu) because people HATED HIM! KILLED HIM! According to the very definition of a Mary-Sue that claims that he is perfect and a Mary-Sue, he is not. It contradicts itself. That definition is a paradox, and I have come to realize why: it isn't true. Jesus isn't a Mary-Sue (well, Gary-Stu) because despite being perfect, he was hated by some people and killed for it.

Okay. So, now that I've proven that even a perfect character can be a non-Mary-Sue, you have to ask what a real Mary-Sue is. Well it's simple: a Mary-Sue is a problem in setting or reasoning. If everyone in the world adores the Mary-Sue despite the fact that she is missing an eye and has a horrible disfiguring scar (that only improves her looks) on her face, that is not because of her. That's not poor characterization on her part. She's missing a god-forsaken eye! Don't blame her. Blame EVERYONE ELSE IN THE STORY! They are what makes her a Mary-Sue. The reason she is a Mary-Sue is because every other character (who interact with her, and thus fall under setting) loves her despite her flaws. They are the problem, not her. They are the ones who ruin the story, not her. She could be a perfectly good character if they would stop adoring the poor cyclops.

And how is reasoning a problem: Well, that girl whose so hot every guy in the world wants to have sex with her for all eternity (I'm talking about Angelina Jolie... just kidding people, just kidding) has to work to get her awesome appearance. She either has to A) Not eat. B) Go to the gym all the time. Or C) Have plastic surgery and lyposuction. If she does none of these, then there is a problem in the reasoning behind her character, but not a problem in her characterization. She is a Mary-Sue because the author didn't have the brains to realize that everything would be just fine if she went to the gym everyday.

You people (WF in general) keep asking "Is my character a Mary-Sue" and then you give us a list of strengths and flaws and expect us to help you? We can't. Your character could have 100 "flaws" and still be a Mary-Sue. Why? Becuase as I've illustrated (well, typed) a Mary-Sue is a problem in setting and reasoning.

And in order to explain even further why I hate the idea of the Mary-Sue in the WF: these strengths and flaws mean nothing. Everyone says "give them some flaws." What? Flaws and strengths don't exist. They don't. They were used in RPs to give a sense of control and tameness to the characters so that people don't have awesome character, these flaws and strengths have no place in original fiction (niether does the Mary-Sue to be truthful). In original fiction, we have something called a "trait" and that trait acts as either a flaw or a strength. You want to combat a Mary-Sue, you want to fix them, there is only two ways to do it, neither of which involve wasting time coming up with a crux or a flaw that ruins their character and the story.

You gave them some cool traits right? Some good ones that define them as a character. Now, take those traits, and find a way to use them in a positive light. They are full of pride, have a women love this man because he's so confident. Have her love the aura he has becuase he walks with such perfect poise and this great smile and this awesome "I don't care what you think because I'm great" attitude. She loves him for it. What a strength! Now write this same personality TRAIT as a flaw. Have him in a contest with somebody and losing. Have him angry, angry and arrogant because he's losing. Have his attitude get the best of him. Both arrogance and confidence stem from the same trait: pride. You've just sucessful won a battle against a Mary-Sue (well, Gary-Stu) The other way involves making this reasonable. With the example above about Angelina Jolie the hot woman who never exercises. Make her go to a gym. Problem solved.

And just to give you one more example: Edward Scissorhands (thanks to Workplace Boredom for the idea to use him as an example in one of the two previous threads that failed). Those scissory hands are a strength or a flaw, but a trait. Think about it: If he was trying to fight someone hand to hand, those scissory hands are going to pwn the other person like no tomorrow. One could swipe and the opponent is dead. Done. Great strength right? Wait a second, he's in the hospital, next to his wife (who apparently is a masochist because she doesn't mind him cutting her) and she gives birth to his newborn son. Cute little guy, all small and adorable. He's got your eyes, and your hair. OH DAMN! You cut off his head with your horrible hands. NO NO NO! You killed our baby. Those scissory hands are very much of a strength now are they. They seem like a flaw to me.

And that is the trick: A flaw is the same thing as a strength, merely displaying it in a different SETTING. Instead of the trait being useful to the character, it is detrimental. AND SHOW IT BEING DETRIMENTAL. Once you do that, the Mary-Sue is dead and that lovely character you worked hard to make can shine and be great. If the setting that they are in makes their traits work for and against them, then the can never be a Mary-Sue, and that is why the Mary-Sue is not a perfect being, because even a perfect being would be hated by the people around them (just look at Jesus)

I conclude with this:

1) F*** the Litmus Test.
2) F*** the cheap a** definition of the Mary-Sue/Gary-Stu
3) STOP MAKING THREADS ASKING ABOUT MARY-SUES!
4) I had to work extra hard on this. The last time I posted about a Mary-Sue I was kind of angry and harsh (though the person thanked me) I didn't want to be angry and harsh. I wanted to be definitive and objective. I feel I have accomplished that. Anyone who read that post knows just how nicer this one is. And I think it's structured better
5) You man now procede to say I'm right or wrong, have a sudden epiphane, love me for all of time, or even call me arrogant. I'll do my best to respond. But I gaurantee you that I'm right. I'll be able to prove it to you given any example.

PS: if anything was unclear, let me know, I will do my best to fix it.

Makes sense, I suppose. It's a new way of looking at it, that's for sure, so kudos for originality.

Personally, I've always been of the opinion that Mary Sue doesn't exist. Badly-written characters exist, but that's only because of the writers, not because of the characters.

For example, "Author A" can create one character and give him or her flaws/strengths/settings/whatever and make him the 21st version of Superman, and everyone will hate that character. Loathe. Abhor. A Wish-to-gouge-out-their-own-eyeballs-after-reading-it type of feeling. Like I feel about that whole Twilight travesty.

"Author B", on the other hand, can create a character with the exact same flaws/strengths/settings right down to the hairy mole on his left cheek, and everyone will LOVE this character. Adore. Worship. Wish-to-marry-and-live-happily-ever-after sort of feeling. Even if this character is a horribly deranged villain who steals candy from children and kicks puppies as a hobby.

Why is this? Why is character 1 loathed while character 2 is adored? Because in terms of skill and talent in the writing world, Author B kicks Author A's a** so hard that A's grandchildren are born with footprints on their butts.

There is also the opinion that Mary Sue merely exists in the eyes of the beholder. What someone sees as a Mary Sue (or her male counterpart), others may see as the greatest heroine ever penned.

For instance, going back to Twilight (because I can never have enough opportunities to thoroughly trash it), in my humble opinion, Bella and Edward are complete and total "Mary Sues". That is, really, REALLY badly written characters. The sorts that make me wish to gouge out my own eyeballs. But that's because Twilight, in general, is a really, REALLY badly written book. Had someone with actual SKILL written that book, I probably would've adored them, because I would have enjoyed the book itself.

But, should I dare to say such a thing to the 3,674,659,064 OTHER people on this forum, about 95% of them will probably form an angry mob complete with torches and pitchforks, hunt me down like a wounded dog, and then string me up by my toes.

Oh, wait. I just did. Guess I should start running now.

See? It's perspective, plain and simple. And since Mary Sue is nothing more than a figment of people's opinions, I don't think it's possible to really kill her.

I agree. I never actually realized that before, but I agree.
Going onto Twilight, because that idiot above you (just kidding!) got me thinking about it, and now I'm all riled up. I've heard Bella and the f*****t described as Mary-Sues, and I never thought they were. Because she was a posessive b***h, and he was a possesive, abusive *****. Now, your explanation seems to work better. I mean, the way people reacted to them was so off it was idiotic. SMeyer obviously hadn't been to high school in a while, despite having the fantasies of a high school girl.
By the way, the thing about Edward Scissorhands made me lol.

Chloe Sullivan fanfic in progress


Thank you thank you thank you thank you!!!! Oh goodness you have know idea how good it feels to be slapped on the hand for posting up those mary-sue topics it gets freaking anonying seeing them, they are spawning up like those twilight fangirl threads.

And you have created yet another great and epic post about the Mary-Sue, hopefully this will kill off the mary-sue/gary-stu threads, as much as I like The Dark Knight series, I couldn't help but send you this picture it just seemed to fit your topic title so well.



DEATH TO THE MARY-SUE AND GARY-STUS!!!! I am definatly going to subscribe to this little discussion it has a long list of helpful hints on it and it proves some serious points on how (even I) several people have posted up the mary-sue topics with only giving in a few flaws and crap like that.

Chloe Sullivan fanfic in progress


He he, glad you liked the picture, that is the only thing that came to my mind I laughed so hard at the title of your thread, and yes it must be true on who came up with Edward. Poor thing, doomed in the realm of twilight. I have read that first book.

And I have found several problems with it, yet it doesn't bother me to read it, what bothers me is the fangirls mostly. But seriously those characters in that story seem to be 2D atleast. After the slaps on the hand you gave me I really appreciate it.

Now I can just work on my characters and enjoying watching them as they grow while I right.

Thank you for questioning the hyperbole, it was totally necessary and helped advance this thread by miles. In fact, everyone should thank you for your useless comment. It was so enlightening, I think we should all sit down and discuss the merits of your ridiculous analyzation.