Mary Sue, Meet Analysis

[Psalm Of Fire]

“...made me realize the term “Mary Sue” or “Gary Stu” is being thrown around awfully liberally these days.”

That’s one of the first lines of the article “Don’t worry guys, Everything isn’t a Marry Sue”. And he brings up a good point; from flaws in the “is your character mundain enough to avoid being a Sue” kind of tests, to the concern of context. The article carries and pleasant, almost breezy tone that makes it easy to read. He uses funny illustrations and images to clarify his points. And more than that, he gives us some of his methods for “finding the funny”.

Some points I don’t agree with (such as "write what you know" and “the suspense doesn’t come from ‘will the good guys win’ but from ‘how will they win'”). They're quite beside the point however. What I do agree with, and couldn’t put to words before reading this article, is the way he defines a Mary Sue. The exact mechanics of why Mary Sues are boring. It's a definition that has yet to be matched by all the professional author's I've listened to on the subject. In other words, it's one that's really stuck with me.

The article is well written, entertaining, and informative in a way that lasts. Check it out.

[Psalm Of Fire]

Here's my view on that article I was looking to review. Edited the thread for convenience ^_^.

[ShonenHero]

Thank you Psalm! I completely agree with your analysis; most of her storytelling suggestions are superfluous, but her main arguments ring true. tl;dr the main problem with sues are conflict. They don't provide it, or they provide it at a level that we generally can't empathize or do not want to empathize with. It also doesn't help that some characters with certain conflicts just don't age well unless you present new ones (example: Superman)

[jgkitarel]

That actually broke things down nicely. I found it interesting that the "Moral Compass" aspect was more at the top of the list of trivial things, but I can't really argue that due to the specifics of the argument presented.

[Psalm Of Fire]

I think "moral compass" is an oversimplification of morality. I see much (much, not all) of people's morality, good or ill, as a result of their environment. This part of 'morality' I would place at the top as well; environments change, and people who were thought to be good turn out to be doing the "convenient good", and when good is not convenient any more, their actions are not so good. Of course, the reverse can be do. A convenient action that is wrong in one circumstance can become right in another, and the person thought evil is suddenly thought good. None of these situations actually reflect a moral compass, though. They reflect a "convenience compass". Of course, convenient good decisions have an overall positive effect for others, they just don't make the kind of steel inside needed to be you're unbending shonen protagonist.

Not that that is all there is to morality, just one part. So much is lost in that simplification. Once you layer in habit, the brain's limited perception, the biological inclination to imitate the behaviors of others in unfamiliar situations, the intent of the doer, willful ignorance, and upbringing on right and wrong we can begin to construct a mockery of actual morality. It's still a straw man, but you can see how those elements belong up and down that pyramid. And, perhaps, why I think shoving all those elements under one label and placing them in one location is a treacherous approach to assessing the role of morality.

[ShonenHero]

I think in terms of the human condition, what immediate needs everyone identify and empathize with, Maslow's pyramid's pretty dead on. In terms of translating those needs into a character, it can break down a little more unevenly.

After all, everyone has more then one need. A character can be trying to fulfill a need near the bottom of the pyramid, while also fulfilling a higher one. I guess it depends on the context of the story. Like, if a character were hungry and couldn't afford food, and morally they thought stealing was wrong so they went to a soup kitchen to get food instead of stealing from a store or vendor. Now both needs of the pyramid are being fulfilled; a higher, less immediate one and a much more immediate one.

And in terms of character empathy, if there's someone worried about writing characters with moral conflicts, I don't think you should worry too much. Generally when we're in a position to read a story, it's when all our immediate needs are being met and when we want to be entertained. We have time to think about stuff higher on the pyramid, and its easier to empathize with stuff like that then.

[Psalm Of Fire]

And in terms of character empathy, if there's someone worried about writing characters with moral conflicts, I don't think you should worry too much.

What would there be to worry about otherwise? That they'll use your book for firestarter? ;)

[ShonenHero]

And in terms of character empathy, if there's someone worried about writing characters with moral conflicts, I don't think you should worry too much.

What would there be to worry about otherwise? That they'll use your book for firestarter? ;)

Ha, true enough, though some people are sensitive about what they write and I can sympathize.

[Psalm Of Fire]

I have absolutely no context for what you're saying. I'm missing something, because right now that seems about a congruent with the morality discussion as "BBQ tastes good." While true... what's the connection again?

[ShonenHero]

Oh! I am probably missing a couple leaps of logic there, my bad. I just meant that, some people might be thinking that from this article and the setup of the pyramid it might mean that writing a character with moral conflicts would mean that it wouldn't connect very well with people, hence my argument why that's not the case and why I brought it up.

[Psalm Of Fire]

Aaaah. No, for anyone fearing that, no need to fear. Morality runs so deep. It's going to evoke a lot more emotions than a hero simply trying to feed his face.

[doc.exe]

I don't agree with the article in the interpretation that the things at the top of the Maslow pyramid are less important (or difficult to empathize with) than the things at the base. Now, admittedly it has been years since the last time I studied the pyramid, but if I'm not mistaken, that model stated that all of the needs presented were equally important and neccesary for the well being and development of the individual, but the things at the base were the ones with the most priority to fulfill because the inmediate survival of the individual depended on those. The article is right in that it's impossible to fulfill the needs at the top without first taking care of the needs at the bottom, but that doesn't mean the things at the top are less important (just less urgent), because ultimately every human being aspires to accomplish all of the levels in the pyramid.

That being said, I found the article fun to read, not to mention that it manages to make a very good point regarding Mary Sue characters and what is the real problem with them. Ultimately, it's not really the idealization or self insertion element (after thinking about it for some time, I have concluded that most fictional characters are idealized in some level or represent certain facets of the personality of their creator), but rather that they tend to dissipate the conflict in a story. It's really a reaffirmation of that old writing maxim ("meaningful conflict is the heart of good drama") but a good one.

It also doesn't help that some characters with certain conflicts just don't age well unless you present new ones (example: Superman)

That's a good point. Even then, I have to agree with one point of the article: When managed right, even characters as overpowered as Superman can be interesting. The key is to provide them with the proper sense of humanity in order to made them relatable (as the article puts it, give them conflicts and needs to fulfill that we as normal and common people can relate to).

"All Stars Superman", for example, being a tribute to the Silver Age, presents Superman at the most overpowered he has been in years (if not decades), and yet manages to make him a really relatable and sympathetic character.

It does it by putting him in a situation that contrast his overworldy super powers with a sense of humility and mortality. During the story his remaining time is limited, and the core of the conflict is not really about him finding a cure for the illness that is affecting him, but rather about him taking care of all his remaining business and making sure that everything is in place when he is no longer around. That is something that every person can relate to, because at some point in our lives we all discover that we have limited time and that we have to make the most and best of it while we can.

[ShonenHero]

Indeed! When given the right touch, Superman is an awesome character and is a personal favorite of mine. Shows like Young Justice, Superman the Animated Series, Justice League and comics like Superman Red Son and All Stars Superman really strive to show that even with all the powers that make Superman 'Super' he still has a lot of the failings and vulnerabilities that make him a Man.