ParanetOnline
McAnally's (The Community Pub) => Author Craft => Topic started by: LizW65 on January 30, 2007, 03:10:40 PM
-
Here's a fun test you can take to find out:
http://www.onlyfiction.net/marysue2.html
It doesn't work on all types of characters; for instance Crowley of Good Omens scored a whopping 74 points (irredeemable) and I doubt many of us would accuse the Gaiman-Pratchett team of poor writing technique. But it's entertaining. You can try it out on real people, too. ;D
-Liz
-
I hate those test with a passion. Not to offend you, since I know you were just posting in fun...but those things are rigged and slanted toward certain questions and attributes--not taking into consideration of skill level. If the skill level of an author is very good, he/she can write the typical MS and make her/him completely real.
Sorry, just had bad issues with that test...though, I think Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita should take it. I have a feeling Anita would fail...badly. I think one more book and she'll transcend into Demi-goddom.
-
Crap. I have to figure out which character to use on that silly test.
'cause I have about twenty or so which I use regularly.
Okay. I'll just use my crazy rapist/serial killer character, whom I named after Maeve.
...
...
...
LOL.
21-35 points: Borderline-Sue. Your character is cutting it close, and you may want to work on the details a bit, but you're well on your way to having a lovely original character. Good work.
These questions weren't extensive enough. They didn't get into personalities as they should've.
But just for fun, right?
-
Crap. I have to figure out which character to use on that silly test.
'cause I have about twenty or so which I use regularly.
Okay. I'll just use my crazy rapist/serial killer character, whom I named after Maeve.
...
...
...
LOL.
21-35 points: Borderline-Sue. Your character is cutting it close, and you may want to work on the details a bit, but you're well on your way to having a lovely original character. Good work.
These questions weren't extensive enough. They didn't get into personalities as they should've.
But just for fun, right?
It's all fun to you and me, but sadly, many out there in fandoms (fanfiction) swear a blood oath by it and judge OC's by that standard.
Like it was made by the President of the High Council of Original Characters or something...
-
Took that test for my Andorian Viper Pilot over on my Star Trek Simm. Thankfully I was only around a 15. Though some of my D&D characters and another favorite character of mine I write with probably score a lot higher...
-
I tried Starbuck and she scored around a 70. That's weird, if any character is not a Mary Sue it's her. ???
~She-Wolf
-
Usually you have to take the test for RPG characters your play or characters you write stories about. Almost any character could be a Mary Sue, depending on who's taking the test.
-
Oh man, I hate the term Mary Sue.
(I had rant here, but you don't really need to know my opinions on why the term "Mary Sue" is an invalid premise outside of fanfic...and I'd probably be preaching to the choir anyway.)
-
I dunno, I've seen some Mary Sue characters in the RPG setting too.
-
Oh man, I hate the term Mary Sue.
(I had rant here, but you don't really need to know my opinions on why the term "Mary Sue" is an invalid premise outside of fanfic...and I'd probably be preaching to the choir anyway.)
How is it an invalid premise outside of fanfic? Let me give you a true example:
Alice of Resident Evil. She was not in the original games, and by the time the second Resident Evil movie came rolling around she was outshining any original characters in the movie. Lets not forget she was a bioweapon with super strength and all those cool things. She also had a dark past. Oh, and she ended up killing a possible romantic intrest in both films.
Cummon, if that isn't premise for a Mary Sue, please tell me what is.
Besides, that's an extreme example. Mary Sue can be used to describe any female character who is too strong and not complex enough to counter balence. And why would a fanfiction character with similar qualities to someone like Starbuck for instance be dubbed a Mary Sue when Starbuck wouldn't.
~She-Wolf
-
Heh, I have strong view on this. YMMV (your milage may vary, take me with a grain of salt) Also, I don't mean to sound as agressive as I might.
Cummon, if that isn't premise for a Mary Sue, please tell me what is.
Because the definition of a Mary Sue tends to be a laundry list of "don'ts" and usually disregards the fact that a talented writer in original fiction can take that rule list of don'ts, break every single one of them, and carry it off so the reader thinks it's a great story.
See Jim Butcher - I believe it's mentioned elsewhere that a talking head is a no-no in writing, and what does Jim do? He gives us Bob. Who is a talking head, literally. He also took the premise of Pokemon--catching funny little spirits and training them up to do your bidding, which was a premise or plot someone else pooh-poohed on--and turned it into Codex Alera.
(They can also break every rule and come out with a poor character, too, which sounds like what happened in your example, but it depends on the author's skill, not the laundry list. You can have a character that's perfectly normal...and perfectly boring. That's bad characterization too. I guess we could call that one a Sleepy Boo? :D )
Besides, that's an extreme example. Mary Sue can be used to describe any female character who is too strong and not complex enough to counter balence.
In my eyes, that's called poor characterization, period. I don't like it being called Mary Sue because of the Mary Sue laundry list; you start down the road where any strong female is called Mary Sue, warrented or not, and it pretty much nixes the Hero category of characters, because the classical Hero (say, Superman) has a lot of the "traits" of Mary Sue. You start down the road where any hero character is a Mary Sue. And that's not true--see Starbuck, as you mentioned.
Really, the part about "Mary Sue" that really gets me is the laundry list that's connected to it. There's quizzes about it, even. So I don't use Mary Sue when I mean "poor characterization" because I don't believe the laundry list has anything to do with the reason the character is truly poorly made, the reason has to do with the skill of the author, and I don't want to give people the impression that I do think the laundry list factors into it.
And why would a fanfiction character with similar qualities to someone like Starbuck for instance be dubbed a Mary Sue when Starbuck wouldn't.
The reason I actually left BSG fandom was because fans were calling Starbuck a Mary Sue. Seriously.
But the reason a Starbuck-like character in fanfic might be a Mary Sue--she would violate existing facts about the world she's put into. Basically the world would bend, just for her. For example, lets put a Starbuck-like character into a Harry Potter fanfic. Starbuck has a special relationship with Admiral Adama--so naturally, in the HP fic a character like her would have a special relationship with Albus Dumbledore. Starbuck is a crack fighter pilot, and used to do sports--so lets make her a crack Quiddich player. She had a bitch of a mother, and I think a better relationship with her dad, so lets make her mother Slytherin, and her father Gryffindor.
So this hot-shot quidditch star that's a favorite of Dumbledore pops up at Hogwarts, and has a foot in each rival House. She appears out of nowhere. Maybe she replaces Hooch. Half the male cast wants her (Lee/Anders/Baltar/Zak all sleep with her...we can make that Sirius/Lupin/Snape/Some other wizard...). And she has an adventure. Stealing the raider/stealing the flying car a la Harry Potter...
Ewwww. For me, this sort of thing sort of violates the space/time of the HP universe, by making all these major changes, with no canon to back it up, even if it was written well. It's fine in the BSG universe, because that's where she belongs, and she has a long history of connections with other characters that we've seen. She IS a hero of the BSG universe. It's when you drop it into another universe that it starts to really warp the fabric of the universe, because it disregards known rules put into place by the original author of the universe. She's NOT a hero of the HP universe, and the reader knows it.
But it's easier to say "Another character with purple eyes!" then "This character violates the rules of this world." "Uh, what are the rules?" "Well, they're tacit...hard to explain" "You mean there are no rules." "There are, I just can't articulate them! Oh, frak it...she has purple eyes. She's a Mary Sue."
But yeah...my highly opinionated opinion.
Again, I'm mostly against the laundry list part of the definition of "Mary Sue". It's so popular, and so easy to run down and check off when you compare a character to it that any moron can use it to bash a character. See my Starbuck comment above!
-
I guess the thing I look for most when evaluating a Mary Sue is if the character is pure wish fullfillment for the author and dosn't serve any other purpose. Basically characters that are the embodiement of everything the author thinks of as cool or awesome, even the occasional weakness is usual a strong note for the character. If you ever play around in AOL Chat room simms (I'll go ahead and admit I used to ::shudders:::) a lot of characters on there are Mary Sue characters, especially if they're what we used to affectionately refer to as "Moders" (invincible characters that were too perfect). Maybe my definition of a Mary Sue is off though, but that was my basic understanding of the term from an RPG stand point.
-
Heh, I have strong view on this. YMMV (your milage may vary, take me with a grain of salt) Also, I don't mean to sound as agressive as I might.
Cummon, if that isn't premise for a Mary Sue, please tell me what is.
Because the definition of a Mary Sue tends to be a laundry list of "don'ts" and usually disregards the fact that a talented writer in original fiction can take that rule list of don'ts, break every single one of them, and carry it off so the reader thinks it's a great story.
See Jim Butcher - I believe it's mentioned elsewhere that a talking head is a no-no in writing, and what does Jim do? He gives us Bob. Who is a talking head, literally. He also took the premise of Pokemon--catching funny little spirits and training them up to do your bidding, which was a premise or plot someone else pooh-poohed on--and turned it into Codex Alera.
(They can also break every rule and come out with a poor character, too, which sounds like what happened in your example, but it depends on the author's skill, not the laundry list. You can have a character that's perfectly normal...and perfectly boring. That's bad characterization too. I guess we could call that one a Sleepy Boo? :D )
Besides, that's an extreme example. Mary Sue can be used to describe any female character who is too strong and not complex enough to counter balence.
In my eyes, that's called poor characterization, period. I don't like it being called Mary Sue because of the Mary Sue laundry list; you start down the road where any strong female is called Mary Sue, warrented or not, and it pretty much nixes the Hero category of characters, because the classical Hero (say, Superman) has a lot of the "traits" of Mary Sue. You start down the road where any hero character is a Mary Sue. And that's not true--see Starbuck, as you mentioned.
Really, the part about "Mary Sue" that really gets me is the laundry list that's connected to it. There's quizzes about it, even. So I don't use Mary Sue when I mean "poor characterization" because I don't believe the laundry list has anything to do with the reason the character is truly poorly made, the reason has to do with the skill of the author, and I don't want to give people the impression that I do think the laundry list factors into it.
And why would a fanfiction character with similar qualities to someone like Starbuck for instance be dubbed a Mary Sue when Starbuck wouldn't.
The reason I actually left BSG fandom was because fans were calling Starbuck a Mary Sue. Seriously.
But the reason a Starbuck-like character in fanfic might be a Mary Sue--she would violate existing facts about the world she's put into. Basically the world would bend, just for her. For example, lets put a Starbuck-like character into a Harry Potter fanfic. Starbuck has a special relationship with Admiral Adama--so naturally, in the HP fic a character like her would have a special relationship with Albus Dumbledore. Starbuck is a crack fighter pilot, and used to do sports--so lets make her a crack Quiddich player. She had a bitch of a mother, and I think a better relationship with her dad, so lets make her mother Slytherin, and her father Gryffindor.
So this hot-shot quidditch star that's a favorite of Dumbledore pops up at Hogwarts, and has a foot in each rival House. She appears out of nowhere. Maybe she replaces Hooch. Half the male cast wants her (Lee/Anders/Baltar/Zak all sleep with her...we can make that Sirius/Lupin/Snape/Some other wizard...). And she has an adventure. Stealing the raider/stealing the flying car a la Harry Potter...
Ewwww. For me, this sort of thing sort of violates the space/time of the HP universe, by making all these major changes, with no canon to back it up, even if it was written well. It's fine in the BSG universe, because that's where she belongs, and she has a long history of connections with other characters that we've seen. She IS a hero of the BSG universe. It's when you drop it into another universe that it starts to really warp the fabric of the universe, because it disregards known rules put into place by the original author of the universe. She's NOT a hero of the HP universe, and the reader knows it.
But it's easier to say "Another character with purple eyes!" then "This character violates the rules of this world." "Uh, what are the rules?" "Well, they're tacit...hard to explain" "You mean there are no rules." "There are, I just can't articulate them! Oh, frak it...she has purple eyes. She's a Mary Sue."
But yeah...my highly opinionated opinion.
Again, I'm mostly against the laundry list part of the definition of "Mary Sue". It's so popular, and so easy to run down and check off when you compare a character to it that any moron can use it to bash a character. See my Starbuck comment above!
You make some good points. Mary Sue is a bit of a broad term. And it makes sense that it should depend on the skills of the writer instead of a "laundry list" of don'ts as you say.
But let me say this. The scenario you came up with for a Starbuck-like character in a Harry Potter universe doesn't fit. A Starbuck character wouldn't fit in the Harry Potter universe under those specific circomstances. It also only speaks of the cosmetic parts of Starbuck's character.
But what about a darker story. About an auror with authority issues, but who's also a fantastic soldier. She drinks, she smokes in an attempt to numb her perpetual depression. She lacks most social graces when it comes to romance and only really holds casual friendships. She has all these problems, but when push comes to shove she'll do the right thing or die trying. Even if that means facing down five Death Eaters by herself. And lets just say she's with the Order of the Pheonix, and Dumbledore tolerates her because of her better qualities. She could very easily be a hero in the Harry Potter universe as well.
~She-Wolf
-
You make some good points. Mary Sue is a bit of a broad term. And it makes sense that it should depend on the skills of the writer instead of a "laundry list" of don'ts as you say.
But let me say this. The scenario you came up with for a Starbuck-like character in a Harry Potter universe doesn't fit. A Starbuck character wouldn't fit in the Harry Potter universe under those specific circomstances. It also only speaks of the cosmetic parts of Starbuck's character.
But what about a darker story. About an auror with authority issues, but who's also a fantastic soldier. She drinks, she smokes in an attempt to numb her perpetual depression. She lacks most social graces when it comes to romance and only really holds casual friendships. She has all these problems, but when push comes to shove she'll do the right thing or die trying. Even if that means facing down five Death Eaters by herself. And lets just say she's with the Order of the Pheonix, and Dumbledore tolerates her because of her better qualities. She could very easily be a hero in the Harry Potter universe as well.
~She-Wolf
Usually a Mary Sue isn't much more then cosmetic and what goes deeper then skin is very cliche. An author (or RPG player) that goes beyond that with a character is usually expanding them to something beyond a Mary Sue. You can get in to archetypeal regions of the character that have similarities with other well known characters and avoid being a Mary Sue, because in my experience a Mary Sue isn't much more then a skin deep character anyways.
-
I've seen Star Buck in action, and HELL no, she isn't Mary Sue...
This is a topic that really gets under my skin because frankly, I had posted one of my OC's on a live journal analysis group, and gave samples of the fanfic in question. They tore him apart not based on prose, or my skill level, but on the fact I made him related to one of the "canon" characters and reasonably attractive. It escalated to a flame war when I didn't go with what they "suggested" and I pulled the post. It did not matter how well I wrote him, as far as they were concerned, related to canon character=Sue. Which is bullshit. Same as those tests. And it pisses me off that people on these groups will make it a point to be as rude and demeaning to the author as they possibly can. Hello, all because you can't see the person, doesn't give you the right to behave like an ass. Some of these authors that they pounce on (or 'spork' as they call it in the fanfic world), are like 14, 13 years old. WTF? It's picking on a kid. There's no reason for it....
Anyway, I stay with those groups so I can smack them every once in a while when "critics" go off on a character for having purple hair, or having a "cool" name. And god forbid anyone is 'related' to anyone else...
Apparently, you have to heap dust on original characters and give them ridiculous flaws just to make them REAL.
*massive eye roll*
-
I've seen Star Buck in action, and HELL no, she isn't Mary Sue...
This is a topic that really gets under my skin because frankly, I had posted one of my OC's on a live journal analysis group, and gave samples of the fanfic in question. They tore him apart not based on prose, or my skill level, but on the fact I made him related to one of the "canon" characters and reasonably attractive. It escalated to a flame war when I didn't go with what they "suggested" and I pulled the post. It did not matter how well I wrote him, as far as they were concerned, related to canon character=Sue. Which is bullshit. Same as those tests. And it pisses me off that people on these groups will make it a point to be as rude and demeaning to the author as they possibly can. Hello, all because you can't see the person, doesn't give you the right to behave like an ass. Some of these authors that they pounce on (or 'spork' as they call it in the fanfic world), are like 14, 13 years old. WTF? It's picking on a kid. There's no reason for it....
Anyway, I stay with those groups so I can smack them every once in a while when "critics" go off on a character for having purple hair, or having a "cool" name. And god forbid anyone is 'related' to anyone else...
Apparently, you have to heap dust on original characters and give them ridiculous flaws just to make them REAL.
*massive eye roll*
That's exactly how I feel. When I write fanfiction with original female characters, lately I've just given up and taken to making them villains because I don't feel like dealing with the "KILL THE SUE!!!" reviews.
In my experience you can't even have a female character that's a skilled warrior without someone screaming Sue. And a female character in a relationship with the main character is a big no-no. That drives me crazy. Now, by themselves someone may not complain, but heaven forbid you have a female warrior that happens to be in a relationship with a cannon character.
I know what you mean about how they are mean to authors that are probably quite young. You know those sites that go through and tear a fanfiction story apart? Whilst claiming the author mentally handicapped? Well, when I wrote and posted my first fanfics when I was 10. Not knowing any better, my character was a bit of a Mary Sue. My story was put on this livejournal account and flamed, terribly. I was just a kid for crying out loud, of course the story was crap! That's part of the reason I'm so scared of making a character that's a Mary Sue.
However, your story is unique from the standpoint that I find reviewers tend to be more lienient toward male OCs.
I'm just curious, what's your definition of Mary Sue?
~She-Wolf
-
That's exactly how I feel. When I write fanfiction with original female characters, lately I've just given up and taken to making them villains because I don't feel like dealing with the "KILL THE SUE!!!" reviews.
In my experience you can't even have a female character that's a skilled warrior without someone screaming Sue. And a female character in a relationship with the main character is a big no-no. That drives me crazy. Now, by themselves someone may not complain, but heaven forbid you have a female warrior that happens to be in a relationship with a cannon character.
I know what you mean about how they are mean to authors that are probably quite young. You know those sites that go through and tear a fanfiction story apart? Whilst claiming the author mentally handicapped? Well, when I wrote and posted my first fanfics when I was 10. Not knowing any better, my character was a bit of a Mary Sue. My story was put on this livejournal account and flamed, terribly. I was just a kid for crying out loud, of course the story was crap! That's part of the reason I'm so scared of making a character that's a Mary Sue.
However, your story is unique from the standpoint that I find reviewers tend to be more lienient toward male OCs.
I'm just curious, what's your definition of Mary Sue?
~She-Wolf
Okay, this will be long. In my defense, I only did this to prove a point.
Here are some links first off: Great if you want to see mob behavior in action and see how nasty people can be when it doesn't concern them. Yes, my deleted posts are there as well, someone took screen caps (who I found out later was one of my friends on my friends list on LJ. Ain't that nifty?)
My stupid mistake (http://www.journalfen.net/community/clairvoyantwank/279449.html)
my stupid mistake continues (http://www.journalfen.net/community/fandom_wank/1028569.html)
Now, you are probably wondering what on earth possessed me to make a sock puppet and then post my OC on both Marysues and oc_analysis when I should have been confident in my reviews and feedback to know “Daniel” WAS NOT a Gary Stu.
A troll did it. Yep, one lousy troll--who I think was a friend of one author I flamed for having a Sue. I used to do that--flame sues, post them on groups, have a good laugh. I never realized how mean and cruel these things are to people until I was on the other side of that line.
Anyway this troll posted on Blood Ties (silent Hill fandom) on Fanfiction.net and I did the wrong thing and responded to them...as did my reviewers. Then I got worried that maybe Daniel WAS a stu--and with a huge brain fart--posted him on analysis under my real account, and then at marysues under a hastily made sock puppet. I just wanted to prove that people would take what my sock puppet said at face value and they wouldn't read the story for themselves (even when I posted Mary Sues, I always read the story. The author's skill level plays a huge part in characterization).
So, I received unfavorable feedback, particularly from two teenage girls, farla and redcoast over on lj. (They stay out of my way now...since I tore them to pieces when they approached me on my own lj during the fallout--my Lj is my turf, no one insults me there! So let’s just say again…they stay away from me now. ) Who decided it would be neat to not only insult me, but to correct my grammar on my PROFILE. Yeah...
I realized after posting on oc_anaylsis, that “my” version of Mary sue: Someone who is perfect, beautiful, powerful, makes canon characters OOC, and has the personality of a muddle puddle on flat concrete, was not the same as everyone’s. Elitists, those who DO make the laundry lists and label and basically want your OC’s as boring as possible (and to NOT be the main character as I have Daniel from Blood Ties) This is unrealistic, and frankly a waste of time. If you don’t like the OC, them click the back button. But no, they must belittle and be rude… and act superior to anyone who is insecure enough to post on those groups.
I also realized, that no, people DON’T read the story in question. They want to giggle and point, and if they actually read the story--they might not be able to do that. I purposely, under my sock puppet, only put half the details about Daniel--so that people would HAVE to read to get the full scoop on him. They did not, so I lost my temper and revealed who I was (bangs head on desk) thus igniting the entire flame war. I may have proved my point, but they were all pissed off that I HAD proved my point.
I deleted all posts to remove the source of the flames--since everyone was beyond critiquing and more interested in calling me names and insulting me. I did not run away like my so-called friend said a month later when she “confessed” she was the one who posted me on fandomwank. I did the exact opposite.
I made a public apology (yes even to farla and redcoast when they didn’t deserve it) to everyone who I got nasty with; apologized to all authors that I had sporked and flamed. Went back and deleted those posts--and went back and re-reviewed with better crits. I also stayed on Marysues and oc_analysis and stayed very VISIBLE--offering advice to people they jumped on from a more neutral and well-meaning standpoint. I also made a guide on helping authors on how to round out their Original Characters. My former friend claimed I ran away--I think not.
I had made my bed and lied in it. I learned my lesson, and am wiser now to how people are, and more confident in my opinion of a Mary Sue. Now I go, and when applicable, review “Sues” that are sporked everyday, and give them a better critique rather than the flames and rudeness they receive automatically. I also get in people’s faces when they spork a Sue whose author is 14 or younger. There is no need for that. It’s common sense that you don’t pick on a child. It pisses me off every time I see it, and I actively pursue those little bastards that enjoy hounding them. I’ve also noticed since I spoke up in the analysis group, more people who are like me are voicing their opinions to counteract the few who are asses. Like me, they don’t see a reason you must make your OC as plain and uninteresting as can be. There’s no need for it. Balance your writing and keep it real. All characters, even canon have strengths, weaknesses, quirks, families, memories, motivations, goals, fears, etc., etc. In fanfic and in original stories: make them beautiful, give them cool names, let them have relations with canon characters--but keep them real. That’s all that should be addressed.
I’m sorry they flamed you…but you shouldn’t let that stop you from doing what you want, or writing what you like. Screw whoever flames you or can’t talk with respect. They obviously have nothing better to do with their time than bitch--and they aren’t worth a second glance. If you want, give me links by PM and I'll take a look at your stories...seriously, stop making OC villians (unless you want to) and make what you want!
Funny thing though, during all that crap--my story received plenty of hits…but no flames. If it were so awful, why not flame me?
Oh yeah, took that test at the beginning of this thread…and Daniel scored a 20.
-
Please, tell us how you really feel. ;)
Actually, I agree with you here. The idea that a character has to conform to a certain set of rules to be considered a viable character is bogus. For me, there are two ways I approach characters. For the "main, main" characters (yes, this is how I classify my characters, hence failing almost every writing class I took), you build a character that you know you can keep interesting for however long the story is. That means no characters that are boring, whether they be a Sleepy Boo (great name ;D) or a Mary Sue. But it's not the rules that make these characters, it's the authors. Any character can be dull in the wrong hands, just as any character can be brilliant in the right hands. For my "kinda main" characters, they're built more to fit the story than in and of themselves. Again, the only rule should be that they fit the story and are interesting. No place-holders, and no blatant deus ex machina characters popping up. Things like talking heads are fine, if you can make them more interesting than a straight data drop. Bob's a perfect example of this; he reveals key information, but has a wonderfully twisted way about him that makes him great. So for the character you wrote, for example, the only things that should have mattered was did he fit the story, and was he interesting? If yes, he's fine, regardless of who he's related to.
That would make an interesting writing challenge, you know. How many Mary Sue rules can you break with a character and still keep him/her fresh and interesting? I might try it some day...
-
Please, tell us how you really feel. ;)
Actually, I agree with you here. The idea that a character has to conform to a certain set of rules to be considered a viable character is bogus. For me, there are two ways I approach characters. For the "main, main" characters (yes, this is how I classify my characters, hence failing almost every writing class I took), you build a character that you know you can keep interesting for however long the story is. That means no characters that are boring, whether they be a Sleepy Boo (great name ;D) or a Mary Sue. But it's not the rules that make these characters, it's the authors. Any character can be dull in the wrong hands, just as any character can be brilliant in the right hands. For my "kinda main" characters, they're built more to fit the story than in and of themselves. Again, the only rule should be that they fit the story and are interesting. No place-holders, and no blatant deus ex machina characters popping up. Things like talking heads are fine, if you can make them more interesting than a straight data drop. Bob's a perfect example of this; he reveals key information, but has a wonderfully twisted way about him that makes him great. So for the character you wrote, for example, the only things that should have mattered was did he fit the story, and was he interesting? If yes, he's fine, regardless of who he's related to.
That would make an interesting writing challenge, you know. How many Mary Sue rules can you break with a character and still keep him/her fresh and interesting? I might try it some day...
I have half a mind to do that myself...just to prove a point...
LOL, me and my "point proving." It gets me in trouble...
-
I feel like adding that I put a different character of mine in and he got a 43.
Here is where I voice my dissent.
Compared to the character I put in first, Sunde is a million times more unique, an actual person instead of a lifeless shell who likes to rape and eat people [my other character]. Just because he's sexy and happens to be a genius doesn't make him a bad character.
Does the question ask about his inability to control his impulses? His creepy, unsettling grin he gets everytime sex is mentioned? His addiction to any sort of harmful subject just for the sake of it? His irrational fear of women and any sort of commitment in his relationships? His bouts of fiery anger that leave him unable to control his actions?
The problem with the templates for Mary Sues is that rules, despite their usefullness, are generally obsolete. It is, as others have said, all about the authors.
But then again, I do not see even the most talented of writers making a perfect character who appears out of no where, saves the world and seduces the main character likable or believable.
-
But then again, I do not see even the most talented of writers making a perfect character who appears out of no where, saves the world and seduces the main character likable or believable.
Absolutely. And a good writer (read: a better writer than moi) could make a perfect character who saves the world and seduces the MC if they build up to it, instead of having the character literally come out of nowhere. Because then the character would fit into the story in a designed place. Would such a character be a Mary Sue? Of course. But he/she would be a Mary Sue who works, regardless of their sex appeal and large... well, brains for starters.
I have half a mind to do that myself...just to prove a point...
LOL, me and my "point proving." It gets me in trouble...
Somehow, I thought you might find the idea intriguing... ;D
-
Well the character for my novel scored a 9. So that's definately good.
-
But then again, I do not see even the most talented of writers making a perfect character who appears out of no where, saves the world and seduces the main character likable or believable.
Absolutely. And a good writer (read: a better writer than moi) could make a perfect character who saves the world and seduces the MC if they build up to it, instead of having the character literally come out of nowhere. Because then the character would fit into the story in a designed place. Would such a character be a Mary Sue? Of course.
You think ? I would not think so at all. A real character on whom an author is doing the work to make them credible is not the same thing as an auctorial wish-fulfilment fantasy.
-
You think ? I would not think so at all. A real character on whom an author is doing the work to make them credible is not the same thing as an auctorial wish-fulfilment fantasy.
Sorry, I meant according the "rules" of the Mary Sue that some people follow. In actuality, of course it's not. See, that's what happens when you type fast to get back to work. Thanks for the catch!
-
Sorry, just had bad issues with that test...though, I think Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita should take it. I have a feeling Anita would fail...badly. I think one more book and she'll transcend into Demi-goddom.
I deliberately ran Merry Gentry through one of those Mary Sue litmus tests and she got the highest score imaginable. Yiggh. Didn't surprise me in the least, since she's such a horrendous character anyway. I can't help hoping there's some salvagable plot buried in all that smut; the real problem with that series is the fact that the writing is so lazy. A more capable writer, or at least one who doesn't seem to be suffering from creative burnout, could probably make something out of the premise, other than a clothesline to hang sex scenes on.
That said, I believe it is possible to create a character that would, on a cursory inspection, fail to pass a Mary Sue litmus test, and yet be a good, well-developed character, depending on the quality of the author's writing and the care they take while creating that character. I have one character whom I've used in several fanfictions, an RPG and some original fiction, who narrowly passed the test, yet he's a generally well-received character. Sure, he has the cliche tragic past (or TWAGIC PAST!!!!111, in fan-kiddie speak): he was left to die at birth by his mother (a prostitute), was rescued by a poor but generally happy family who later had to give him up to a state-controlled children's home (the setting was a world where only licensed people could have children and unlicensed kids were taken into state custody and farmed out to people who met the licensing requirements, but couldn't have kids of their own for whatever reason), where he was later adopted by a wealthy couple who pretty much treated him like a trophy child -- but the guy pretty much let all that slide off him like water off a duck's back. Unlike Mary Sue (or her male counterpart Gary Stu), he didn't angst over it or try to use it as an excuse for people to pity him. His attitude was, "Yeah, sh** happened to me, but hey, I'm still useful to th' ladies... or th' gents who swing that way."
-
Myself, I think a Mary-Sue is a perfect character with no flaws that makes all the other, canon characters ask OOC. That's basically it.
And as for 14 year old writers... I'm younger, and I post on ff.net, with an original character (Rhiannon Brooks), who happens to be an amazing warrior in the HP fandom, and I still haven't gotten any flames. I'm almost tempted to hook her up w/ a canon character to see what happens. Of course, she's not a main character, just supporting.
But it's interesting. My favorite thing to do is develop a perfect character and give them one irredemable flaw. And my irredemable, I mean it makes a perfect hero into the darkest of villians. Lawrence is an example. Exceedingly handsome, 27 year old billionaire. Kind. Sauve. Cool. Collected. Intellegent. Perfect. Psychopath. Murderer of 18. Killed his father at age 14. Embezzled millions to start his business.
See my point? Those characters are pretty fun, but you can't use them too often.
-
But it's interesting. My favorite thing to do is develop a perfect character and give them one irredemable flaw. And my irredemable, I mean it makes a perfect hero into the darkest of villians. Lawrence is an example. Exceedingly handsome, 27 year old billionaire. Kind. Sauve. Cool. Collected. Intellegent. Perfect. Psychopath. Murderer of 18. Killed his father at age 14. Embezzled millions to start his business.
Interesting point, especially since ancient mythologies usually followed that pattern and they survived how long? They've also been redone several times but there's still that one character flaw that stands out and kicks them down.
-
Mary Sue isn't an easily defined term from what I found and discovered over the years. It can be well written. I have read stories where, by these tests, the characters are Sues but the writing was good. The characterisation was good. Things fell through like liquid instead of being shoved down your throat like an eating contest. Case in point, I'll use one of my own as an example. It was when I was getting the hang of writing (slightly translated into training wheels from a tricycle), so I started towards the Anita Blake section. This was loooooong before LKH went crazy and made me wonder "huh?" at the beginning, middle, and end of her books. I wrote in an OC. I wrote in plenty of OCs. I also crossed the thing over with Merry Gentry because I had a mystery that I wanted to explore that A Kiss of Shadows didn't. Looking back, it had a very mediocre start. Very much unimaginative by the state of name and characteristics when you compared it to a number of stories in the same category. And do you know what happened? The story snowballed. Reviews piled in as well as emails (especially my favourites of 3-paged emails). I remember sitting in shock, finally coming to realisation that a teacher had told me ages ago before then, I could write. Between chapters 1 to 35 (my first long story), my beta could tell me how she knew I was improving in writing. Putting chapters 1-5 next to chapters 17-21 was a vast improvement in style, characterisation, grammar, spelling, tone, and more. Heck my vocab had gotten larger from looking up new words.
As for criticism, some people don't take them too well. Others love it for the improvements they can make. Like fiches, you have to sift to find the ones that will help you. Relaying back another experience, there was story where the main character was the Sue that many fear and reject. Trying to be helpful, I told her that and tried to suggest things of why she might be getting 0 reviews. Such as not having the world bow down to your character's feet. She took the story down the next day and I felt like a heel for doing that. I was trying to help and it blew up in my face. There are people out there who would enjoy ripping a Sue to pieces. That isn't going to help. It's going to make the writer spiteful. It's going to make them clam up some more. They might be a very good writer buried deep down but because they committed the Sue sin, they might never try to surface.
Getting to the point, an OC, Mary Sue or not, is like fanfiction. It's a learning tool. It can make and break you on its own without people trying to smash you into the ground because you are not following their rules. Also, by inserting in a new character, it can help you develop a thicker hide to criticism and especially to flames because in the publishing world, you'll find reviewers who will tear apart your story soon after it's been advertised and sold on Amazon if you get there. Just look at a couple of the reviews given to White Night by some "professionals" who don't seem to have read the book.
-
My basic definition of a Mary Sue is a character that is basically worshiped by the other characters with little or no reason (except for maybe the random bad guy but no one likes him/her anyways).
Mary Sue can do no wrong. She has a lesson to teach everyone. She understands everything because she has "been there" due to her "Tragic Past."
It's fun to be Mary Sue. I'm sure everyone has a Mary Sue in the back of thier minds at one point in thier writing life. Most Mary Sues never make it to paper, or if they do, they are chopped down and turned into a more realistic character (hopefully).
Of course there are the opposite of Mary Sue (which I am guilty of creating). Let's call him Bobby Sue. They are the characters that are perfect but for some reason everyone hates them. There really isn't a cause for that hate, except for some superficial quality.
-
My basic definition of a Mary Sue is a character that is basically worshiped by the other characters with little or no reason (except for maybe the random bad guy but no one likes him/her anyways).
Mary Sue can do no wrong. She has a lesson to teach everyone. She understands everything because she has "been there" due to her "Tragic Past."
That's a very good way to define this literary enfant terrible in a very precise nutshell.
-
"Is your character a Mary Sue? "
Considering what I put them through, I really hope not.
-
Sorry, just had bad issues with that test...though, I think Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita should take it. I have a feeling Anita would fail...badly. I think one more book and she'll transcend into Demi-goddom.
Ok, this is my first post to this list.......... but THAT........
that damned near made me shoot coffee out of my nose........ > holding my sides<
I assumed by the next book or three in the Anita-verse, she'll be the G-d Emperor of Dune.........
no, wait, that's Jack Ryan......
zwinky
-
Out of curiosity, I plugged Harry Dresden in. Of course, I don't know Jim, so I left out the questions about "does your character do this thing that you would like to do" and just stuck to character traits from the novels. Harry scored a 68.
Karrin Murphy scored a 36 - still considered a Mary Sue by the test.
Bob is a 31 - "Borderline Mary Sue".
Thomas is a 57 - right up there with Harry as an "Uber-Sue".
Michael is a 35.
I'd say the test is skewed to make almost any interesting character a Mary Sue. Any character that comes up as a "non-Sue" on the test would be too boring to be worth writing about. You don't read novels about store clerks who do nothing particularly well, have no particular skills, and who don't do anything interesting, but that would be the ideal non-Sue to these folks. Hell, Waldo Butters would probably score pretty high here.
-
Mary Sue is a standard term for using the main character as your alter ego to insert the real world you into a bit of fiction - be it a fanfic or something else. Only you - the author - knows how much truth there is in that. And even then it might not matter. Anne Rice books = textbook Mary Sues but I'm betting that you've all read at least one of them and liked it. Jack Ryan = Tom Clancy's Gary Stu and again I'm betting that most everyone here as read at least one and liked it. It's all in the skill of the author. Most fandoms hold these quizzes out as the holy grail of what not to be because there is so much utter and total drivel (and I'm being polite because I can't call it what I would normally call it here) that gets written any given fandom. Most of it revolves around taking the author, making them, in the infamous words of Cartman, "Hella-cool", and then reshaping an entire plane of existence to enhance their "Hella-cool-ness".
If you want to write a total Mary Sue - I'd say go for it. What else do you know better than yourself? Who have you spent more time with? Just do us all a favor, and do it well if you do it. Forget being "Hella-cool" and actually write the *real* you into something. That might actually be kinda interesting.
2 cents....
RecentCoin
-
Forget being "Hella-cool" and actually write the *real* you into something. That might actually be kinda interesting.
Though if the real you is actually Cool, don't feel you have to hold back on those grounds.
-
Fun site, Liz! Afraid I don't really understand what a mary sue is, but thankfully my character scored a 12 and seems quite normal and interesting. I hope that means he's someone others will find fun to read and know. To be honest, I started wondering if I knew enough about my character--but since I feel very comfortable with his "wearability" I won't worry!
Thanks for the site! Meg in IA
-
Your Mary Sue Score: 33
21-35 points: Borderline-Sue. Your character is cutting it close, and you may want to work on the details a bit, but you're well on your way to having a lovely original character. Good work.
Funny thing is, I did this for a character from my story My Ideal (http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2346584/1/) - in which the character, Misty, is a total Mary Sue. She's my physical description, my tastes in music, movies, my beliefs, ect. A lot of my stories lately are Mary Sues, in fact, especially the romantic ones because I have no romance in my life and have given up all hope of ever finding true love. So I live it out in short stories instead.
The thing is, most of the test did not apply to my story. Except for the time traveling angle of the story, there's nothing super natural or sci-fi about it. Girl meets 70s rock star who seems to know everything about her, 70s rock star gives her a gift and reveals to her he knew her five years before she was even born, she gets thrown back in time where she meets 70s rock star before he's famous.
-
Funny thing is, I did this for a character from my story My Ideal (http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2346584/1/) - in which the character, Misty, is a total Mary Sue. She's my physical description, my tastes in music, movies, my beliefs, ect. A lot of my stories lately are Mary Sues, in fact, especially the romantic ones because I have no romance in my life and have given up all hope of ever finding true love. So I live it out in short stories instead.
As an odd note, I had to do that [give up hope] to find myself in my current situation (getting married in just over seven months)...
Anywho...To the point of the matter. Well, one of the characters that I've created scored me a nice number in the mid-40s. Which strikes me as odd. Sure he's a great warrior and immortal. He chose immortality to serve his country and king along with a group of four other individuals, he's not naturally an immortal. He can be killed, at least temporarily, and if the ritual is no longer performed he stays inbetween this world and the afterlife. After a few lifetimes of battle, you're going to be good at it and people will know who you are. :-\ Should he still not know the business end of a sword, axe or maul? Should he not try to find a couple hobbies to relieve the stress of all that carnage (again, with all that time to practice some folks are bound to know your skill level even if you have a wide variety of hobbies)? Now, what happens if the ritual is misperformed or corrupted somehow?
And he is responsible for thousands of deaths both directly and indirectly. The last time I checked, that was part of being a General/Warleader. It's going to be kind of tough to not think about things like that from time to time.
Aha!
He should be a completely inept warrior that feels no guilt for the lives he has taken or led to their dooms! And he should completely suck at anything else he does (but especially combat), because after a few centuries of making jewelry, gardening or learning the occassional language, he's not going to remember any of it...
Right? ???
But then I suck as a writer.
-
But then I suck as a writer.
*shrugs* So do I. But sometimes a story won't let me go until I write it. I hate that. I'd rather read then write.
I don't get, actually, how making your character beautiful or really good at something makes them a Mary Sue. To me a Mary Sue is when the character is exactly like you. IE: I wrote a fan fiction called Star Trek: The Mary Sue (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/2135575/1/) where I put myself and my dog in it. My exact description, my name, etc. Just - get to fight the Borg in one story and sleep with Spock in the sequel.
That is the ultimate Mary Sue. Now other stories I've written have characters that are nothing like me - but they do have super powers and fight super villians. Does a tall woman who's chosen to freeze her emotions and is beautiful qualify more as a Mary Sue then a character who's short, fat, and can sing just like me?
-
I found out one of my comic characters was, but she's the fan favorite.
-
To paraphrase Pirates of the Caribbean, the "shopping list" is more guidelines than actual rules. Plenty of really good, fleshed-out characters have characteristics of Mary-Sues, but they have things that balance them out. What makes the sort of Mary-Sue that people spork is when the character has nothing but Sue-ish characteristics.
I have no problem with moderate Sues in original fiction, as long as they're coupled with decent writing and an interesting story. However, it is good to know the rules before you go breaking them, so that you know your character's Sue-ish characteristics and can balance them out.
There are always stupid people who flame (give overly harsh reviews to) stories because they have nothing better to do. Usually, they have nothing worthwhile to say. Someone who is honestly concerned with the quality of your writing, and not just making you feel bad, will give you a well-rounded critique that points out flaws and strengths and doesn't just say, "OMG, thats a MarySue!"
In fanfic, the big concern about Sues is that they are often coupled with bad writing and/or mangling of canon. The stereotype of a Suethor in Lord of the Rings, for example, is a Legolas/Aragorn fangirl whose character exists only for living out her creator's romantic fantasies, and has bad grammar to boot. Because of this stereotype (which is not unfounded--many Suethors are like that), many readers start flaming the minute they see something that might be Sue-ish. It's unfair, to both authors and readers, but it seems to be an unavoidable part of the fanfic community.
-
I do have to wonder, if Mary Sues are so bad, why are my most popular stories the Mary Sues and my least popular the ones who are nothing like me?
-
Maybe A) you're a better writer than you think?
Or B) the folks reading are getting the same wish-fulfillment that you are writing about?
I'd say it's probably more of the former than the latter, but I don't have more than a hunch to base that opinion on. Besides, even a no-talent-hack such as myself has heard the phrase "write what you know" (which is why I'm a no-talent-hack--I know nothing about being a psuedo-immortal-Viking-inspired-general). Emotions and enthusiasm do come through the writing.
-
Maybe A) you're a better writer than you think?
Nah, can't be, my writing stinks. I rush it, don't edit cause when I do I tend to remove anything I feel "is childish" and it actually ends up worse then before, and am always short on diologue cause I hate writing it.
Has to be that they all write Mary Sues too and think that we Suers need to stick together.
-
This was a lot of fun and made me laugh.
I would love to see some folks take that test and find out the truth about the Mary Sueness.
-
To paraphrase Pirates of the Caribbean, the "shopping list" is more guidelines than actual rules. Plenty of really good, fleshed-out characters have characteristics of Mary-Sues, but they have things that balance them out. What makes the sort of Mary-Sue that people spork is when the character has nothing but Sue-ish characteristics.
I have no problem with moderate Sues in original fiction, as long as they're coupled with decent writing and an interesting story. However, it is good to know the rules before you go breaking them, so that you know your character's Sue-ish characteristics and can balance them out.
There are always stupid people who flame (give overly harsh reviews to) stories because they have nothing better to do. Usually, they have nothing worthwhile to say. Someone who is honestly concerned with the quality of your writing, and not just making you feel bad, will give you a well-rounded critique that points out flaws and strengths and doesn't just say, "OMG, thats a MarySue!"
In fanfic, the big concern about Sues is that they are often coupled with bad writing and/or mangling of canon. The stereotype of a Suethor in Lord of the Rings, for example, is a Legolas/Aragorn fangirl whose character exists only for living out her creator's romantic fantasies, and has bad grammar to boot. Because of this stereotype (which is not unfounded--many Suethors are like that), many readers start flaming the minute they see something that might be Sue-ish. It's unfair, to both authors and readers, but it seems to be an unavoidable part of the fanfic community.
Yeah, I've figured out the cliche Mary Sues in several fandoms: in the "Matrix" series, most Mary Sues are "OMG TEH REEL WUN!!1111", or "Neo's-twin-just-not-mentioned-in-the-movies-who-goes-out-and-kills-the-Merovingian-and-the-Machines", or some random girl who gets kidnapped by the Merovingian and becomes the Mercury Twins's girlfriend. In "Hellsing", she seems to be some random girl who gets rescued/turned into a vampire by Alucard and/or becomes his girlfriend, whereupon Integra and/or Seras get "SEW JELLUS!11111" over the new girl.
Canon Sues of either gender (males are usually called Gary Stu or Harry Stu) are just as possible. I've mentioned Laurell K. Hamillton's Merry Gentry, but Dan Brown's Robert Langdon is another candidate: he's so special, he even has a job teaching a course that doesn't exist in any known university, much less at Harvard University. As is Sophie Neveu in "The DaVinci Code"; she's such a Sue that I tend to refer to her as Marie-Suzette since she's French.
Mind you, I can take a well-written Sue, but if -- as in the case of fanfiction -- the story is fraught with bad spelling, bad grammar, blatantly obvious lack of research, horrible logic violations (as in the case of the Mary Sue that told her friend she was seven months pregnant with the baby of the Sue-thor's obvious favorite male character, and said friend asked Mary Sue why she didn't look pregnant; replies Mary Sue, "Oh, I had surgery so I wouldn't look fat."), and canon character bashing (case in point, all those "Matrix" Sues who kill the Merovingian just because the Sue-thor hates him), I feel obliged to get out the scythe and do a little reaping.
-
150 Years Of Mary Sue, by Pat Pfliegar (http://www.merrycoz.org/papers/MARYSUE.HTM). Fascinating and insightful essay on the phenomenon.
-
150 Years Of Mary Sue, by Pat Pfliegar (http://www.merrycoz.org/papers/MARYSUE.HTM). Fascinating and insightful essay on the phenomenon.
Love that article! The late, great "Kielle" has this linked to her wonderful website, subreality.com, which features tons of articles, both pro-, anti-, and contra-Sue.
-
Based only on what I've seen in all six season, Jack Bauer came out with a 46 on the Mary Sue test, meaning he is somewhat of a Gary Stu. I would've though the score would be higher, but since it's not my character, I couldn't answer everything.
By the way, Samurphy, I KNEW Dresden was a GS. Thanks for doing the test for him.
-
By the way, Samurphy, I KNEW Dresden was a GS. Thanks for doing the test for him.
Naw, Harry's no GS: He *would* be if he'd gotten more AWSUM POWAHS!11111 after having that horizontal tango with Susan in Death Masks. Getting the gift (or curse) of Hellfire doesn't count since there's so many strings attached to his connection with Lash.
-
You should do the test for him if you don't believe us. There's a lot more that is considered GS-ism that just that. ;)
-
You should do the test for him if you don't believe us. There's a lot more that is considered GS-ism that just that. ;)
I think this just goes to provide more evidence that the test is a load of dingo's kidneys, myself.
-
I think this just goes to provide more evidence that the test is a load of dingo's kidneys, myself.
As was said above, the test is more like a set of guidelines than a set of rules. Mary Sues/Gary Stus/Arry Oos (yes, Arry Oo is sometimes used as a non-gender-specific version of the term) tend to have a lot of the qualities listed, as well as flawed writing and a strong whiff of wish-fulfillment.
-
It's so nice to see people talk common sense for a change.
I think this just goes to provide more evidence that the test is a load of dingo's kidneys, myself.
I love that, by the way.
-
49-Mary Sue for black mailing victim Jeromy Mitchell
This test is stupid. No major developed character from my stories( I wrote mystery for fun in college) got a decent score. The questions were unclear at times resulting in me saying yes to only part of a question. I didn't like it.
-
By the way, Samurphy, I KNEW Dresden was a GS. Thanks for doing the test for him.
I did the test on him before and after White Night came out. He was borderline Sue at first, then crossed over into full-blown - I think it was Lash's parting "gift" that pushed him over the edge. God forbid that any fictional character should be proficient in , eh?
-
I did the test on him before and after White Night came out. He was borderline Sue at first, then crossed over into full-blown - I think it was Lash's parting "gift" that pushed him over the edge. God forbid that any fictional character should be proficient in , eh?
Well, it's not like the typical Mary Sue who can out-sing Sarah Brightman, or the late, great Beverly Sills, and usually does so on the first page (I have seen so many singer Sues, it isn't funny). The key to Arry Oo-ness is not so much *WHAT* is written, but *HOW*. Sure, a character might come out with a huge score on that test, but they might not actually *be* one, if the writer knows how to bring the character across in a believeable manner.
-
Well, it's not like the typical Mary Sue who can out-sing Sarah Brightman, or the late, great Beverly Sills, and usually does so on the first page (I have seen so many singer Sues, it isn't funny).
But what if you really do sing IRL? ;) (I might not be better then Sarah Brightman, but I think emotional depth speaking I'm better then Charlotte Church cause I have more life experience to draw from.)
Most of my characters are Mary Sues, I admit, again. I have a boring life. So I make up exciting and romantic ones for myself that I'll never have.
-
One typicaly solid way I've found to avoid mary-sue/gary-stue ness is to always remember this rule
Everything has a Price.
case in point, a kind of magic I came up with for some short stories, queromancy. Queromancy is the magic of asking a question, and getting reality to give you an answer. There are, however, many prices that come with this. for example, you wll never hear a queromancer speak a question in casual conversation. They have to be very good at this, becasue of the possible consequences. Said consequences being two things; 1) going crazy. These guys go crazy at the drop of a hat. for one to be sane past the age of twenty is almost unheard of.
2) Falling. As with any kind of magic, it is possible to screw up, and Fallen queromancers are some of the scariest s**t around.