LibriumArcana.Games

I'm not really sure if this belongs here, but I couldn't figure out where else it might go. At any rate, Im posting this thread because I'm curious. I'm familiar with the general concept of the Mary Sue, enough so that I know that not everyone agrees on what exactly a Mary Sue is. So, I'm asking how you define a Mary Sue character.

I'm also curious about something else; is the widespread dislike of Mary Sue characters a result of the bad writing/storytelling which often accompanies them, and if so, how is that distinct from a more general dislike for bad writing/storytelling? And if not, what is the reason for the dislike?

Honor Harrington.

That is very uninformative. What is it about Honor Harington that makes you consider her a Mary Sue? Is it her sex? Her status as a naval officer? Her rank as a naval officer? Her proficiency with martials arts, firearms, and/or the Grayon-style katana? The loyalty she inspires in her subordinates? The respect she commands from others? Her ability to pull victory from overwhelming odds? Her status as a noblewoman? Her empathic sense? Her bond with Nimits? A combination of the above?

And you neglected to answer my second question.

Her proficiency with martials arts, firearms, and/or the Grayon-style katana? The loyalty she inspires in her subordinates? The respect she commands from others? Her ability to pull victory from overwhelming odds? Her status as a noblewoman? Her empathic sense? Her bond with Nimits? A combination of the above?

We can start their. Honor is good at everything and is the first person in the long history of bonding with treecats to make the language breakthrough, because she is extra super special awesome. Everyone who is good and decent loves or respects Honor and can help her. Everyone who doesn't is evil and vile. Her personality flaws consist of not realizing how extra-super special awesome she is. Former enemies are converted after getting to know her for a while. She is, simply put, too perfect to be a believable character.

She does get put through the wringer, but that's not incompatible with being a Mary Sue. Terrible things can happen to Mary Sue characters, but they remain noble and virtous. Mercedes Lackey also likes to do that with her Mary Sues.

And you neglected to answer my second question.

Mary Sues are bad writing. They are projections or wish fulfillment characters that cause the universe around them to conform to making the Mary Sue look wonderful. Calling a character a Mary Sue is, by definition, an accusation of bad characterization and plot development.

I guess my confusion stems from the fact that, on several Mary Sue litmus tests I've looked at, a disclaimer is included, to the effect that certain characters may score highly on the tests, but not be considered Mary Sues because of good writing and characterization. If a character possesses the traits of a Mary Sue (as measured by one of the aforementioned tests), then the character must in some sense be a Mary Sue, but if the nature of a Mary Sue is to force poor writing and poor characterization, then how can characters exhibiting both the traits of a Sue and good characterization exist? If the one precludes the other, and vice versa, then it would seem to be a logical impossibility.

It's quite simple: you can have some of the traits of a Mary Sue and not be one. It's not that any single one of the traits make a Mary Sue, its possessing most of them in combination. Example:

[fangirl]
A rogue swordmaster from an evil culture of royal blood who is totally awesome and feels guilty about the bad stuff that isn't his fault and is totally handsome and brave and the Goddess loves him and he has this cool sword that only he can use and there's as prophecy about him that says he'll defeat the evil one and save the world.[/fangirl]

It's possible to have a decent character with some of those traits, but the combination of all those traits in one character that make it a Mary Sue. Honor Harrington is great naval commander, an excellent martial artist, can learn a new weapon quickly enough to win a duel to the death with it, wins multiple pistol duels, is gorgeous, everyone loves her, is the first person to make the breakthrough with treecats (despite those bonds being around long enough for the fucking navy to make exceptions for them), becomes best friends with the royal family, and so on and so forth.

A Mary Sue is like a black hole or a neutron star, its the total amount of these traits that push the character from plausible past the crap barrier and create the Mary Sue.

Is The Doctor (Doctor Who) a Mary Sue?

I thought Honor was described as looking like a horse in On Basilisk Station?

Cpl Kendall wrote:I thought Honor was described as looking like a horse in On Basilisk Station?

She doesn't see herself as beautiful, but she is. She gets a makeover and is drop dead gorgeous in either the second or third books.

Must be the third as I've only read up to the second book where she gets her face maimed during the attempt on the Grayson Head of State's life. I believe she was still disfigured at the end of the book.

Lost her left eye and muscle control as well as nerve input on the left side of her face. She doesn't response to regen therapy so cybernetic implants are necessary.

Is there any reason for the character to really rely on a team of peers, or can the character really do it on his/her own? If they can do it all on their own, then it's probably a Mary Sue. No one person is that good.

In the case of Honor Harrington, her "flaw" is essentially harmless and is too obviously supposed to make her tragic and sympathetic.

Destructionator XV wrote:Is The Doctor (Doctor Who) a Mary Sue?

Not really (As I see it). He's far from perfect, makes mistakes, his (good) companions often leave him simply due to how detached and alien he can be (Or ruthless), and his brains are more of a plot device than anything else (Along with his technology).

Happened across this article and thought I should share it.

The essay's author completely misses the point. Mary Sue characters aren't bad simply because they're self-insertions; they make for bad storytelling because one of their hallmarks is the ability to overcome any obstacle without harm or trouble; it's bad storytelling in the same class as deus ex machina.