Thoughts about Mary Sue

[alias_sqbr]

I've read a bunch of very interesting posts recently about how Mary Sues are not actually that big of a deal (beyond being generally bad writing) and maybe telling girls not to write overly awesome female characters has some underlying misogyny. This post is not about that but is partly inspired by those posts on that subject:
Oh Mary Mary and the slash writer ponders female characters.

EDIT: Valid question: what do I mean by Mary Sue?
I personally would only call a character a Mary Sue if it fit all the major hallmarks: an original female character in a fanwork who is implausibly unique, talented, and popular, badly written, and has the canon characters and plot warp around her to fit the author's wish fulfillment.
But I have seen the accusation leveled at any original female character who is in any way cool.

So, two thoughts:

1)Why gender? Why should I, as a disabled Australian woman (to choose some of the ways I differ from the "default" of able bodied American man etc) be worried that my female characters are self insert fantasies, but not my male ones that are disabled or Australian?

For me, female characters are the default. They're who I like to read, and who I like to write (of the six prose stories I have up at AO3, four have a totally female POV, one is almost all female, and one is mostly male). So if I'm going to worry about overinvesting in a character it will be because of "non-standard" things we have in common, like being disabled. I'm currently trying to write a story about a male Australian maths postgrad and am having intense issues with over identification, figuring out how to write the situation with some distance is really hard, and this has happened every time I've tried to write Australian characters in the last few years (of course, it doesn't help with fanworks that I don't like much Australian fiction :/)

I guess the fact that fanfic fandom is majority female has a lot to do with it, all the other difference people have are too variable to make broad generalisations about. (And if people started saying "Disabled fanfic writers shouldn't write overly awesome disabled characters" it uh..probably wouldn't go down so well) EDIT: But that doesn't explain why individual female writers should worry about gender the most, and from for example the slash writer ponders female characters it would appear many do.

Anyway, do any other female writers have this issue, where gender really isn't the big stumbling block? What about writers who do not identify as female etc?

2) This section was posted to the dragon_age community first, the text is basically the same but there's a bunch of interesting (albeit spoilery and somewhat context dependent) discussion in the comments which I have summarised at the end of this post.

The protagonist of Dragon Age:Origins is a basically original character saving the day and having everyone fall in love with them, and this is reflected in much of the fic. And I'm not sure that's such a bad thing. EDIT: I'm not saying the character is a Mary Sue. I'm saying fanfic about her is, or at least could be easily read that way.

The way the game works you get to control a lot about your character: their gender, appearance, species, and social position are chosen to start and give you one of six origin stories. The choices you make can have significant effects on the plot, and since there's often no obviously "right" decision required to win the game it makes sense to just play your character with whatever personality and motivations seem fitting. The plot of the game you play is broadly the same as everyone else's so it's possible to share fic and have everyone get the references (assuming they've played all six origins :)), but I know my characters feel much more like my own creations than the main characters of say a Final Fantasy game.

People talk about "My *insert character's name*", and they can be quite different. For example, two spoilery comics dealing with the poor relationship between the dwarf noble character and her brother: Siblings (she's nice and it's all his fault) and Lady Aeducan Explains it All (she's a machiavellian back stabber)

I enjoy other people's stories and engage with the PC characters mostly as I do with canon characters rather than entirely original ones, but they're not about my PC characters, not entirely. They feel about as close as the characters in an AU fanfic do to the canon ones.

Two other things about the PC character: they have three possible romantic interests (there's four choices total but two of them are straight) who, if you play the game right, are clearly very much in love with the PC. These characters are well written and voice-acted, and attractive if you squint and use your imagination.
Also, while not a prophesised chosen one or anything the PC is canonically Made Of Awesome, while some of the origins start pretty beat down and spat upon, by the end everyone is going on about what a great, talented, special hero they are.(*)

All this combines to create a lot of stories about Totally Awesome semi-original female characters who probably fit the writer's idea of what looks cool having whoever of the romantic interests the writer finds most engaging(**) fall in love with them and saving the day from the Forces of Darkness before riding off into the sunset. EDIT: Which still doesn't make them necessarily a Mary Sue, but they certainly tick a lot of the boxes.

And while Sturgeon's Law applies, the stories aren't bad. I don't read everything that comes through the comms I'm on but I would say that the "Female PC + canon romantic interest" stuff is about as good as everything else on average and I have enjoyed quite a few of them. They're certainly not all Mary Sues in the sense of being nothing but wish fulfillment. (nb there's plenty of "Male PC + canon romance", "Female PC gen", "Fic about NPCs" etc as well) Personally I prefer "Female PC has canon romance go horribly wrong", and have written a whole series of them, but my id is odd :D (it also alas reflects the way my games have tended to go)

I was thinking about what other canons would create this sort of semi-original main character. There's other computer RPGs: the Final Fantasy ones I've played the main character's personality and arc is pretty set in stone, and with what little I played of Neverwinter Nights I didn't feel like my character was a real person at all. Apparently other Bioware games like Mass Effect and Knights of the Old Republic work like Dragon Age: Origins and have similar fic. People get very invested in their tabletop roleplaying characters of course, but those are genuinely original characters and those outside your roleplaying group won't care about them any more than they will any other original character.

Some things people pointed out when I cross posted this to dragon_age:

• There are no unambiguously happy endings to this game, so totally fluffy romantic happy endings require a moderate amount of handwaving and OOCness. Most of the origins are an oppressed minority in some way, and that oppression doesn't magically vanish by the end of the game. The one exception is the human noble (who still goes through a lot of crap and has to make some murky unpleasant decisions) and fics with that character as a protagonist are the most likely to be Mary Sue-ish.
  
• There's a difference between the game handing fanwriters a character who fits a lot of the markers of a Mary Sue as a protagonist who they can choose to make 3D and flawed or not, and a writer choosing to insert an OFC for no good reason.
  
• There's a specific subgenre of fanwriting which deliberately obscures all the details of the PC so that the player can mentally insert their own PC. See for example the comic Master and Protege by aimo. (I love this fandom, so many humourous meta-ish fancomics :))
  

EDIT: I have no deep thoughts, but it's interesting to commare to dating sims, see for example Starry Sky. Do people write fic for them I wonder?

Anyway, those are my two thoughts! I have no final conclusion, beyond thinking people shouldn't be so locked into rigid anti-Mary Sue dogma. I guess the two things I'd like people's opinions on are the fact that individual female fanfic authors are expected to worry more about their female characters being self inserts than the ones with whom they share other significant traits, and the Mary Sue-ishness (or not) of fanfic based on particular types of canon characters (eg the protagonist of Dragon Age)

(*)An aside: it's weird for me watching ads for the game which (as well not being a very accurate representation any actual scene of the game nor it's appearance) are clearly aiming this message at Manly Male Characters played by Manly Male Gamers. They felt rather odd aimed at my characters, who really aren't very manly. Especially the guys :)
(**)Though it's important to note that this may change for different characters with the same player, I know it did for me.

Comments

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

I would say gender is a big hurdle for most immature writers (ie fan fiction writers) because they have either hugely self-inflated views of their own worldliness or are painfully naive. Having said that though, it isn't at all unreasonable when you're a white, western female to presume that another white, western (Or maybe exotically asian!) female character of your creation is similar to you except for any differences you care to specify. That sort of 'fill in the blanks, where the blanks are what I think and feel' type of presumption and lack of imagination is probably what causes it?
This is generally because they are young and ignorant though, so it isn't particularly surprising.

It is a purely demographic thing. Most of your bad fan fiction writers that write self-insert characters are female and they generally make female characters.

As for dragon age, I think I don't agree with your definition of a mary sue character. If you play a female in dragon age you are powerful and awesome etc but that isn't what defines a mary sue. The path of becoming a powerful character and fighting the dragon at the end is just a textbook hero's journey type affair.
The Warden in dragon age isn't particularly mary sue-ish in my mind, they are just a powerful hero who is exceptional but is just a magnified version of whatever archetype (mage, fighter, thief) you pick. You do the same things as other people, you just happen to be better through experience and skill. Someone has to be the best, after all! It seems reasonable.

[alias_sqbr]

Crap, that was a stupid choice of cut text *edits*. I don't think a female Dragon Age PC is a Mary Sue, but I do think fic written about her very easily comes across as one (and sometimes is).

It is a purely demographic thing. Most of your bad fan fiction writers that write self-insert characters are female and they generally make female characters

The thing is, one could say the same thing about the other things many immature fanfic writers have in common, eg if you're inserting an American teenaged OC into a fic (especially one for say Dragon Age :D) the likelyhood that they suck is moderately high :)

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

It depends how you write it though. The Warden fails to meet a lot of the criteria for a Mary Sue. Whilst they are an individual, they don't have many truly unique traits, they don't have unique powers and a lot of things go wrong for them. Unless you're playing a human noble as well, your romances can end up pretty flawed.

It isn't the same though. There is a male version, the Gary Stu, that is less common because, well, generally speaking guys don't write about the Weasley twins having sex or Zevram and Morrigan or whatever. You were asking why Mary Sue characters had that defining characteristic of gender and the answer is "because girls write them" and the slightly more complicated answer is "because they are immature writers and writing a self-insert character of a different gender is too hard".

I'm not sure what you're arguing in that last bit. Yes, if you're inserting an American teenaged OC into a fic the likelyhood that you suck is moderately high (I'd probably just cut out most of that and say if you're writing fan fiction the likelyhood that you suck is very high) and that is true, it is just statistics!

[alias_sqbr]

Hmm. Ok:

I agree that since most fanfic is written by women, and Mary Sue type characters will have a lot in common with their writers, most Mary Sue type characters will be female. Thus from a statistical POV it makes sense to think of it as a gendered term, and if you see an original female character they are statistically more likely to be Mary Sue-ish than a male one.

But the idea I react against is that individual writers should worry more about their female OCs than their OCs who have other stuff in common with them, which I have seen around the place eg the slash writer ponders female characters.

Also I think that while the statistical genderedness of the term makes sense it can still got to bad place to only think of crappy author self inserts as a female thing, the same way that treating "mother" as a synonym for "primary child caretaker" perpetuates assumptions around parenthood.

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

Okay, I understand finding it a bit unsettling that fanfiction authors feel uncomfortable writing characters of their own gender because they are scared of writing bad self-inserts. I don't necessarily think that is bad though! It isn't even sexism, as male writers presumably have the same concerns.
The reason the worry is there is because they are immature writers who are using fan fiction as a lazy medium to write porn or explore a relationship without having to do the work of developing a setting or the rest of the characters. I think the very nature of the genre draws immature writers or, more generously, writers who wish to concentrate on a very tight aspect of writing. When you've got that mindset and you're making an OC, you should be *more* careful the more lazy you're being. When you write that character as the same gender as you then you need to tread delicately to make sure you don't just copy paste across yourself and just change the relevant details and fan fiction writers are particularly vulnerable to that trap in character creation because the whole genre is based on a lack of creativity. This is because gender is more important than most other single traits because it pervades every aspect of your life. If you're an orphan and writing about an orphan, sure, you've got to be a bit careful. If you're a doctor and writing about a doctor then you probably have to be even more careful, depending on how into your job you/your character are.

I guess I'm just saying that fan fiction writers are generally looking for a shallow exploration of a specific type and the rest of the story is just a 'near enough is good enough' vehicle for that and as a result you need to be really careful about not taking further shortcuts, and writing your same gender is dangerous like that.

[alias_sqbr]

Well I guess that's the thing: gender may be the most significant trait to worry about with self inserts for many other writers, but it doesn't affect me the same way, and I was wondering if I was alone in this.

(Also, going back to a previous comment, I second furikku's comment about Gary Stus(*) not being found primarily in slashfic. You'd find them in het, since most shippy fic by guys is het. There's some examples on the TV Tropes Mary Sue page, if you feel brave enough to google it :))

(*)EDIT: By male writers. I got sucked into TV Tropes and was reminded of all the slashfic by female writers which utterly romanticises male characters into fairly obvious author self inserts, there was one where Draco Malfoy basically becomes the Best Wife Ever, famous for his cooking and quietly yet competently helping Neville's worklife by charming his coworkers etc. Meanwhile Harry Potter etc band together to try and cheer him out of his pretty pretty angst.

Oh it's sexism, all right.

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

It isn't even sexism, as male writers presumably have the same concerns.

When male writers create, oh let's say.. a gorgeous hunk of a guy who is the very last living member of an entire planet, grows up to have superpowers, wears a red cape and saves the world daily, other men don't worry about whether he's a self-insert, they just buy the comics.

Men get superheroes, women get yelled at for mary sue.

I am sick of the mary sue stigma. I am pretty sure that much of the slash writing we see is because young women are afraid to write about women. And I see a lot of love lavished on various woobies who sure do look like surrogates to me.

When Xander of BTVS turns out to be the foundling prince of a demonic family and the only possible mate for Spike-- he's functioning as a surrogate for the author, but the women coo and ooh over that story where they would tear an original female character to shreds.

So.. no female characters equals no female characters. I would rather read failed attempts than this wasteland where women dwell not.

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

Yup! Superman, a comic written in 1932, is completely comparable to Lady Purple Eyes and Silver Hair Who All The Harry Potter Boys Want To Have Sex With in terms of literature.
I don't even know why I'm replying to this when you start with such a ridiculous premise.

I'll start by saying that, well, there are female super heroes as well and whilst that is a totally different can of feminist worms (In that they are often just female versions of male superheroes and are often super sexually charged) they are clearly a different genre.

Superhero comics and internet slash fiction is probably a little different?

Isn't Xander a canon character? Comparing a fan interpretation of a canon character to an original character seems also pretty pointless for debate.

You probably have an argument under there somewhere, let me know when you find it.

I'm not sure if this link will work but it pretty much sums up the level of objectivity and rationality displayed in your post

[img]http://forthehor.de/files/joyce/original.jpg[/img]

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[alias_sqbr]

While I don't 100% agree with dharma_slut's argument either (I will address it tomorrow when I have had some sleep) this thread is getting ruder than I'd like to see in my journal.

*remembers why I have a special journal with commenting rules and screening in which I usually talk about topics like sexism*

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's fair enough. Dharma_Slut's post just set off all my obnoxious response buttons. I hope the rest of the stuff I've said has been of an okay tone? I'll take it to my LJ or something if you'd prefer? I'm also perfectly happy to just stop, as I think I've explained my point of view relatively well in other comments on your LJ.

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

Nope, you come off like a mansplainer.

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

My evil penis makes me think Superman is different to teenage wizard slashfiction :(

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[alias_sqbr]

Before you were ok, but while dharma_slut was insulting towards your argument she wasn't insulting to you, so that was definitely an unnecessary escalation. And don't make me have to enforce the "No talking about your own or other commenters primary or secondary sexual characteristics" rule, which I had always assumed went without saying :P

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

I will never back down from a primary sexual charactaristic remark... :p

Contemptuous Arbiter? You really call yourself that? Is that fair warning, or what!

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

So your opinion is that the originators of superhero comics must be judged by different standards than fanfic writers, and and therefore comics show none of the problematic aspects of self-insertion. Possibly, because they are an older institution.

And also, judging by your Lady Silver hair, girls whom 'everyone wants to have sex with' are reprehensible as characters, unlike men who save the world daily. Presumably because the kind of social acceptance a young woman struggles for is bad, while the kind of social acceptance that comes from gratitude of the world is a good (and manly) thing to strive for. Oh, and supersexually charged female superheros (which are written by men) are also bad.

Furthermore, canon characters which are treated as surrogates for self-insertion, and in ways that warp canon are different than mary sues-- especially when they are male.

Is that a fair summing up, minus your rudeness, o contemptuous arbiter? A tip, change your name there.

Re: Contemptuous Arbiter? You really call yourself that? Is that fair warning, or what!

[tamerterra.livejournal.com]

I've seen your comments and such in meta a fair amount recently, and now I'm wondering why I hadn't friended you yet. Fixed!

Re: Contemptuous Arbiter? You really call yourself that? Is that fair warning, or what!

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

Oh, thank you! and back atcha :)

Re: Contemptuous Arbiter? You really call yourself that? Is that fair warning, or what!

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

I would say that different medias and different contexts must be judged by different standards, yes. Superhero comics may show problematic aspects of self-insertion but they are completely different.
Fanfiction or whatever about superhero comics probably has a higher threshhold for super powered characters I would daresay.

You're still going on with the superhero thing but okay. If you are reading a generally vaguely realistic story with a coherent setting and then a setting breaking character is introduced then you're more likely to wince and reject the character as a Mary Sue. Original fiction is more tolerant of powerful characters and comics even more so, Superman basically proves that. You can have female super heroes that get gratitude of the world as well.
Supersexually charged female superheroes are maybe bad, yes? That isn't at all what I'm talking about and the empowerment/fetishisation thing isn't really within the scope of the original post.

Yes, canon characters are different to fan fiction original characters.

Re: Contemptuous Arbiter? You really call yourself that? Is that fair warning, or what!

[dharma-slut.livejournal.com]

I would say that different medias and different contexts must be judged by different standards, yes.

In what ways?

Superhero comics may show problematic aspects of self-insertion but they are completely different.

In what way?

If you are reading... you're more likely to wince and reject the character as a Mary Sue.

Ah, but we are not talking about reading-- we are talking about writing. This post is about writing.

Original fiction is more tolerant of powerful characters and comics even more so, Superman basically proves that.

Why is that? More to the point, why does Superman prove that?

You can have female super heroes that get gratitude of the world as well.

Not in fanfiction you can't-- because she will be labeled a mary sue...

Yes, canon characters are different to fan fiction original characters.

In what way?

Everyone but me is wrong (it's a heavy burden I bear)

[alias_sqbr]

I think both of your arguments are flawed.

I agree with your basic point about the different responses to characters based on their gender, but I think canon characters are different to fanfic ones, and comparing original male characters to fanfic female ones dilutes your argument.

Superman is given more respect than Twilight, which is blatant wish fulfillment aimed at women.
Woobie!Snape is way more popular than Woobie!Bellatrix Lestrange.

Also, Superman is given more respect than the original hero of a spin off novel by a male writer. One can definitely argue that there's a gendered component to the disrespect given derivative characters, but it's not just about female characters by women getting less respect.

Hmm. And I'm not sure if Bella Swan gets more or less respect than woobie!Snape.

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[lit-gal.livejournal.com]

I read and write a lot of original fiction and I read and write a lot in Buffy!verse, so I do think she has a point there. Writers turn Xander into something which has no relationship to canon!Xander because they are afraid of writing a woman who is a foundling princess who Spike falls for despite the fact we have canon evidence that Spike very likely *would* fall for a powerful demon princess. So, being afraid to write a woman because they are afraid of being attacked on the "Mary Sue" front, they turn a canon character on his head in order to turn him into what they actually do want to read. It's odd... they want to read a wonderful, superpowered demon, but they hesitate to create an original character and they almost never create a female original character. When I create original female characters, I often get bashed, and I publish both in the erotic and mainstream (sci-fi) markets. There's a real bias against women original characters, much more than the males, and it sometimes is a little disturbing.

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[tattered-pinion.livejournal.com]

Fair enough! I guess I've never been part of a female dominated fan fiction group so I haven't seen that. All the fan fiction I've seen and read has been probably 70/30 male/female and is generally pretty devoid of both mary sue characters and claims of mary sue (Even when female original characters are written by females).

I guess it is a niche community thing then? I'm not really willing to go reading a whole pile of erotic fan fiction to find a counterpoint, so I'll take your word for it.
Yeah, that does sound a bit disturbing, maybe it is because people find female powerful original characters as 'unrealistic' because most literature has males in that role and it is a subconcious side effect of that? Pretty bad but hard to solve.
I don't really think the solution is encouraging Mary Sue characters though, I suppose critique should encourage writers to make believeable female main characters?

Re: Oh it's sexism, all right.

[lit-gal.livejournal.com]

But there's something in the human psyche that has always called out for that superhuman hero... that person with both incredible powers and incredible flaws. Oedipus rides in and solves a riddle that has stumped an entire city. Odysseus sails in and outsmarts the gods. Luke Skywalker flies in and destroys the evil empire. Human beings want beings that go beyond humanity. That's who we are as a species. Is there really anything *wrong* with that?? I will admit that the trope can be either well written or poorly written, but I really don't see anything wrong with writing it, even if it's not personally my cuppa

[furikku.livejournal.com]

There is a male version, the Gary Stu, that is less common because, well, generally speaking guys don't write about the Weasley twins having sex or Zevram and Morrigan or whatever.

1) The Gary Stu is probably equally common, just not in the same fannish circles.

2) As I've seen it described, the Stu is treated as an idealised masculine, just as the Sue is idealised feminine, but with the same reality-warping powers that make him the center of the universe. So it's not very likely that he'd show up in slashfic, just because he's a completely different sort of manifestation. It'd be like expecting a Purity Sue in... IDK, Warhammer or something.

here via metafandom:

[kaptainvon (from livejournal.com)]

Funnily enough, I was just thinking about how I started out in Warhammer 40,000 fanficcing, which... yeah, has something of a Stu problem. It can be slightly harder to spot in settings like that (one day, when I'm feeling really brave, I'll start writing about the hyper-masculine super-warriors who fight all day, are better than everyone and don't talk to girls, and how that has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO with what's commonly seen as the universe's target audience, honest guvnor, and possibly a bit on how the irony is probably lost and would likely inflame a lot of sensibilities anyway), but they're there. I know I've written my fair share, during that "writing from before I was twenty which is not worth a brass nut" phase.