The HFIL is a Mary Sue?

[Garren Jacobsen]

Ok, so Brian, have you found your answer?

I think so. I am not 100% certain I have it all straight. But I think I have the elements of it. Now, it's just a matter of organizing my thoughts so it makes sense and is usable for me.

 

[DeathtoTrite]

I think the whole thing isn't so much about what a Mary Sue is so much as what we should avoid-- characters who defy the internal logic of the piece for awesome, whether it be a villain regressing to ape-level intelligence, some improbable deus-ex-machina, etc.

Sometimes, we can suspend our disbelief and just be like "Wow that's SO awesome!"

Unfortunately, authors feel this way more than readers.

 

[Steerpike]

If the definition of a Mary Sue is idealized characters then why is it so often used as a pejorative?

Because it's an easy criticism to make when you're critiquing or reviewing a book. It's like "show don't tell." Worthless on its own. The underlying concept can be useful as a criticism, but only if expanded beyond the bare definition into some kind of meaningful analysis.

 

[Steerpike]

Disclaimer - I haven't actually read the Twilight books and maybe if I did I would dislike the Bella character too, but I've seen several of the movies and didn't really mind her.

Bella isn't a bad character. Good and bad have to be viewed in the context of the work and what the character is meant to accomplish. To that end, Bella works perfectly well as a character (which is one reason the books did so well).

 

[Heliotrope]

I've been doing a ton of reading about this, especially after my "character arc" issues I was having last week. I have read about six character development books in the past few days and this is what i have come to learn:

The term "mary-sue" or "gary-sue" is 'typically' used to describe over the top characters that are so 'perfect' they are unbelievable... like the girl in Star Trek.

However, this is not always a bad thing, and, in fact, can be exactly what the reader or viewer is looking for.

So, in certain platforms (which I will get into in a minute) the Mary-Sue or Gary-Sue is perfectly acceptable... however, these platforms are typically not considered to be literary, and so the lack of character development is often criticized by literary critics.

Platforms where Mary-Sues or Gary-Sues are appropriate and even appreciated by readers/viewers.

Action/Adventure
- Examples include: Indiana Jones, Chris Pratt's character in Jurassic World, Shia Lebouf's character in Transformers, Jack Reacher.

I mean, seriously, look at Chris Pratt's character in Jurassic world. He is the 'alpha' for the raptors and he gets a scene where he races through the jungle on his sweet motorbike flanked by raptors on both sides. But... this is what the audience came for. This is what they were expecting and this is what they paid for. They want to envision themselves being bad ass with dinosaurs for an hour and a half. They don't want a "spiritual awakening" (as my husband would say). My husband is the prime example of a man who loves Gary Sue characters and the stories they are found in.


The Caper/Idea driven stories.
Examples: Oceans 11, Oceans 12, Oceans 13, The Italian Job, Pirates of the Caribbean, Percy Jackson, any of Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt novels, Lara Croft.

This one is close to my heart because I'm writing a caper. I DID find a way to add some character depth to my story, but since then I have read that it is not necessary. When people pick up a caper or a treasure hunt story they are specifically looking for the adventure of the treasure hunt or the heist. They are typically interested in plot twists, funny moments between characters, hilarious situations and chases by natives (if a treasure hunt story). They want clues and mystery. The characters are typically just the vessels to deliver the excitement (as Clive Cussler did perfectly with his character Dirk, who is for all intensive purposes is a Gary Sue... on purpose). Danny Ocean is also a Gary-Sue character, who is witty, charming, smart and such an amazing thief, with very little to no character development. But readers of capers or treasure hunt books are not looking for character development.

It doesn't get more Mary Sue than Lara Croft. And yes, I love Lara Croft.

There has been a huge push in the twentieth century to write "character based" novels. And this push is good. But there has to be a balance. In the case of Twilight she very smartly used a 'vanilla' character that would appeal to a mass amount of teenager girls. If she had made Bella quirky, eccentric, dark, or in any way added too much 'flavour' to her character then the teenagers would have had a harder time using her a vessel for themselves in the situation... she crafted Bella to be the character that the readers could live the experience through.

Clive Cussler creates a character that is so awesome that you want to be him and have his exciting adventures. You are not supposed to learn much from Dirk. It is purely escapism.

So, know what sort of story you are writing and what your audience is going to expect. If it means a mary sue or Gary sue then that is fine, so long as the decision is made intentionally.

Certain actors and actresses have made their livings off of portraying exactly these sorts of characters:
- Bruce Willis
- Arnold Schwartzenegger

come to mind.

 

[Steerpike]

Good post Heliotrope.

I dislike the negative connotations that go along with labels like "mary sue" or "purple prose" etc. You did a nice job of dispelling that idea. I enjoy the Jack Reacher books a great deal, for example, but Reacher is faster, stronger, and smarter than anyone else. That's just part of the books. They're still good.

 

[vaiyt]

The term ended up worthless because it's either used as "character I think should be less important because I hate them", or disproportionately used to disparage wish-fulfillment directed at girls.

Batman is a playboy millionaire by day and vigilante by night, with basically infinite resources at his disposal, plans that never fail and allow him to beat even godlike enemies, gets to act like a sanctimonious prick against his moral superiors without ever being called out, attracts lots of women despite being a paranoid misanthrope. By the original, "too-perfect" metric, he should be the Mary-Sue to end all Mary-Sues.

You're better off not bothering with such loaded terms and working with some more solid literary criticism.

 

[Drakevarg]

Batman is actually called a Mary Sue on quite a regular basis, to be honest. The only reason why the trope is stereotypically applied to females is that for whatever reason, it seems that the majority of fanfiction writers are female and since the fanfiction community tends to be... for lack of a more tactful term... more amateurish than original fiction, the phenomena tends to crop up there more often than elsewhere (and indeed originated from a Star Trek fanfic, as has been noted already). Perhaps because the very nature of fanfiction lends itself to the wish-fulfillment of inserting yourself or your OC into an established story and dazzling everyone with your self-idealized awesomeness?

 

[kennyc]

No seriously, I keep seeing people call x-character a Mary Sue. (The present popular belief is that Rey from The Force Awakens) From what I understand a Mary Sue is supposed to be a self-insertion character that is over idealized. Yet, I keep seeing people mention idealized characters (like Rey) to be Mary Sues. So now I am a bit perplexed. So, tell me, what in the Home for Infinite Losers is a Mary Sue? Because now I have no idea.

It's the current buzz-word, the in-term, the social elite cliche if you don't know you can't be part of our group word.

 

[kennyc]

It's a buzz word that literally means "bad character".
The more specific a definition you give it, the less accurate that definition becomes.
"Over idealized self-insertion" can be part of the definition (it often is) but not always.

My advice: throw away the term. It's worthless.

This.



.

 

[Mythopoet]

I have never, ever seen Batman referred to as a mary sue. Superman, obviously, is often called a mary sue. And usually Batman is held up as a positive counter example to Superman. Despite not really being any more realistic.

 

[kennyc]

I have never, ever seen Batman referred to as a mary sue. Superman, obviously, is often called a mary sue. And usually Batman is held up as a positive counter example to Superman. Despite not really being any more realistic.

It's all about Transgenderism!

 

[FifthView]

I don't think the movie would have been called The Dark Knight if Batman was a Mary Sue.

A couple things I'm seeing here:

a) Because some people use the term in a facile way, it should be abolished.
b) In defense of Twilight and Bella, the term must be abolished.

I have no stake in defending poor Bella. Never read the books, although I very much enjoyed the movies until the last one--and that one only seemed rushed to me, or else maybe the delay between seeing the others and seeing the final movie meant I'd already fallen out of the spell.

Superman is an interesting case, given the difficulty directors have had in making good or great movies using the character--and what they've had to do in trying to accomplish that goal. The difficulty is generally acknowledged.

Edit: Incidentally, it seems some are arguing that any character must end a tragic character, must ultimately fail in the main plot, because anything else means "MARY SUE!" Superheroes succeed (and others) so voila!

 

[Miskatonic]

I have never, ever seen Batman referred to as a mary sue. Superman, obviously, is often called a mary sue. And usually Batman is held up as a positive counter example to Superman. Despite not really being any more realistic.

The only difference is Superman's overpowered abilities vs Batman relying on gadgets. Other than that Bruce Wayne, billionaire playboy, moonlighting as caped crusader, sure has a Gary Sue ring to it.

 

[FifthView]

Ah, rich men are now Mary Sues! It's all becoming clear...

 

[Heliotrope]

Yeah. Fifthview, you raise another good point. When I was in high school I used to write a ton of dark angsty poetry. One day my writing teacher told me to stop. She said dark angsty stuff is the easiest to write. It's a fall back, like sunset photography.

It does seem, nowadays, that the dark angsty stuff is the only stuff that people seem to think is legit... Anything else is a Mary Sue.... Very interesting,

 

[FifthView]

Yeah Helio, I was just pondering whether those who desire to see nothing but anti-heroes are the ones most likely to throw "Mary Sue!" at any character that is not an anti-hero. It's either gray or Mary Sue.

I'm still pondering that. As I said before, I do think authentic (??) Mary Sue characters can succeed in some genres and with some audiences. Maybe I reveal too much of myself by having admitted that I liked the Twilight movies and, now, in admitting that I've enjoyed Vampire Diaries, True Blood...even Smallville (which is the best of those three television shows, in my own very personal opinion.) And, Veronica Mars....I am a sucker for those types of shows. Never really got into Buffy though; but at the time, I was busy doing other things.

For me, an inexact yet intriguing metaphor for looking at the idea of the Mary Sue is the difference between DC Comics and Marvel Comics. It's only a metaphor, just a type of vague guidepost, but as a young kid I was very much a Marvel Comics fan and didn't particularly like most DC Comics. The heroes in DC Comics were exaggerated "perfect" heroes in comparison to the heroes Marvel tended to use. (That said, this was in the 80's, and I did like some DC series, like Teen Titans–right around the time that the creators of Titans were trying to emulate the X-Men. Also, as an even younger child, I got up extra early every Saturday morning to try and catch the Super Friends cartoon. Kids are a particularly great audience for the type of stereotypical Mary Sue-ish perfect characters who easily succeed in everything.)

 

[Miskatonic]

Don't even get me started on Sookie Stackhouse.

 

[Drakevarg]

Batman being a Mary Sue has nothing to do with him being rich, and only slightly has something to do with the fact that he is canonically the best criminologist in the world and is a master of every single martial art (yes, literally all of them). No, him being a Mary Sue has more to do with this barely being an exaggeration:

Batman is a Mary Sue because he regularly does the blatantly impossible - like sneaking around Superman - with no explanation besides "because he's Batman," and it's a commonly accepted truth that he can beat literally any opponent given sufficient prep time. But Batman is also an example of a Mary Sue not necessarily being a bad thing - a lot of people enjoy him specifically BECAUSE of those qualities.

 

[Heliotrope]

Lol. I also loved Marvel a d not so much DC, but like I mentioned in my earlier post, my husband loves those types of characters.... Batman being his favourite. He has a first edition Super Man as well. The man absolutely loves Batman. I think he really likes the concept of being invincible (almost)... He is a very sensitive guy (Im sharing too much), and I think for him, having a hero who is so capable was really important to him as a kid. In his imagination, when he read Batman, good could always win. Good could always be the best. I think that matters to a lot of people, actually.