2013-09-06, 06:26 | Link #41 |
In a Box
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Somewhere on the west coast
|
I think when most people think a character feels 'sue-ish', they're really talking about the 'blackhole' effect that blatant Mary Sues have on the story. Basically, a Mary Sue character is always liked and is never wrong. All the good guys like the Sue, and the only people who disagree with the sue or dislike the sue are bad guys. So the world essentially revolves around the sue and all the characters aside from the sue are only there to show how great the sue is. Characters will also act out of character in order to agree with the sue. This is especially apparent in fan fiction where established characters from canon suddenly make really strange decisions just because the sue is there and needs them to to progress the plot.
When this is too blatant, the story is pretty much destroyed. There's basically no tension as you know the sue will always win, and everyone will always end up agreeing and praising the sue. Any characterization in the side characters are destroyed as all of them will behave inconsistently whenever the sue shows up, or they are just 1 dimensional props in the first place. |
2013-09-06, 07:04 | Link #42 |
Senior Member
Author
|
Like a lot of popular fan-terms, "Mary Sue" and "Gary Stu" have been overused. And when terms get overused to a significant degree, they tend to lose their value as it means that they're getting applied too loosely, which can dilute their meaning.
That being said, I'm not as against these terms as some are, since I do think there are some characters out there that are deserving of this particular criticism. It's just that the critical label is applied too often in very borderline cases, or even in cases where it makes no real sense at all. If the term was used more judiciously, it would probably cause less of an issue. I don't really buy the sexism argument myself, since I come across the "Gary Stu" criticism about as often as I do "Mary Sue". But putting aside the labels for a second, I think it's more important to focus on the root reasons for why some characters get labeled this. Over time, I've observed that there are three root reasons for it. They are... 1) The plot contorts itself to serve the character's every whim and desire. Everything goes this character's way. The character never has to deal with loss or failure or even serious setbacks. Many readers/viewers start to find this tiresome as the character is never truly challenged. Eventually, their dissatisfaction is taken out on the character. 2) The character renders other characters redundant or useless. There's nothing of practical value that other characters bring to the table. Fans of those other characters hence start to resent this, giving rise to "Mary Sue" or "Gary Stu" criticisms. 3) The character is always right. The character is never allowed to make a mistake, or shown to hold an incorrect opinion or assumption. The character is never allowed a moment of weakness. Now, the importance of this is proportional to how much focus and screen-time the character has. If a character only voices two or three opinions throughout a lengthy narrative, then it doesn't matter that much if he or she happens to be right every time. So this is mainly an issue for main characters. If the writer avoids these root reasons for the label use then the writer will almost certainly avoid the label being applied to one of his or her characters. Now, the importance of all of this is directly proportional to the importance of the plot. In a light and fluffy slice of life work, it doesn't really matter that much if a character runs afoul of one or more of these root reasons. But if there is a significant amount of conflict in the story, it's good to avoid these root reasons behind the Mary Sue/Gary Stu label, imo.
__________________
|
2013-09-06, 07:15 | Link #43 |
Lumine Passio
Author
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Hanoi, Vietnam
Age: 18
|
Just having another though: We watching Anime is kind of a self-fufillment itself, to imagine the wonderful drama of a wonderful world. But we never got satisfied...
Actually, the line of Sue-or-not is kind of vague these day. Normaly, OC always have a bit of badass in themself. The real problem lies in the author: Making everything sense is the key point! And then that lead to Original events,... Which is kind of hard for an average writer. |
2013-09-06, 09:49 | Link #44 |
Sekiroad-Idols Sing Twice
|
It's possible to have good Mary Sue characters even in a conflict-heavy story. Wang, Mikoto, and Kirito from LoGH, Railgun, and SAO are often personality magnets, usually trivialize the other characters (Federation's ace military genius, 3rd Ranked Level 5, the solo frontline player), and overcome most conflicts. The difference is how Wang and Mikoto are balanced by their own personality in the former's cynicism and awareness of how he's being manipulated and the latter for showing genuinely teenage faults. But Kirito has no character between his extremes of nice guy and badass and his personality is close to flawless.
A Mary Sue's quality depends on whether their personality rounded out storytelling gifts.
__________________
|
2013-09-06, 11:16 | Link #45 | |||
Senior Member
Author
|
Quote:
First of all, Wang and Mikoto are not Mary Sues. Reasons why... Spoiler for Minor LoGH spoilers:
Spoiler for Major Railgun S spoilers:
Now, as for Kirito, he's a debatable case. And personally, I lost interest in SAO largely because I started to feel no suspense or tension in Kirito's fights because, imo, he was made too strong relative to his enemies. Quote:
Kirito... yes, I think he does do this after awhile. And that's one of the problems in SAO, imo. Edit: Actually, I would say that Mikoto is an excellent example of how you can make a main character very strong and impressive, and generally competent, without having that character sink into the depths of Mary Sue-dom. If you run Mikoto by my three reasons for why characters get labeled a Mary Sue, it's crystal clear that neither of the 3 reasons apply to her. The plot definitely doesn't go easy on Mikoto, the other major characters definitely bring something to the table, and I can think of at least two or three times when Mikoto was mistaken in a plan or opinion she had. Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Triple_R; 2013-09-06 at 11:54. |
|||
2013-09-06, 12:22 | Link #46 |
Vanitas owns you >:3
|
Just write your character as you would, describing a human being. (not in a literal sense). As long as your character isn't "perfection 24/7", you shouldn't have a problem.
But don't give them too many flaws either. You just need a balance of good points and bad. Balance is key. I made my very first character so much like myself...and I worried that she might be a Mary-Sue. But I gave her my own personality flaws as well....so...that ought to fix that.
__________________
|
2013-09-06, 13:22 | Link #47 | |
In a Box
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Somewhere on the west coast
|
Quote:
I also agree that Mikoto is not a Mary Sue. First, she's a 'growing' character. You can tell that she's incredibly idealistic at the start, and tries to solve things with actions based on her idealism, but she keeps on getting into situations where it showcases just how childish her idealism is, and shows her powerless she is in the grand scheme of things despite her powers. Even the people she beat she only beats them physically, but is unable to beat them in the battle of ideals, as their motivations are far stronger and run much deeper than Mikoto's simple sense of justice. Also, there are characters in the Railgun universe that are not antagonists that challenge Mikoto. Spoiler for Spoiler for the Railgun Manga:
Edit: Also, she's relatively weak compared to the other stronger characters in the Index-verse. I mean, she gets completely destroyed by Accelerator and needed Touma to save her. Last edited by relentlessflame; 2013-09-06 at 14:01. Reason: removed and tagged spoilers |
|
2013-09-06, 13:24 | Link #48 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
|
This. It amuses me to see how certain quoted characters are labeled as 'St/ues' without thorough understanding of the work in question, that or making early pre-judgments with few or shallow substantiations. So yeah, I won't bother either......
So far, in my book, true St/ues only appear in fan-fiction. |
2013-09-06, 13:58 | Link #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
He entered a game and planned to fight the head GM with no plan about how to do so. He won due to a deus ex machina. That's about as Gary Stu as you can get.
Plus, despite having a girlfriend who is essentially his wife and a surrogate AI daughter, he still gets more and more girls in his harem every time he so much as blinks. |
2013-09-06, 14:11 | Link #50 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Age: 41
|
Quote:
1. The way that fight was won is one of the on-going/persistent themes of the work. 2. It's not as if all of his plans went flawlessly; his decisions and carelessness literally got people killed. 3. His personality weaknesses are explored in multiple ways in the story. So now you start playing this game of "how much hero-gravity is too much" and "how many flaws are needed to disqualify someone" and so on. My point isn't necessarily to get into arguments about SAO itself, but just to say the term has grown to the point where it's "a protagonist I can't relate to because they seem too perfect and the story seems to always go their way". (i.e. "Too good to be true.") And when we're talking about characters designed to be heroes/heroines in their respective stories, that can really encompass an awful lot of variability and the term's meaning loses precision. (And so you get into the quote that was posted earlier where it can seem conversely like any capable female character can be accused of being a Mary Sue unless they have enough crippling flaws to make them "believable" to the sexist male audience. It's a judgement call of "you're not weak/flawed enough!")
__________________
Last edited by relentlessflame; 2013-09-06 at 14:38. Reason: slightly better phrasing... |
|
2013-09-06, 15:52 | Link #51 | |
Sekiroad-Idols Sing Twice
|
Quote:
Touma trivializes every esper instead of outright overpowering everything like Accelerator does, to which I agree on the latter. I look at Mary Sues in conflict-heavy stories as individually gifted but may or may not be stunted by the story. Wang and Kirito were always impressive with only the latter being a plot breaker. That said, Wang's limited resources was the same kind of roadblock Mikoto has against Touma; they're not being outdone on the intelligence or power that makes them impressive, their gifts can't be used to the fullest extent. Mikoto admittedly starts to lose her power advantage as early as the Level Upper arc so she isn't a Mary Sue anymore but Wang is still an unmatched genius despite his limited resources. In fact, relative to their series Wang might actually be more "overpowered" than Kirito for managing just fine when his side of the proverbial chess board is missing half its Pawns, Rooks, Knights, and Bishops. Though Wang's a better character overall and I wouldn't mind a near-flawless lead if the character was actually good.
__________________
Last edited by Akito Kinomoto; 2013-09-06 at 16:34. |
|
2013-09-06, 17:17 | Link #52 | |
Bittersweet Distractor
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 32
|
Quote:
You aren't wrong that people often use the term to just criticize just any character that seems too "perfect," but this is not the best example IMO.
__________________
|
|
2013-09-06, 18:59 | Link #53 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Age: 41
|
Quote:
I'm not trying to dismiss the criticisms people have of the character. But I am trying to say that the Mary Sue/Gary Stu term is confusing when you apply it outside of the realm of fan fiction (where the meaning is much more clear).
__________________
|
|
2013-09-06, 19:18 | Link #54 | |||
Senior Member
Author
|
Quote:
Honestly, I think you do Wang a bit of a disservice in even bringing him up in this discussion on Mary Sues. Quote:
Spoiler for Railgun and Index spoiler:
Quote:
A Mary Sue is someone who runs afoul of one or more of the three reasons I listed. And when I use words like "everything" and "always" in those reasons, its not hyperbole or exaggeration. It's totally literal, that's how extreme an actual Mary Sue is. And that's why Mikoto and Wang's names shouldn't even be in this thread, imo.
__________________
Last edited by Triple_R; 2013-09-06 at 19:28. |
|||
2013-09-06, 19:39 | Link #55 | |
Sekiroad-Idols Sing Twice
|
Quote:
You're seeing Wang's limitations as something that stops him from being a Gary Stu but the way he works with them could arguably make him more impressive.
__________________
Last edited by Akito Kinomoto; 2013-09-06 at 19:52. |
|
2013-09-06, 19:47 | Link #57 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Age: 41
|
Quote:
So yeah, that's basically the spirit of my earlier comment as well. When you start branching from the strict/literal definition, now you've got to figure out where the line really is. I think there can be protagonists/characters that are "problematic" or "criticized" in terms of how they're used in a story, but they may not necessarily deserve the label because they're truly not as perfect/flawless/unmatched as the term was intended to imply.
__________________
|
|
2013-09-06, 19:56 | Link #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
Quote:
As for people dying, that was really early in the story and doesn't really reflect on him later. Using, say, Spider-Man as an example, if his only losses were Uncle Ben and Gwen Stacey, and everything else in his life went not only without a hitch, but were basically given to him on a golden platter... would you not say he was getting into Gary Stu territory? Shoe-horning in one or two losses does not negate the massive amounts of divine handouts he gets. |
|
2013-09-06, 20:40 | Link #59 | |
Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Age: 41
|
Quote:
My whole point is this argument about "how much is too much/not enough". One of the major themes in the second arc is powerlessness and persistence in the midst of helpless circumstances completely beyond your control. And the other half of the plot was dealing with the consequences of a regret he left from before SAO that festered into a heartbreaking situation for both parties. But clearly, these themes/elements didn't resonate with you as much as the "divine handouts" did. Is the issue the character himself, or it the story's ability to develop its themes in a way that the audience can understand and relate with? Again, my point isn't necessarily to dismiss the criticisms, but to say: what even is a Gary Stu/Mary Sue character in the modern use of the term? It seems a bit like a vague criticism that's "you'll know it when you see it". In that case, I think it'd be clearer if people just list the actual criticisms of the story without bringing this term into it, because now we argue semantics over whether or not this character qualifies for the label, rather than trying to understand each other's points of view about the storytelling "flaws".
__________________
|
|
2013-09-06, 20:48 | Link #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
It's not about how many, but when. If he only experiences losses in the beginning, then gets divine handouts, what was even the point of having him experience loss to begin with? Just to give him some background angst?
Powerlessness is fine and all for story-telling, unless the end result is "screw it all, here's a free win from god." Deus ex machina kill stories, and from what I've read regarding spoilers, he continues to get more and more unique things in games, divine handouts, etc. |
Tags |
discussion, fanfic |
|
|