Why is Mary Sue a bad thing? [Overthinkingit]

[takenoko]

For those who don't know, a Mary Sue is a criticism used to describe a character too perfect or overly idealized or seems overly favored by the creator

My question is, why is this a bad thing?

It seems more like it's a criticism of wish-fulfillment... but.... what's wrong with that too? Isn't the entire point of fiction the fact that one can create whatever they want, including unrealistic fantasy stories?

If people like the story and can get involved in the character, isn't it kind of neat to see them accomplish tremendous feats that would never happen in real life? If we criticize a work of fiction because it's too out there, there's not enough grounding in realism, then that invokes the question: just how realistic does a piece of fiction have to be to be enjoyable?

Obviously the answer will vary from person to person.

Let's take my favorite punching bag of this type: Tendou Souji. Sure, he has character flaws and not everything goes his way, but overall he's pretty untouchable in the first part of the series. Why is is acceptable that this guy is able to turn into a giant armored beetle that can move super fast, but his exaggerated charisma and success rate is what is called into question?

Is it the unrealistic nature of the outcome of events? Then let's take a character wielding Coinspinner from the 12 swords series. While not a direct consequence of a character's basic nature, anyone wielding Coinspinner will have nothing but good things happen to them. Depending on the fiction, we see that situations can be bent into any shape the creator wants

So if we assume that Tendou is as smart, talented, and quick as befitting his massive hubris, isn't it alright to say that he can achieve great things because he's supposed to be a great character?

I guess another complaint that can be made against Mary Sues is that if the character is too perfect, the story doesn't become compelling. There's no obvious room for growth when you're at the top, right?

But if the character is likable as is, is there really a need to change it? I don't think every good story requires that characters learn something or becomes drastically different by the end. I think a character can still be tremendously fun to watch even if they breeze through the obstacles, as long as he or she does so with style or in an entertaining manner.

That's the whole point of a fantasy. Real life is real, and there's a lot of great fiction that conveys the harsh nature of reality. But a fantasy is just supposed to be fun. Instead of overthinkingit, why not just enjoy a group of unrealistic kids as they achieve unrealistic goals in their glee club?

[lostinbrave]

I think this generality is very interesting, on of my favorite characters is a Mary Sue. I am referring to Dirk Pitt from the Dirk Pitt novels. He is an action adventure hero, he owns a large hangar filled with antique cars and collectible, he has 2 kids that he doesn't have to take care of, he always gets the girl... But he also has some faults that makes you feel like his level of perfection is attainable which really brings you in to him.

I have also noticed in my writing I do it a lot as well, I focus on one character, and give them all the attention, skills and every thing else needed, or wanted. and because of this some of the readers have been turned off from my stories.

Basically what I am saying if a Mary Sue character is written well, it will be a very popular character, because it give people hope of a better future for them selves. Though, on the reciprocal, if badly written they seem like a snob, and the people you always hate, not because they are great but because they have all this amazing ability, and with out knowing it flaunt it around. Unfortunately there are many more that fit in the second category, and very few that fit in the first.

[takenoko]

Okay, how about the Wesley Crusher version? He's not a snob. He's super talented, but he's not pretentious about it. Yet a lot of people seem to hate him.

Yes, he flaunts his skills, but isn't that the point of a fantasy story? He wouldn't be much of a Mary Sue if he was constantly failing at what he's doing. What's the difference between showing off because it's necessary for the plot/characterization as opposed to showing off because it's excessive?

It may bug people that Wesley goes "hey, let me show you what I can do" but the only other option at times is to let the ship explode.

[Anime_freek22]

Ah Mary Sue eh? I always viewed them as fangirls shoving themselves into fan fics. As a perfect character...I think people hate them simply because they want a flawed character. Although that doesn't really seem to be the case for Goku. But that aside, I view Mary Sues as what we all want to end up as, but can never be. It really is the fangirl/boy with the perfect looks and powers inserted into the series. So maybe it could be a resentment or just a general sense of disbelief. I.e. in Tendou's case: He cooks, he's hawt, he can do hair up, he is uber smart, a loving brother, he does everything PERFECTLY. I think people just resent the fact that they are flawless, so really lacking as a character. You really can't develop perfection all too well throughout a series can you?

[Arigomi]

I don't think that the archetype is necessarily bad. The problem lies in the execution. Even when they are effectively written, they tend to end up as polarizing characters. Mary Sues are defined by extremes, leaving no room for a middle ground.

But if the character is likable as is, is there really a need to change it? I don't think every good story requires that characters learn something or becomes drastically different by the end. I think a character can still be tremendously fun to watch even if they breeze through the obstacles, as long as he or she does so with style or in an entertaining manner.

The operative word is entertaining. It is very difficult to have a character breeze through obstacles without the story becoming predictable and boring. I actually think Tendou Souji did change by the end of Kabuto but the writers didn't have enough time to explore it because they were too busy trying to cram in an epilogue.

Even if the character doesn't change, something about the world has to alter in order for the narrative to have any impact. People are looking for something of value to take away from a story. If nothing changes, then nothing of interest happened.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Superman as a classic Mary Sue character. Arguably the most powerful superhero, he was given only one physical weakness. On the surface, his personality doesn't seem to show any signs of extremes. He's dapper, mild mannered, and down to earth. On closer inspection, Superman is really the personification of a goody-two-shoes boy scout.

[lostinbrave]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Superman as a classic Mary Sue character

I was steering clear of that. I mean what do you do when a guy can blow out the sun in one breath.

Ultimate Mary Sue, and it all started from cartoons.

[takenoko]

>Even if the character doesn't change, something about the world has to alter in order for the narrative to have any impact. People are looking for something of value to take away from a story. If nothing changes, then nothing of interest happened.

I don't know if I agree with that. There are a lot of shows where the episode returns to the status quota by the end of the episode and nothing is learned or gained. I guess some examples are like the Simpsons or Family Guy, which are purely episodic. I guess this wouldn't work for a show with a overarching story though, since being teased with the promise of change only to never get it would be pretty unfulfilling

>I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Superman as a classic Mary Sue character.

In my case, I don't think of Superman as a Mary Sue. When I got into comic books in high school/college it was right after his death arc. While one can say "oh yeah, but he defied death and came back to life" that doesn't really say much when talking about comic book heroes in general.

At any rate, it was proven that Superman can die. In the year or two since I followed Superman, I saw him confronted with a ton of stuff he couldn't handle. His main vulnerability is that he may be invincible, but not the people or places close to him. There was an arc where Metropolis was destroyed, where people targeted his friends, even his parents.

Now that I'm older, I guess I'd prefer Batman as a more compelling character, so it's not that I don't see where you're coming from

[kokowaks]

the writers of kabuto wanted a change in the usual attitude of the lead characters... most of them are down-to-earth and they fight because they want to protect others... not thinking they are the center of the universe... exept for momo

i dont think kabuto or tendou is a bad... but most of us prefers those other guys since we can see ourselves in them... they are not perfect but are able to do amazing things...

[UMMX]

I think it find to have Mary Sue char's in an story. Just make sure you have more then one and everything will turn out find. I think the main reason why people hate Mary Sue is because DA, make it seem like an bad thing.

[nekollx]

I think it find to have Mary Sue char's in an story. Just make sure you have more then one and everything will turn out find. I think the main reason why people hate Mary Sue is because DA, make it seem like an bad thing.

All of your example really aren't Mary Sues, a MAry Sue has no flaws, they can do no wrong.

Let me give a example.

In one fan fic i read there was a human girl who was married to Optimus Prime and could turn into a truck, oh and she was carrying Prime's Baby.

Mary Sues don't live in the world of the story, the physics of reality bend over backward to accommodate them.

[lonegamer7]

Arigomi pretty much hit the nail on the head regarding a Mary Sue. While it is true on wish fulfilment on the author's part, when it becomes "Me, me, me, me, and me", whoever the lead character is, it gets damn boring. No conflict, little to no character development on said Sue (or Gary Stu/Marty Stu for the male variety), also little to no character development on the secondary characters (because they tended be delegated to the "fan club" or "audience" or "Woobie" levels), no opportunity to reflect on decisions, not balanced (the polarizing aspect Ari mentioned)... Just, bleah. Heck, TVTropes puts it best on their page for Mary Sues (and it's subcategories/traits). Good execution is the main problem and the bad ones tend to range from Did Not Do The Research to You Fail Physics/Biology/Logic/what-have-you Forever.

[takenoko]

I'm going to post a theory, let me know if you think it's a fair one

Could it be that people who don't like Mary Sues are suffering from the idealized world syndrome from "The Matrix". I mean, it sounds like the same thing. As beings who live in a flawed world, we come to shape our expectations to match, and anything that comes off as too idealized is rejected because it breaks us out of our suspension of disbelief

I had a friend make a Mary Sue like complaint about Kuuga too actually. She felt the main character never grew. But is that necessary to have fun? Don't we want to believe a man can fly? Or that a man with an unlimited supply of bullets can slaughter 100's of people and that actually solves his problems?

>Mary Sues don't live in the world of the story, the physics of reality bend over backward to accommodate them.

I mean, don't people say the same thing about Harry Potter? "Harry! Here's this rule that we're explaining just so you can break it at the end because that'll be cool" And a lot of people like Harry Potter

[Draiken]

I've never seen "The Matrix", so I can't say much about it, but I find this to be somewhat similar to movies in general. I can watch a movie and enjoy it, but it won't always be a good movie. Like the sequel to "Alvin and the Chipmunks". While I enjoyed the movie, there were a few characters I wish had more time to develop, but since I still I had fun seeing the movie, I won't let it bother me so much later. (Similarly, there are movies that I will agree are well-made but not movies that I enjoy.)

So while I'm not fond of Mary Sues, I agree that it is not necessary for a character to grow in order to enjoy something be it a book, a movie, or whatever. I think that it's more important to have fun, but it's not bad to see a character as a Mary Sue/Marty Stu. I feel that it kinda shows that the audience cares about the characters.

-Draiken Talkos

[takenoko]

The situation in the Matrix is that everyone is in a pod and plugged into this group experience created by a computer. Originally the experience was like a paradise, but everyone started dying off because they were rejecting the obviously false reality. So the current version of the Matrix is basically similar to modern day

[Saejima Kouga]

I tried to watch it once. Got bored and slept.