![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Mary Sue. It's a term that gets thrown around a hell of a lot, up to the point where it seems like it means
a) any female character who's a bit good at something,
b) any original character in fanfic, especially a girl,
c) any character I don't like.
There's a serious case for giving up on the term altogether, but I can't help but think that it does refer to a real phenomenon that's worth discussing. Thing is, it's one of those "I know it when I see it" phenomena.
Firstly, it's not something that can be picked up by checklists. Sorry, but the Mary Sue Litmus Tests really are not useful here. It's not about the godmoding, not really -
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
The likes of Agatha Heterodyne, Miles Vorkosigan, Batman and the Doctor would be off the scale in the godmode stakes, and they're not pinging my Sue-dar either. There has got to be a reason why Johnny "Cursed With Awesome, Considerably Harder Than You, More Weapons Than Some Planetary Militaries, And Did I Mention My Angsty Past?" Alpha does not ping my Sue-dar, whereas Feral "I'm Albino, And A Shapeshifter, And Really Rebellious, And I've Got An Angsty Past Too, And... Er... That's About It" Jackson really does.
Conclusion: A Mary Sue is what happens when you aim for Awesome and miss.
Specifically, the annoying form of Mary Sueism goes something like this:
Reader: "So why should I care about this character again?"
Writer: "...because I... er... well... you just should!"
It is a triumph of Telling over Showing. It is Trying Too Hard. It is what happens when instead of a character actually being awesome, the writer keeps insisting on their awesomeness in increasingly loud and desperate tones, whilst the reader slowly backs away with one eye on the door.
Of course, there are common Suetastic tropes. Possibly the most annoying is Awesomeness Vampirism, in which previously competent characters suddenly become unable to tie their shoes without Mary Sue there to help them. There's also the Groupie Whammy, in which any other characters who fail a DC 30 Will save suddenly end up gushing over Mary Sue's wonderfulness (*cough* I shall name no Living Greyhawk NPCs *cough*). They're the tropes bad writers use when they realise they can't make you love their pet character if they play fair, and so resort to cheating.
Of course, this does mean that this is really a rather subjective term. This is fine. Fandom is all about the subjective answers to important questions, such as; is Cloud's true love Tifa or Aeris, who was the best Companion ever, and who would win in a fight between River Tam and Elsa Bloodstone? (The right answers are Sephiroth, Ace and the femslashers, of course). And this isn't going to make me cheer any less if Elminster gets his smug head pulled off by a dragon.
2. If Rorschach represents Kantian deontological ethics, Ozymandias represents utilitarianism, and Dr Manhattan represents some kind of existentialism, what about Dan and Laurie?
3. Judge Dredd: evidence that Lawful Neutral is in fact the scariest alignment?
4. Johnny Alpha and Wulf Sternhammer - Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser IN SPACE! Discuss.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 07:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 07:36 pm (UTC)There's something very Unknown Armies about Watchmen - it's all about the archetypes, and obsessions, and how becoming larger-than-life really screws you up. Hmm. Maybe I should write a UA AU?
no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 02:47 pm (UTC)2. Rawlsian social contract theory, maybe? Inequities can be supported so long as everyone is better off than they would have been under another system?
3. Good point. However, consider also the claims of Neutral Good (Granny Weatherwax) and Chaotic Good (V).
4. Yes, indeed. Although Fafhrd is, I suspect, rather smarter than Wulf, and the Mouser is a lot less angsty than Johnny.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 08:06 pm (UTC)Makes sense. I'm increasingly tempted by my theory that they represent all the kludges and improvisations of actual moral decision-making, given that they are kind of positioned as Everyman and Everywoman here.
3. Good point. However, consider also the claims of Neutral Good (Granny Weatherwax) and Chaotic Good (V).
The really scary thing about Dredd is that he's a kind of deconstruction of all kinds of Lawful Neutral impulses - that philosopher-kings would be a great idea if we could just get rid of all the human imperfections and corruptibility in them, that "there ought to be a law" is a plausible way of stopping any kind of behaviour you don't like, that if you've done nothing wrong you've got nothing to fear. Dredd's world is a Lawful Neutral dystopia that's as horrible as any explicitly evil one.