Mary Sues and prejudice against female protagonists

[manic_depressive13]

Whenever I see that kind of fight I always imagine that all the thugs got together before the scene and said "Remember everyone, it's Amy's first day in the underground. Be extra special nice to her and let her think her punches actually hurt." Then when she leaves they go drink tea and discuss their favourite classical poets.

hahahaha EXTACTALLY..brilliant

[sub/]was that choice of name random or intentional?[/sub]

I did it to freak you out. That's your name, right? I'm Christina, nice to meet you.

 

[Erttheking]

I can understand why people want to avoid mary sues, they're perfect in everyway, everything goes their way, and everyone loves them, they tend to be annoying. I don't know what you mean aboout female heros, Hell, when I write I'm concerned I'm not making enough MALE characters.

 

[albinoterrorist]

I'd heard of Mary Sues before but never really had a grasp on what they were. So it isn't really just a badass character, but more a character who the world revolves around. I'm curious if someone like Sherlock Holmes (from the books, though I guess from the movies too) would be considered a Mary Sue? He's not really the type of character that fails very often I guess is why I'm asking.

Here.
40 chapters worth of Suedom should give you a fairly watertight definition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9R4hPY7Xgs

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Yes, I know there has been some discussion about Marty/Gary Stus in fanfiction, but it always seems to be considered a sidenote to the main issue of female Mary Sues. The TV Tropes articles always used feminine pronouns when discussing Mary Sues, and at least one article suggested that such characters are predominantly female.

That's because of the way female literature is written. Gary Stu's are often indistinguishable from normal characters because neither is well-defined in male literature. Female characters in female literature are overly crafted (not defined) to appear as blank slates.

Just in case that's puzzling. Men are undefined, Women are defined as blank. Male characters are there to be watched; Female characters are there to be inhabited.
(With all the manipulation of definition that entails)

Gary Stu's don't exist as much because men don't write "inhabitable" male characters. Batman is a plank; a force of nature. Joker, on the other hand, IS an inhabitable character - and he's the closer point to a Gary Stu - especially with the anarchy and Harley.

Sherlock? Again...Force of Nature. Moriarty is the Gary Stu.

Equally, Jacob/Edward are far stronger, faster, prettier, smarter, more agile than Bella - but Bella outwits them all by ...whatever reason is picked at the time. That's a Mary Sue.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

So, uh, anyway... Wesley being the 14 year old child genius that he is, knows exactly how to operate a starship even though that's supposed to take years of training...

Wes is a Creator's Pet. It's different to a Mary Sue/Gary Stu in that it's a child form, rather than the all encompassing, all powerful author insert.

 

[badgersprite]

To be honest, pretty much every protagonist in the history of ever has an element of the Mary Sue in them, heroic or otherwise. Even grizzled drunken bastards are able to be implausibly awesome despite substance abuse.

Personally, though, I think it's almost unfair to level accusations of Sue-ishness against non-fanfiction characters unless they're either blatantly obvious self-inserts or the entire fictional universe unironically jerks them off so much without reason that it makes them utterly intolerable, particularly because they've done nothing to deserve it and don't actually embody any good qualities beyond the superficial.

Male Mary Sues definitely do exist, though. Look at any online roleplaying or fanfiction section in a male dominated fandom and look for the part where a super powerful dude who's someone's invincible brother with a power level of six billion comes in to be more awesome than everyone else.

Really, though, what much of this boils down to is the simple fact that most media is aimed at men. Most media on some level fulfills male fantasies. That's just something we're used to. So, if we have something aimed at women, or a female protagonist, it's suddenly a lot more jarring when we see that same wish fulfillment foisted at chicks, or when that male wish fulfillment comes in the form of a hyper-sexualised fap fantasy T&A machine. That's just really all it is. It's a lot easier to point out how stupid and awful someone's wish fulfillment Mary Sueish analogue is when it doesn't appeal to one's own demographic, because we all would probably like to think that we're above that and that we like the things we genuinely like because they're good, not because they're trite beige sandwiches made out of nerdy teenaged wet dreams.

 

[lord.jeff]

Batman is a Gary Sue some of the time, he's been around for about 70 years had hundreds of writers, dozens of different personalities and some of those have been Gary Sues. I don't think Mary Sues make a story automatically bad as long as your writing the story as a parody around that fact it works, Austin Powers, Doctor Who and Batman:Brave and the Bold have examples of this. The problem with Mary Sues in serious stories is that it's really hard for the character to learn and grow during the story making them bland.

 

[michael87cn]

I have recently begun writing again, after about ten years of not once putting pen to paper, and I decided to start looking around the internet for inspiration and advice. I ended up on TV Tropes (naturally) and found their pages on all the different types of Mary Sue that exist.

I've known about Mary Sues for a while, and I've mocked them along with everyone else over the years. I also wrote a couple Mary Sue characters of my own back when I was a preteen. Several years later, after realizing what I had done, I was completely mortified. That was actually one of the main reasons I quit writing for so long. And I'm not the only one; I've heard numerous accounts of other people who quit writing, or at least quit showing others their work, when they were accused of being a Suethor. It really is one of the most damning criticisms a writer can hear.

It seems as though public opinion of Mary Sues has recently become even worse than it was back then, which probably came about with the increase in popularity of nerd culture and greater awareness of what exactly a "Mary Sue" is. In some circles it has become a full-blown witch hunt, with certain people and groups proclaiming themselves to be "Sueslayers" and the like.

It's true that characters like Bella Swan, who only exist as an empty shell for the author and audience to imagine that they're in a relationship with another character, are pretty lame in published fiction (though I remain adamant that what you do with your fanfiction is your own business). But it really seems that people are much too quick to scream "Mary Sue!" at any character who is so much as competent (and, most importantly, is female), to the point that writing a fun and entertaining story about a female protagonist has become nearly impossible.

Yes, I know there has been some discussion about Marty/Gary Stus in fanfiction, but it always seems to be considered a sidenote to the main issue of female Mary Sues. The TV Tropes articles always used feminine pronouns when discussing Mary Sues, and at least one article suggested that such characters are predominantly female.

This may be the case in fanfiction. But I would like to propose that infinitely more popular canon male characters in fiction exhibit Sueish traits than their female counterparts. Consider James Bond, Indiana Jones, and...this quote, which I found online:

So, there's this girl. She's tragically orphaned and richer than anyone on the planet. Every guy she meets falls in love with her, but in between torrid romances she rejects them all because she dedicated to what is Pure and Good. She has genius level intellect, Olympic-athelete level athletic ability and incredible good looks. She is consumed by terrible angst, but this only makes guys want her more. She has no superhuman abilities, yet she is more competent than her superhuman friends and defeats superhumans with ease. She has unshakably loyal friends and allies, despite the fact she treats them pretty badly. They fear and respect her, and defer to her orders. Everyone is obsessed with her, even her enemies are attracted to her. She can plan ahead for anything and she's generally right with any conclusion she makes. People who defy her are inevitably wrong.

God, what a Mary Sue.

I just described Batman.

I'm of the belief that such over-the-top badass characters have just as much of a place in fiction as truly flawed and believable ones. The fantasy, adventure, and superhero genres in particular really can't thrive without such characters around to keep us enthralled and inspired.

So I would very much like to see other people realize that there's nothing wrong with them--so long as they're well-written and entertaining--and that there is just as much room for female characters of this type as there is for male characters.

One particularly disturbing realization I made in my research was that there have always been people making the same points as I've just made, even since the 1970s when the term "Mary Sue" was first coined. And yet it seems to have had little to no effect on public perception of fun female protagonists. Maybe someday we'll get there, but I'd like to see it happen sooner rather than later.

Thoughts? Personal anecdotes? Requests for amazing hot chocolate recipes? Post them here!

You care WAY too much what people think about your writing. WAY too much. Nothing a human being ever writes will be FLAWLESS or PERFECT.

People that refuse to read a book because of a 'Mary Sue' are, to quote Family Guy "mm, yes, shallow and pedantic".

If its fun, its fun. Don't put more thought than that into it. You wrote like you did as a child, because you didn't have all that bullshit that gets fed into us when we become adults and stop enjoying our lives.

 

[Syzygy23]

That right there is the reason Mary Sue is bullshit. Batman is NOT a bad character. A normal human being who swears vengeance for the death of his parents and goes out into the night to serve out justice? Awesome! He has NO super powers, only the things he can work together on his own with his resources. If he were poor, he'd STILL manage to do a job of it. Batman thinks outside the box, while othert heroes thing "It's power time!". These are just the facts as I see them.

He is bad character. He has no superpowers yet he is almost flawless. Always succeeds and is just generally horrible pain in the ass.

Only reason batman gets a pass is because he is old. If newer superhero came around similar to Batman he would be laughed out of the room and just ignored.

Op.

Mary Sue is someone who is not only competent but flawless as well. You really don't have to write such a character to have an interesting and fun story. Indeed story which have someone like this will most certainly be unfun and uninteresting for anyone who reads it, not necessarily to its writer.

It isn't impossible to write an interesting female protagonist. Writers especially should understand that which makes characters interesting for readers are their flaws not their competence.

In my opinion there is no worse character in fiction than one who is perfect.

Batman isn't flawless, he fucks up all the time and people suffer for it. Just because he beats the bad guy doesn't mean he doesn't end up hurting more people if he HADN'T.

 

[JMeganSnow]

When people write about a perfect character that has no real flaw, it destroys the story.

Perhaps I'm wrong on that, though.

I don't think it's necessarily about having flaws. Richard in Sword of Truth has plenty of flaws--he has a stupid temper, he jumps to conclusions, etc. His flaws, however, never produce any negative result other than *angst*.

Another characteristic of the true Mary Sue is that everybody else is helpless without them, no matter how independent and competent they were prior to encountering the Mary Sue.

 

[TheFinalFantasyWolf]

Does anyone have an amazing hot chocolate recipe?

* 3 Tbsp sugar
* 3 Tbsp high-quality unsweetened cocoa
* small pinch of salt
* small quantity of boiling water
* 2 c milk
* scant 1/2 tsp vanilla

Combine sugar, cocoa, salt, and enough water to make a paste. Add milk and heat in the microwave until temperature is just right. Mix thoroughly, then add vanilla. Makes 2 servings.

Oh, so that's how it's done. I had no idea you needed so many ingredients. Instead of adding a pinch of salt will it work if I just cry into my mug?

I do think that female characters get scrutinised far too much. Unfortunately I catch even myself doing it on occasion. I don't even know what the fuck a female character is supposed to be like anymore. You can't make her too weak because that's sexist, you can't make her too strong because that makes her a Mary Sue. If she acts "feminine" you're stereotyping but if she doesn't have "feminine" interests you're just "writing a male character in a female skin". If she's sexual you're objectifying her or playing into male fantasies, but if she's not interested you're denying women's sexuality. Except if they use their sexuality to manipulate men that's good (or something?). What the fuck. Sometimes I wonder if I'm a believable female character or if my entire personality could be shoehorned into some archetype. So much for removing gender roles.

Mmmmm, Hot Chocolate :3.....Anyway, back on topic.

I agree with you right there, but perhaps that is also the problem. When the protagonist is a female, too much thought is put into what kind of a woman she should be, rather than what kind of a person she should be. More effort should be ut into how she reacts to the conflicts surrounding her, rather than how she acts in general.

 

[ElPatron]

ITT: Everyone is a Mary Sue

Batman is obviously not a Mary Sue. He exists to bring balance to the world, he doesn't "create" the world around it.

 

[Aurora Firestorm]

I think what the OP is trying to say here, is not that Mary Sues don't exist. It's that fanfiction readers are primed and eager to say that any female protagonist who isn't a canon character is automatically a Mary Sue.

This definitely happens. I believe the instinct to judge like that derives both from the law that says 90% of every medium is crap (hence, 90% of fanfiction is crap, and a lot of that crap is female Mary Sues, because Fanfic Writers are Female), and from the fact that a lot of fans really don't like to see original characters in their fanfiction.

I'm going to assume that the real Mary Sues are called what they are, and that the problem we're now dealing with is characters who aren't Mary Sues, who are labeled as such wrongly.

This is a thing. Some people just really hate OCs. Whether they're Mary Sues or not, some people see OCs as intruding on their precious canon and screwing things up. This is their opinion; they have a right to it; however, it's my belief that they should take themselves off instead of reading and flaming fanfiction that simply doesn't meet their style. Still, considering any powerful OC to be a Mary Sue is like assuming that all red food tastes like cherry cough syrup. Mary Sues are powerful, but that doesn't mean all powerful characters are Mary Sues. Not everyone thinks about this, though. Female + OC in a fanverse + powerful will set off huge alarm bells in their minds, and then they shut down further reasoning.

There is some logic here, because any OC powerful enough to compare with the Main Characters (who are necessarily powerful, at least in the end) is going to stand out and draw a lot of attention from everyone, because he/she is now on the level of Protagonist. This will irk a lot of fans.

Back to actual Mary Sues. Mary Sues can certainly be male (I believe "Gary Stu" and "Marty Stu" are the most popular names for them), but they're not as common because Fanfic Writers are Female. Most Mary Sues are going to be female because that's what the authors know best. Ergo, most people are going to assume that if a character is perfect and flawless and captivates everyone and dies heroically or whatever, that character is probably female. I'm guessing statistics will back me up here, though I haven't seen a formal study on it or anything. Hence, TVTropes will assume your Mary Sues are female.

There are plenty of Mary Sues in non-fan-work also, or at least "perfect author-insert characters." I hazard a guess that lots of romance is this way, just on a hunch.

I also agree with "Batman sucks," but that's irrelevant here.

 

[twohundredpercent]

Eh I don't think that it's like the girl characters that get that label don't deserve it. It's just that there's male characters that could get that label who do deserve it. They're all terrible really. But in the end it's the execution that counts.

I think Riddick is a better term than Mary-Sue. It's like an action character with like no backstory and personality with a dark sense of humor that isn't well executed. Like no butthurt prags can call you sexist for using that phrase.

Though I'm not sure if what I'm saying is relevant here saying as it is a fanfiction term and I do not read fanfiction because I am not a fat girl.

 

[Aurora Firestorm]

I do think that female characters get scrutinised far too much. Unfortunately I catch even myself doing it on occasion. I don't even know what the fuck a female character is supposed to be like anymore. You can't make her too weak because that's sexist, you can't make her too strong because that makes her a Mary Sue. If she acts "feminine" you're stereotyping but if she doesn't have "feminine" interests you're just "writing a male character in a female skin". If she's sexual you're objectifying her or playing into male fantasies, but if she's not interested you're denying women's sexuality. Except if they use their sexuality to manipulate men that's good (or something?). What the fuck. Sometimes I wonder if I'm a believable female character or if my entire personality could be shoehorned into some archetype. So much for removing gender roles.

Also, this. This, this, this, this.

We need to stop bitching at authors for writing sane characters. It's like if you do anything with a female character, you're a bad person. Hey guys, let's all write about men only -- oh wait, that's sexist!

Two hundred percent: I hope you were joking about that.

 

[PBMcNair]

I hate to think of Comander shepard as a mary sue..but he/she fits the description..espeically the "center" of the universe thing..well sort of

That really is a sad thought.I think I'll reserve judgement till ME3, can't be a Sue if every choice you've made in the past 2-3 years blows up in your face.

 

[The Funslinger]

Sure, except Batman sucks. James Bond sucks. I've never seen Indiana Jones. Overpowered, contrived, inexplicably skilled and "desirable" characters aren't fun to read about because every line reeks of bullshit.

Does anyone have an amazing hot chocolate recipe?

I may be able to see where you're coming from with the films, but the original Ian Flemming James Bond novels were based off of the combined experiences of him, Christopher Lee and such doing tons of undercover shit in WW2.

 

[TheDooD]

Does anyone have an amazing hot chocolate recipe?

* 3 Tbsp sugar
* 3 Tbsp high-quality unsweetened cocoa
* small pinch of salt
* small quantity of boiling water
* 2 c milk
* scant 1/2 tsp vanilla

Combine sugar, cocoa, salt, and enough water to make a paste. Add milk and heat in the microwave until temperature is just right. Mix thoroughly, then add vanilla. Makes 2 servings.

Oh, so that's how it's done. I had no idea you needed so many ingredients. Instead of adding a pinch of salt will it work if I just cry into my mug?

I do think that female characters get scrutinised far too much. Unfortunately I catch even myself doing it on occasion. I don't even know what the fuck a female character is supposed to be like anymore. You can't make her too weak because that's sexist, you can't make her too strong because that makes her a Mary Sue. If she acts "feminine" you're stereotyping but if she doesn't have "feminine" interests you're just "writing a male character in a female skin". If she's sexual you're objectifying her or playing into male fantasies, but if she's not interested you're denying women's sexuality. Except if they use their sexuality to manipulate men that's good (or something?). What the fuck. Sometimes I wonder if I'm a believable female character or if my entire personality could be shoehorned into some archetype. So much for removing gender roles.

That's pretty much why I ignore they whole Mary Sue bullshit because you just can't win. It's the same with male characters you can't make'em like Superman, Duke Nukem, Homer Simpson nor Cliff Huxtable without somebody yelling that's a horrible design.

 

[twohundredpercent]

I ain't joking. Deal with it.