HOME | DD
Published: 2012-04-16 21:04:16 +0000 UTC; Views: 30876; Favourites: 468; Downloads: 29
Redirect to original
Description
Clarifying Mary SueSo, I realize that everyone has heard of Mary Sue characters, but the thing that bothers me is that Mary has never really been as clarified as she could be. Girls go around crying Mary Sue at every character with long pink hair, then go and create even worse Mary Sue characters in the false illusion that they're making nonMary Sue characters (or even anti-Sues) when in fact they're doing the opposite. Allow me to explain how this seems to happen.
First of all the term "Mary Sue" desperately needs to be clarified to these people, so this brings us to the very important question: What IS a Mary Sue?
At least everyone can agree on one thing. Mary Sues are characters that are so perfect it's annoying.
But. What do they mean by perfect? Everyone has different ideas of that, naturally. Unfortunately, this is how many fanfiction (and other) writers make their biggest mistakes.
When you hear the name Mary Sue what pops up in your mind? A beautiful princess who gets everything she wants, has magical powers and is loved by all the other characters around them? Is that really perfect to you?
Are you sure that in your heart you wouldn't rather be the mysterious emo that everyone else dislikes and is seriously misunderstood or the tough butt-kicking karate girl with short hair? These kind of characters can just as easily be Mary Sues as the girly girl Mary Sues that writers seem to be under the impression are the only ones.
"But my character has faults!" some might point out. Granted, this may be true, but your idea of perfect might in fact include these faults.
A common example of a Mary Sue fault that isn't really a fault is that they get into trouble because they are too caring or too nice to everyone. Well. . . This is an obviously stupid way to go about giving your character faults, BUT it's definitely not the only stupid way. You see, many people only pretend to give their characters "faults" by giving them something supposedly bad that they actually think of positively. Someone who thinks it's cool and funny to be sarcastic might make their Mary Sue character sarcastic, thus making them even closer to their personal definition of perfect.
Heck, if the author thinks shooting a gun off in an orphanage is a good thing and makes their character do it, then their character is STILL a Mary Sue, so long as it's portrayed as good (whatever "good" means. More on that soon).
Why do we hate Mary? While some of the writers might hate her because they hate girly girls in general (and labor under the impression that only girly girl characters are Mary Sues) true authors find her degrading not just because of her (usually) corny looks, background or history. Oh, no. That's the least of the problems with Mary Sue. We hate her, because she can do no wrong.
Mary Sue cannot do anything wrong. Sure, she can trip over a rock if it's funny and cute or maybe even accidentally press a button that blows up a city if it adds to the plot (naively assuming there is a plot). But she can't do anything that makes her a bad person. She cannot do anything morally wrong. At least, (and this is the most disgusting part) what's morally wrong according to the author.
"Ah, so as long as I make Mary do something unchristian she isn't a Mary Sue?"
No. Remember, this is perfect according to you. Even if you use the words "morally wrong" we all know that you're not thinking of it that way. You're not thinking, "This is the part of the story where Mary Sue makes a mistake that the audience knows is wrong and doesn't want her to do!" Give me a break. You're thinking, "This is the part of the story that makes Mary Sue more deep and mysterious and interesting!"
Also, it doesn't help that a lot of people skate over describing Mary Sue as sweaty, smelly, fat or anything like that even when it would be the realistic thing to do. Still, I'm not saying that just because you did use one of those words you're character isn't a Mary Sue either.
Mary can be your own twisted, lame or just plain pathetic idea of perfect.
Everything she does is your type of perfect. Basically reading about a Mary Sue regardless of what person's type of perfect she is feels like reading "BE LIKE ME, BE LIKE ME, BE LIKE ME," which is both tedious and insulting.
Then there are the "self-insert Mary Sues." There is nothing wrong with inserting yourself into a story. However, when people do this, they tend to make themselves seem (admit it) cooler than they really are. This could be by focusing on or emphasizing the (in some cases exaggerated) most interesting things about themself (which sometimes even leads to them getting big-headed and sometimes even believing they're really this mysterious, great person in real life). No wonder the phrases "self-insert" and "Mary Sue" usually go together.
How can you possibly try to portray yourself this way and not get a Mary Sue?
I guess, what I'm really trying to say, is that "perfect" is a very very very broad word to use as a definition for Mary Sue and if that's the definition you're going to use, don't you dare turn a blind eye to your own Mary Sues just because they don't fall in line with someone else's idea of perfect.
It doesn't matter whether they have long, flowing pink hair, special abilities, or who they fall in love with (it doesn't even matter if the author personally believes they ARE perfect). It doesn't matter if they're a tomboy full of flaws either. A Mary Sue is a character who is plainly, mercilessly and unfairly worshiped by the author (directly or indirectly, usually indirectly or even unintentionally so watch out). It's in the portrayal. What could be a Mary Sue in one author's hands could be a perfectly reasonable character in another's.
Real people could take a so-called "Mary Sue test" and score as a Sue. What then? Is the person unrealistic? Perfect? Not at all! How then do so many "self-inserts" get labeled as Sues? Because of how they are PORTRAYED.
How can stereotypical perfect characters in cartoons be bearable? Because the cartoonist is not worshiping them; they are making fun of them.
Mary Sues are not so much characters who are "so perfect that they are annoying" but characters that authors worship. "Perfect" is merely a differing opinion among everyone in the world. So Mary Sues are types of characters *portrayed* as perfect.
One could even go on to say that "perfect" isn't the only thing characters can be unfairly portrayed as. Instead of perfect, maybe evil, mysterious, deep, interesting, random, tough, or funny. It all comes down to how much the author is forcing their opinion on the audience (by doing so, they are either worshiping their character or a view of their character that we may or may not share, in an obnoxious and unfair way).
(I do have to admit at least, it seems that negative opinions are generally more tolerable than positive ones. Everyone loves to hate, but nobody likes a goody two-shoes, and calling a character out every so often can be good for a story).
One could go even FURTHER to say that not only characters can be unfairly portrayed, but THINGS in your story as well. Emotions, objects, lyrics, perhaps even the plot... The list is quite infinite.
One way to avoid doing this is to show and not tell (not even show AND tell. Worry about showing). Be fair. It's almost as simple as that: keep your opinions out of it.
While super-strong, beautiful, all-holy princesses can be corny and obnoxious that's not always the stuff Sues are made of and certainly not the only.
FALSE IDEAS OF MARY SUE:
Many people who claim they hate "Mary Sues" actually just hate girly girls. Most of these people tend to be girls themselves, who are bitter at the stereotype and mistake it for Mary Sue or vice versa.
Others mistakenly believe that Mary Sues are girls who don't fight for themselves or rely on men. Regardless of whether that's stupid or not, it's NOT what Mary Sue means. One of these characters wouldn't be a Sue if the author portrayed them as an idiot. They would be however, if you were supposed to look up to them.
Yes, that's right: stereotype Sues made to make fun of Sues are contradictions, for Sues never make fun of themselves.
Also, Sues are not "characters who are underdeveloped." That is simply a bad character. Underdevelopment and Mary Sue characters, while they tend to go hand in hand, are not the same thing, and the absence of one doesn't necessarily mean the absence of the other.
When all is said and done, perhaps what we need to realize is that Mary Sue isn't a type of character, but a type of attitude.
Oh, and you know all of that goes for Gary Stus too, even though I used Mary Sue as the example instead of the less heard of male-version, right?
Related content
Comments: 353
MadHat11D6 In reply to ??? [2013-03-07 04:01:32 +0000 UTC]
I agree completely. The biggest issue I always found myself having with Mary Sues and the like was that no matter the story they are in, they are the innocent and something terrible happened to them. Now, this is in no way a bad thing and is a commonly used character back story. The problem with Mary Sues is that none of them every have remotely realistic reactions and continue to go about their world without any hint of 'woe is me' while doing no wrong and being perfect in their completely fictionalized black and white (good and evil) world. This is why I was never fond of Superman in the comics, as he is displayed as a Gary Stu very early on. For me, a Mary Sue is a character that tries to have dimension, but has no real dimension. Everything feels invented, and it's just so annoying.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MadHat11D6 In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2013-03-11 05:51:30 +0000 UTC]
Indeed. The way I write, the characters are so much a part of the story and their lives are so intertwined within the story I have a hard time stepping back and looking at what makes the story and what makes the character, for other people's stories especially. The past of the character defines the does a lot to define the character. I agree, drawing an unrealistic emotional conclusion based on past events is poor story telling. In the act of the poor story telling and over dramatic-ism leading to some image of perfection, a Mary Sue may be born. What I previously wrote is just one of the easiest ways to end up with a Mary Sue (from my experience) without starting with the 'perfect' subject as a character.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to MadHat11D6 [2013-03-12 06:29:05 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, I see what you're saying.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ivory-phills In reply to ??? [2013-03-06 16:17:47 +0000 UTC]
So, stop me if I get this wrong, but is a Mary Sue/Gary Stu a character that is really one-dimensional with no real, interesting qualities but has all of the spotlight and praise?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to ivory-phills [2013-03-06 17:28:41 +0000 UTC]
Well, yes and no. They're not necessarily one-dimensional, just portrayed in a ridiculously unfair manner.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OperaticAnimeNimue In reply to ??? [2013-03-06 13:14:22 +0000 UTC]
I've been obsessed w/ this idea for a while of having a couple heroines/DiDs from old medieval romances going on a quest for the Grail together (who would expect women to do that, remember that in their day they thought the sun goes around the earth), but have been afraid 2 write it on the pretense that I'd turn them into Sues by accident. (But, when u think about it, they WERE the Sues of their day to begin w) so it would be more of an incidence of just making them more rounded people. Now I'm even MORE nervous about writing ANYTHING!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
VampireQueenEffeffia [2013-03-02 16:11:05 +0000 UTC]
After that it now sounds like it's difficult to NOT make a Mary-Sue . . . Especially for someone like myself, because one thing I like to do is insert a chunk of my personality into every character I make (but only things like favorite color, least favorite smell, etc.). But still, looking back on what I made when I was yonger, I see that I had a lot of either Mary-Sue/Gary-Stu-ish characters. Well, I guess I'll have to recruit my friends for character development, just so I don't get carried away and make a Mary-Sue/Gary-Stu. Thank you for this information, I will cherish it always.
And a quick thing: I don't think I noticed anything about 97% of the MS/GS population being FC's that the creator claims to be an OC. A way I like to describe the all-out Mary-Sues is like being a fire escape on a building; the fire escape clings to its building, and had the building never been their, neither would the fire escape.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to VampireQueenEffeffia [2013-03-03 17:26:10 +0000 UTC]
I wouldn't say giving your characters a chunk of yourself is what makes them a Sue; they become a Sue when you start portraying them unfairly because of it (or for any reason).
I don't think a character being invented for a fandom is what makes them a MS/GS either, but I agree that most of them consequently are. Probably because the majority of writers who aren't writing about their own ideas in the first place aren't as imaginative.
But look at it this way: if you take a reasonable character (just say... Harry Potter who we agree isn't a Gary Stu) and put him in the same place as one of these characters who "wouldn't otherwise exist" this wouldn't automatically make him a Stu, nor should it make said FC a Stu/Sue (at least, not in itself).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ToddNTheShiningSword [2012-12-29 18:16:57 +0000 UTC]
At first I was reading this and thinking "So according to you, everyone is a Mary Sue", but at that point I couldn't because I hadn't finished reading. Then I finished ( I actually read it all! ) and I guess it boils down to you having a more specific definition of Mary Sue than the typically accepted one. One that's essentially the same, but with critical extra words added that makes it different and more thought provoking.
Could I go as far as to say giving your character a flaw as a quick way out only works if it's a flaw to you, the artist? If it's a flaw that only makes the character more likable, like a cute character being clumsy, than it doesn't count? So if you wanted a quick fix, (not necessarily the best fix), you could just give the character a trait that you, the creator of her, really dislikes?
So the kind of flaw that actually counts in a good character is the kind the audience actually will dislike, but it won't make them dislike the character?
Kind of like when a character on a movie does something that makes you mad, but you just gotta keep watching?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to ToddNTheShiningSword [2012-12-30 16:42:15 +0000 UTC]
Well, I wouldn't say giving your character a flaw (whether you dislike it or not) is necessarily the main thing you should be relying on. The more I think about it in fact, the less it seems to matter if the character really is perfect or not. That is, I think the key word here is really *worship*.
In fiction anything can happen. So if the story requires a perfect character for whatever reason, why not? The portrayal is the thing that's really vital. Think of the Spongebob episode that Spongebob becomes "normal" (or perfect). No one calls him a Gary Stu because contrary to a Gary Stu he is being made fun of and not worshiped. It all depends what your motives are for making a "perfect" character and how you handle it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ToddNTheShiningSword In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2013-01-08 03:56:16 +0000 UTC]
That Spongebob example is a little different though, right? because in something like that, the change was only for one episode. It's different when the character is like that all the time, but still, yeah, I guess it's portrayal.
One thing I think of though, is that, most of us don't have such a knack for writing a story that we're great at it from the beginning. So... if someone is still a not-so-good writer, but they still want to write a story for a comic or short work of film or literature, and they don't want to create a Mary Sue disaster right away, is there any piece of hard-and-fast advice that you'd give them? I mean, do you think there's a simple rule that isn't exactly correct, but is suitable for getting newbies started writing?
and unfortunately for me, with Spongebob, all I could think of was that episode where Patrick got a nose, lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SilverTidalWave In reply to ??? [2012-12-28 09:23:47 +0000 UTC]
This is really helpful, and now I know the things I need to watch out for. It's just that now I'm wondering if my OC is a Mary-Sue. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to SilverTidalWave [2012-12-28 16:28:46 +0000 UTC]
I'm glad you found it helpful!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SilverTidalWave In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-12-28 23:25:06 +0000 UTC]
It was, very much so.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
MushaMusha In reply to ??? [2012-10-30 04:53:48 +0000 UTC]
you should definitely add this to your journal: [link]
its the closest thing we have to people diagnosing a sue.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to MushaMusha [2012-10-30 05:02:05 +0000 UTC]
I dunno, I don't see the things in that test as so much signs of Sues as they are of plain immature writing. I still stand by what I say about a Sue being a character that the author worships, but that's just my take.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MushaMusha In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-30 05:54:10 +0000 UTC]
maybe this is true, but perhaps we can eliminate some sues by highlighting and correcting immature writing.I mean, most of the fanfics I have read or looked over involving sues are pretty immaturely written.
still, there are some aspects of the test that I think hold very true to the diagnosing of a sue. Maybe not all of it, as I have read through the test and some things are not reasonable. but some things can definitely be taken from it I feel.
regardless of all this, I unite in your hatred of sues. I simply wish there was less of them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to MushaMusha [2012-10-30 16:46:14 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, especially since Sues usually have some of those traits anyway, haha. So I agree with you
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
cartoonygothica In reply to ??? [2012-10-21 21:23:06 +0000 UTC]
[That's really informative. Now, I'm starting to wonder how much I worship my own characters.]
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fisherella In reply to ??? [2012-10-20 04:58:45 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, it's a fairly new term on me and seems from context to mean any character that is the author's self-insert. While I can understand the annoyance at characters that are poorly crafted, or too perfect, I have to admit I've come across some self/fandom character shippings and found them hilarious. I guess because I'm not of the respective fandoms it didn't upset me. I also didn't find it what I would call "quality fanart" but it's amusing, and it's a person's self expression. If it can be funny I don't see the harm in it. If you don't like it... move on. Plenty more to see in this big wide world.
Personally I think Carl Brutananandilewski's car in Aqua Teen Hunger Force is a Mary Sue because it is actually producer Mat Molinaro's car photoshopped in and I don't think it seems a part of Carl at all. It's canon, but still a Mary Sue if you ask me. Yes it's a car!!!! Can't a car be a Mary Sue?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to Fisherella [2012-10-20 05:03:29 +0000 UTC]
Objects that are Mary Sues? Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! You're definitely onto something.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fisherella In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-20 05:05:47 +0000 UTC]
Ever seen 2 Wyked? Total Mary Sue! I mean, why would Carl's car be called 2 Wyked? It's just not him. It's the producer's car! He named it! Total ego placement. =0D
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fisherella In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-20 05:15:29 +0000 UTC]
Mary Sue car: [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fisherella In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-20 05:09:49 +0000 UTC]
Aqua Teen Hunger Force man... on the Adult Swim network. =0)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to fluttershyandangel1 [2012-10-19 23:26:45 +0000 UTC]
I wish people like that understood that it all boils down to portrayal... *sigh*
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fluttershyandangel1 In reply to fluttershyandangel1 [2012-10-19 22:00:41 +0000 UTC]
just look at it XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to fluttershyandangel1 [2012-10-20 02:19:11 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, I think they miss the point about what a Mary Sue really is It doesn't matter whether they have long flowing pink hair or if they're full of flaws; a Mary Sue is a character that the author worships above others and portrays as perfect (no matter what others' ideas of perfect may be).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fluttershyandangel1 In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-20 03:10:13 +0000 UTC]
Oh okay that must have forgotten that
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
VanityElric In reply to ??? [2012-10-18 20:03:11 +0000 UTC]
...
People put breast sizes? Like... 34 triple D cup or something? Literally? What in all...
I quit.
Have you ever seen a Mary Sue or even a general OC that is supposed to fit in every fandom ever?
I knew one who could Fire and Earth Bend(Avatar), was a Soul Reaper (Bleach), enire appearance completely based from Sebastion Michaelis with his "crimson eyes" and "raven-black hair" (Kuroshitsuji/Black Butler), could turn into a wolf because he was half werewolf (at any time he pleased), and was a vampire hunter (Blood+ ), among a handful of other things but those are the ones I remember... And, it wasn't just that the character was split into these fandoms, but could do all of these in everything he was in no matter the fandom. And this character was not in any crossovers, simply put into individual fandoms with all these things.
Its one thing to change an OC to fit into each fandom individually, but its another to just mishmash every fandom ever into the character and put them in non-crossover stories.
Also, this reminds me of some of my very old characters. All Mary Sues, of course, but I'm so glad I grew out of it. Let me just... Keep those characters locked up forever and always.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to VanityElric [2012-10-18 20:06:45 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, it's really... I don't even know a word to describe the stupidity in the breast-size thing.
Lol wow that character sounds really... lame XD
Haha
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ResidentNobody In reply to ??? [2012-10-13 02:49:25 +0000 UTC]
I like the point you raise of different perceptions of perfection, but I think that may work in someone's advantage, if you know your audience (by no way am I trying to condone Mary Sues, people don't use them!). If a Mary Sue for me is a demon-worshiping emo twenty year old who is fearful of the sun and spends his or her days hiding away in a dank corner of their room, but I know the only people who will be reading my story are happy go lucky suburban families, well the perception of a Mary Sue dissipates for the reader. I could imagine their definition perfect is far from mine, but what would it matter? Depending on how I set up that character, they may love that story even though its obvious flaw. Granted, it's only under special circumstances will anyone know only a select few will his or her work, it is still a possibility and the game changes then. So it all boils down to which perception you want to look at it from, the reader or writer?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to ResidentNobody [2012-10-13 16:06:05 +0000 UTC]
Well, think about this: if the author is portraying that kind of person as perfect then the people who read it regardless of who they are will surely realize that and could easily find that in itself annoying rather than (necessarily) the character. What I mean to say is that the portrayal is the thing that makes a Mary Sue far more than the type of character. For example, have you ever watched a cartoon with a stereotypical perfect person? They would be exaggerated and made fun of to the point where we could say that they are portrayed as imperfect even though their stereotype is perfect. This way they are bearable unlike the "be like me, be like me," type of portrayal that Mary Sue authors use.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cerdisinerias [2012-10-12 19:15:39 +0000 UTC]
I think another point about Mary Sues, especially in fanfiction, is that they don't fit into the spectrum of the fandom. The fact an OC even exists within a certain fandom or fanfiction makes them Mary Sue enough, in my opinion - they stick out like sore thumbs. Everyone's attentions go to the character, and often, they have qualities that don't even exist within the franchise. So for me, Mary-Sue-ness boils down to context. According to the context of the story, does she or he do something out of the ordinary?
I believe that's why Mary-Sues and their male counterparts are harder to discover in original fiction, and that's where your idea of warped perceptions of perfection come into play. Authors tend to understand their own contexts, and can't really see past the fallacies, so they end up writing characters who lack human qualities: the flaws and faults we clamor for in a character.
I guess another way to evaluate characters is to ask how believable they are, if they were real human beings. Human beings tend to be dynamic characters, constantly changing their perceptions of themselves and others to adapt to various situations. Mary-Sues and Gary-Stus, on the other hand, don't usually show much development over the course of their stories - they're static characters. Of course, you can have a static character but still believably human, but from my experience, Mary-Sues and Gary-Stus are static, remain static, and never realize they're dragging the story.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to Cerdisinerias [2012-10-12 20:58:58 +0000 UTC]
Thanks for the comment. Those are some really interesting points.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
meanderingKnight In reply to ??? [2012-10-12 04:24:59 +0000 UTC]
Well, thanks for the insight I'll make sure to steer clear of over exaggeration
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to meanderingKnight [2012-10-12 04:28:12 +0000 UTC]
I'm glad you liked it!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
meanderingKnight In reply to MakingFunOfStuff [2012-10-12 04:42:57 +0000 UTC]
I'm glad you wrote it
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Xiapharre [2012-10-11 15:21:55 +0000 UTC]
Thanks now I have a better hold on what a Mary sue is, and hopefully my writings won't suck as bad XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
shunsuixnanaofan101 In reply to ??? [2012-10-11 02:15:43 +0000 UTC]
The only time when it's alright to make a Mary Sue is when it is so blatantly obvious that it is a parody, or meant in an entirely comedic sense.
One thing that kind of annoys me about reader inserts (I saw your post there, it was wonderful, by the way) is how you always seem to be the perfect person.
It's always "perfect figure", "shining ____ eyes", "lustrous _____ hair", "heart-shaped face", "slim", "sexy", anything.
Sometimes it is nice to get an ego boost, I suppose.
But...not to incite anyone, but I don't feel as though anyone is perfect.
//shot//
But the character you are, in a way, always seems to be. Or at least, just right for the scene.
It's a nice change to see one where they describe you as both being physically, as well as characteristically (I'm pretty sure that I come off as a smart aleck to people).
Although, do you think that it's harder to read them?
Here's hoping that I didn't offend your sensibilities, nor those of anyone else on this site.
Thank you very much for posting this.
P.S.: Thank you for the "breast size" comment. Why do you need to know that, in any scenario? I'd love it if a guy liked me for my character, not if I had large...assets.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
MakingFunOfStuff In reply to shunsuixnanaofan101 [2012-10-11 02:23:10 +0000 UTC]
Thanks for the comment!
Exactly, it's all about how the character is *portrayed.* That's how some characters who could be considered Mary Sues from one portrayal could be considered a perfectly good character from another. This is all because there is no real definition of perfect and it's up to us to portray characters fairly no matter who they are. That must be how self-inserts are so commonly labeled as Sues for example. They're always written about from a biased point of view when in fact, the real human being isn't a Mary Sue in real life and only in the story. The same goes with made up characters too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
LurkingShadoww In reply to ??? [2012-10-11 01:17:23 +0000 UTC]
I've always wondered what Mary sue means I always thought it was some one's name O_O;;;;;
So your saying is, Liking the color black or being kind to another person, a bad thing? but it's not only girl characters, some males too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>