Welcome to Gaia! ::

In my early years as a fanfiction writer, the concept of Mary-Sue was simple: it refered to an original character who was portrayed in an overly idealized way, thus lacking noteworthy and realistic flaws. I understand how this term is also refered to carbon copies of the author, simply created to act as a wish-fulfillment; and I do agree that, in these cases, the OC is a MS. The same would go for canon characters, both in fanfiction and original sources. While these terms may still be true today, I have developed problems with the term "Mary-Sue." It seems like writers are using the concept too widely, to the point where they are willing to call anyone a MS. Of course, any character can become a Sue, but are we starting to forget the basic key ingredients?

I began noticing this when a character I liked was being bashed as a Mary-Sue. I'm sorry, but since when has a shy, clumsy, akward girl been the basis for a MS? From what I've come to learn, a Mary-Sue would be more on the outgoing, graceful, and confident side. Okay, so the character was open-minded enough to not let the gossip of others guide her judge of character. Big deal. I'll admit, she does have a tragic past, but she does not angst over it in the stereotypical way. Instead, I found this to give more depth to her character. As such, in no way does this justify the harsh criticism she has been receiving. Every character has to have a certain amount of virtues, talents, vices, and flaws to make them a realistic, believable character. We seem to have forgotten that, basically, a MS is simply an all-perfect character. So much so that even if they have realistic flaws, they will still be considered a Mary-Sue. The definition has become so obscure and broad that we can't agree on who is a MS and who isn't, unless under extreme measures.

To make it worse, the term "Mary-Sue" has become so fearful to amateur writers that they will go to great efforts to avoid it. This leads to the Anti-Sue, where we find a character that is so full of flaws that the writer's attempt has backfired, creating a character that is just as over-the-top as a Mary-Sue, and just as badly developed and cliche.

I blame more experienced writers for this.

Mary-Sues have become such hated figures in the world of (fan)fiction that writers will unjustly bash and flame the "offending" writer. For a new writer that is just starting their first story, this is terrifying for them. Experienced writers are forgetting what amateur, rookie mistakes Mary-Sues really are. I find that most creators of Sues are simply beginning writers who just don't know any better. I know this isn't true for all writers. Let's face it: there are some moronic authors out there. But, all in all, Mary-Sues are rather innocent mistakes mady by the inexperienced.

However, instead, we treat such writers as if they have commited some horrible sin. No writer started out great, and none us can claim that, in some point in our lives, we haven't created a MS. But, like good writers, we learn from our mistakes and grow into even better one because of them. But, all we do in return is flame other new writers. Instead of giving constructive criticism, we tear the little rookies apart, possibly discouraging the next great writer of the century. How do we know that person can't be a future Charles Dickinson or Virginia Woolf, compared to the elitist with 2000 reviews on FF.net for a story with an unoriginal plot and only canon characters? (Another pet peeve of mine) Everyone has to start out somewhere. At least with MS creators, they try to create their own character; and, contrary to popular belief, it still takes imagination to make a MS.

Writing is like anything: it takes practice.

So, my fellow writers I ask you for the following things:

1. Think about the term Mary-Sue more carefully. Next time you come across a character, don't be in such a rush to mark them as a Sue. We need to make the concept less broad and use it more strictly. Give OCs a chance; you'll find that there are some good ones out there.

2. If you do come across an honest-to-good Mary-Sue do not flame the writer. Instead, give them constructive criticism, teach them, and help create a well-developed, likeable character - and be nice about it.

Thank you for posting this. I agree with you 100%. I created a character in the "Kim Possible" fandom that, looking back on it now, is totally a Mary Sue (this character has now seemed to become my main username online but that's only because that's what people now recognize me as).

What I hate is people who see an OC in a story and instantly cry "Mary Sue!" without even bothering to read. I want to write a "Code Lyoko" fanfiction piece with an OC of mine but, even being a much more experienced author now, I am iffy about the backlashing I'd get from it.

I've learned how to easily spot a MS before you even open a story. If the summery of the story is (Code Lyoko wise here...):

"There's a new girlboy at Kadic...she seems to know about Lyoko but is (s)he friend or foe?"

Then it's probable that character is a MS.

I don't know, I mean some fanfic genres will have more "powerful" characters than others just because. Like a Star Wars Sith or Jedi, or a Superhero in the Marvel or DC comic world compared to someone in the Naruto or Sailor Moon realms. (insert you own examples if you wish)
A doctor who never looses a patient in the House or ER realm would be boring and missplaced along with the shows characters.
Sora is the keyblade master and should always be the strongest when writing a KH based fanfic.

Just think about it. If your character is the solution to EVERY problem, or could be- than you probably need to rethink him or her over.

Well the thing is, for a more extensive plot, sometimes the characters in the manga/book/movie are not sufficient. The need for an original character arises. It is acceptable to create original characters as long as you don't turn them into something overly powerful, perfect...in short Mary Sue. I believe that a good supporting original character can add some interesting turns in the story.

...I've written a couple hundred pages or so of OC based works without even knowing what a Mary sue was, so now with such strong emphasis on them it makes me quite nervous. Dunno if that's ever happened to anyone else, but it leaves behind a strong sense of doubt.

I will admit to starting out my career on fanfiction with a Mary-Sue. Her name was my user name (still is my user name, actually). She was cute, pretty, smart, and had traits granted to only a few of the cannon characters.

I was not flamed. I can honestly say that in (almost) three years at fanfiction.net I have never truly been flamed. (I've hit a point as of late where I'm asking for constuctive critism, but that's beside the point).

When I look back on it now, I refer to my first handle of reviews as being 'Saved'. I often return to the profile of the user who 'saved' me from my sue-dom.

I know that had I been flamed within those first few months, I would have quit fanfiction forever. I can take critism well, if that's what it is. But if I was to be blantly told I sucked, merely for that fact that my polished and poised young female existed, it would have broken my writing spirit. As a 'vetran' author, I occasionally feel its my place to set author's straight on grammar, marysuedoms [I don't do this often], and to compliment where necessary. Although, this isn't often. I find it too difficult to wade through the quagmire of yaoi and poorly written stories to find anything worth critiquing.

I have a few minor OCs I've brought into a few of my stories (I tend to reuse them because I get attached), but I've never once had a comment about them, because I leave them minor.

I think that one of the biggest problems with Mary-Sues is that the author centers some portion of the true story around them. (What bothers me is when they adjust the timeline of the anime/story to fit their character).

There's not really anything wrong with original charactes in any sense. Its the few drastic ones that have earned almost all original characters the title. And there actually are quite a few that don't deserve it.

#1: Which is exactly why we need to come up with different terms, and stop calling every cliche characters a Mary-Sue. I see a MS as simply a perfect character; no matter how cliche they are, if they have just one flaw, they are not Mary-Sues. The two terms are not interchangeable to me.

#2: No, they don't deserve it. I don't care how bad the story is, I do not support the flamming of others. Flamming is simply immature and moronic; it serves absolutely no purpose other than hurting others and doesn't provide anything constructive. I don't see flammers as anything but holier-than-thou jerks who have nothing better to do than be cruel to others.

I never said anything about plagiarizing. Originally, I just stated that I don't like how others make Mary-Sues out to be such sins, which usually leads to the author being unjustly flammed.
But, honestly, even if you do come across a plagiarizer, I don't think it's necessary to go on a whole tangent, unless you are the original author. An author who has had their work stolen can do more damage in a single review than dozens of flames put together, and they have every right to do so. If I ever did come a plagiarizer who copied another's work, I would report them, notify the original author, and tell the offender what they did wrong. But I would do so in an intelligent, mature way. However, plagiarism is a whole different scenario, which is not what I was refering to.
I prefer acting more like an adult, which doesn't include flamming people. Criticism is okay, but I prefer if it's constructive; I have no problems even being blunty honest either. But, that is not the same as flamming.
Also, I don't care how egotistical a particular writer is, or how much they mess the facts up, I don't think acting like a similar jackass by flamming someone is any better. Be the bigger person. If you have problems with an author and their work, try talking to them. If that doesn't work, than ignore them and go on your merry way. Why bother wasting energy on some jerk with a crappy piece of writing? It's not like it affects you in life.
Furthermore, I was talking about people who are hurt by flames, which is most often the case. Plus, the whole point of flamming is to hurt others; you don't give constructive criticism in a flame. Just thinking about the name itself implies causing pain: flame=burn=pain. I'm pretty sure that's how we come up with the name. Even if it doesn't hurt the writer, the reviewer's motive is still there, and I don't support that. Flames have even gotten so bad, that I see people wishing death upon the author.
Also, I'm even more against flamming writers who are really trying; and I don't care how bad the story is, if they are truly putting in effort, I will gladly offer help to make them better writers.