Welcome to Gaia! ::

This thread is for everyone, no need to apologize. I like the way you perceived this. And really, I can't think of a better way to explain it myself. Although, the Mary Sue should be a pick-and-choose thing. While you could permit Batman as an arse-kicking vigilante, he can't swoop out of a shrapnel dispensing situation with the snap of a finger. What I'm trying to say is that while Batman does have quite the arsenal, he can't get out of everything. I believe this is displayed in the test at one point (MAKE YOUR CHARACTER HAVE A FLAW OR TWO). I agree that a believable character can be a successful one. Making a character can be intricate and often blood-boiling work. I'd like to say to everyone that you should just make your character, whether it be based on the Mary Sue litmus test or not. After that, you'll be able to punch out every kink and quirk you ignited while writing them. And in the end, you will have a refurbished and believable character of your own. I hope I didn't discourage anyone from writing their character. That would honestly make me mad. That's not the goal of this thread, but to simply, like I said, punch out a kink or quirk.

Thanks, glad to know I'm welcome.

To make issue of your sentence there "I agree that a believable character can be a successful one." I'd like to argue that an unbelievable character would almost never be successful barring a very few exceptions depending on the genre. (Comedy for example, but that opens up a whole new can of worms.)

Also I would argue that the kinks and quirks are the things you need to keep. Shaping a character isn't so much molding them to perfection, it's more starting with that perfectly molded idea and running it against the pavement until it's sufficiently worn in.

I would compare it to a furnished showroom verses the living room of a house that has been lived in by big family for years. The furnished show room is beautiful, has had a lot of work put into it, sure, but you can tell something is missing. You have to wipe your feet before you walk in or else the owner's going to get pretty upset with you. You couldn't see yourself, or anyone, living there. That's your mary sue. The other room knows what life is. It may still look nice, or maybe it's trashed. Maybe it's welcoming, or maybe not. It's existence and the years that it's lived through shows. Maybe clearly, or maybe you have to move the couch to find that scratch on the floor. That's what creating a believable character is like.

Ah but what I think you were trying to say is just to make sure you fine tune things. Put a little effort in, right? That's always good.

Excuse me for a moment, I need to weep over how passionate I am on this subject.

Hun, I don't mean to offend, but I think you may be abusing the thesaurus a bit much. There'd be much less misunderstanding here if you'd type a little plainer, just saying. Words don't always need to be unique and interesting to be good- and not all words with similar meanings fit in the same places.

It's a beginner's mistake really, to think being a writer means to utilize a huge vocabulary at all times. Have a huge vocabulary, sure, but also have the wisdom to know when to use the right words, hm?

Well it does have to do with writing. But apologies, I suppose it's not relevant to our specific topic. I'm just having trouble understanding what points you're making and I feel like we may be arguing in certain places over nothing. sweatdrop

Ok, sure dude, whatever you say. XD

Hey, I told you I was having trouble understanding your posts because you seem to like to write in purple prose for whatever reason and you sorta just ignored it and went back to purple prosing at me like hard core about characters again. (And from what I could tell repeating everything we'e already been over.) So pardon me if I wanted to end the conversation.

I'm almost convinced you're in character right now to be honest. I thought this was ooc? If not then big mistake on my part.

But regardless, all I did was shoot you a little sarcasm. Sorry if that offended you.

The word rude implies offense: if you thought I was rude then you were obviously offended. Saying "I'm not offended but I thought you were rude." is a paradox.

I don't understand your writing because the language you use is flowery and detracts from the points you are trying to make. The things you've said have come off as repetitive and contradictory and I don't know how to respond to them. It isn't that I don't understand the words you're using, it's that the words you are using do not make sense in context.

Using "kink" and "quirk" when you mean to say flaw, as just one example.

Kink does not really mean flaw. Kink means more of a deviation. When something has a kink, it has a twist or a knot- something to be "worked out." As you kept repeating.

When used to describe a character or a person, kink would refer more to a sexual deviation, maybe a physical affliction.

Saying "Work out your kinks while writing a character." Would have been fine, as it refers to the writing process itself. But saying "Work out your characters kinks" Can mean something entirely different.

I would have been able to guess you meant it in terms of writing, except you also said quirk.

A quirk is something that stands out, but it isn't inherently negative. Quirk most often refers to an aspect of someones personality that is interesting or unique. Usually when writing characters, a quirk is a good thing.

Saying "A characters kinks and quirks" together in the same sentence is not the same as saying "A characters flaws." which is also not the same thing as saying "The flaw in writing your character." When you put kinks and quirks together it sounds as though you're referring to the characters inherent traits, as does the second expression, when I'm surmising what you actually wanted to say was the third.

All I'm trying to tell you is that word choice is important whether you're writing in fiction or trying to participate in an online discussion. When making a point especially, you need to be precise and organized; It doesn't have to sound nice, it just has to be clear to the person reading it.

Off topic, can I ask you? What is your favorite book? And Harry Potter doesn't count.

OKAY! This is good, this is literally my point right now.

You say, I can't put you in a situation where I pick what emotion you're are feeling.

I didn't. You did. You chose the words. The words conveyed a feeling. The words don't magically pick up on what you mean when you write them. The words already means a specific thing by themselves. This is why choosing words is so important.

When you say "I thought you were rude." it means "I'm communicating offense to you." You can't count on the person on the other end automatically knowing that you were objectively pointing out rudeness while remaining unaffected. I didn't pick what you meant. You said something that didn't accurately represent what you meant. Understand?

In writing there is no body language. No facial expressions. I'm not in your head. The things you write when you read them might make sense because you already know what they mean but someone else reading them has no clue. So when you're writing, try really hard to put yourself in the audiences shoes. Pretend you don't know what you were feeling or thinking when you wrote the words, and see if they carry the message you want.

Never read Mazerunner. I will suggest to you practically ANYTHING by Scott Westerfeld. My favorite of his are the Uglies trilogy along with the Fourth book Extras (kind of a sequal but really its own thing) And also the Graveyard book by Neil Gaiman. Do yourself this favor.

And read Harry Potter, for the love of god, seriously.