Subject: Please nobody do this
Author:
Posted on: 2021-05-05 02:03:49 UTC
Internet fandom spaces are, like, defined by making really hard stances based on mostly exaggerated, inaccurate information. I don't see why we need to acknowledge this one, let alone march up to their faces and exclaim 'uuhhh actually you're incorrect.'
I'm a regular TV Tropes user, so this isn't to bash the website, but I found this while editing Broken Aesop:
Like, TV Tropes has kind of had this outdated perception of the PPC as a whole for, like, over a decade now. And admittedly, sometimes they have some points and all since from what I've heard the older PPC wasn't the... friendliest place, but these reviewer folks always seem to be missing something about us, so. (I wasn't there back then, though, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)
Anyway. Like, for instance, with this one at least, the troper doesn't seem to get that the thing with Agents isn't that they brute force their way through everything with high-powered tech, but that they cheat. They're almost never physically tougher than the majority of Sues, so it encourages creativity and all that. The gist of it all seems to be random folks killing overpowered folk. (Also, this guy lists off being an self-insert like it's a bad thing on its own, so I'm not sure I'd trust this guy's values on creative writing to begin with.)
Overall, TV Tropes is kind of just pop culture Wikipedia, so I can see why some folk looking over the old pages haven't realized the PPC has changed over two decades, but hey. Nothing worth getting riled up over or anything, I think. It's just opinion, anyway.
-OrangeFox
I think it wouldn't be unfair to say that the original definition of "Mary Sue" is a perfect female self-insert who wrecks the canon. Delightfully, Wikipedia currently has the entire text of the 1973 "A Trekkie's Tale" on their Mary Sue article, and (barring that it was a parody) the definition fits.
Since that time (and stars above, Original Mary is in her mid 60s now), various people or communities have focussed in one part or another of the term:
Fandom as a whole tends to focus on 'perfect'. That's where you get the big lists of traits, with "if your character scores more than X points they're a Mary Sue!".
Whole swathes of obnoxious men have picked up 'female', and now deride any OFC as a Mary Sue. This is where a lot of the backlash against the term comes from, and is why I prefer "Suvian" in my own writing these days.
As you note, a lot of people look at the 'self-insert' part, and I think this is what people mean when they say "I know my character's a Mary Sue" or suchlike.
The PPC nowadays hones in on the 'who wrecks the canon' aspect. We're actually quite unusual in that respect, which is why we define the term at such length on the wiki. It's worth noting that this position has developed over time - we used to have a lot more focus on traits and attributes, but that way lies sexism, and we really don't want that around.
hS
Some OCs are identified as self-inserts by their authors, and some definitely have a recognizable SI vibe, but a lot of the time it's not that easy to tell. It's important to remember we don't actually know anything about the authors, so we can't know how much of themselves they've put into a particular character.
It's also not that important if a character is or isn't a self-insert, because what makes a Mary Sue is how it's written, not any particular trait about it. A lot of agents are explicit self-inserts, after all, and we would certainly hope that doesn't make them Sues!
~Neshomeh
I have a mild fever, so sorry in advance if this doesn't make much sense.
Going off of the conclusion statement, particularly the last half ("and then treat the dimension-hopping, shapeshifting, universally-ordained hunter dripping in technology who shoots her through the head as without fault") here, I read somewhere one the wiki that the PPC is considered by some agents as evil, but they still work for the PPC (this moral dilemma is something I'm planning on working into CPP lore) but I forgot where.
So, both meta and in-universe, agents (and the PPC in general) is not without faults.
(Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though.) -kA
Acacia looked, and cringed. "This fic is just plain evil—" she shook her head. "No. No it isn't, it's worse than that. We're evil, Miss Cam is evil, this is just plain dumb."
The PPC is a bunch of theoretically-paid murderers who have to constantly be reminded that Torture Is Bad, Mmkay?. They have a department which glories in its mission of setting fire to everything. They recruit Sith, Orcs, Mind-flayers, and a whole assortment of other nasties. They think nothing of sending kids as young as thirteen out to kill. Their bosses care absolutely nothing for their comfort or even safety, with even the cafeteria food being a) disgusting, b) dangerous, and c) occasionally cannibalism. Their closest allies torture young fans at length for the right to write, often with the assistance of literal demons.
By any objective standard, the PPC is evil as sin.
But at least they're cheerful about it. ^_^
hS
Assuming Acacia is serious, which is rather a big assumption: In a worldview where dumb is worse than evil, what the heck qualifies as good? I don't know.
But I don't take Acacia all that seriously. {= )
TBH, I think the PPC is better defined in terms of Order vs. Chaos than Good vs. Evil. Upstairs is Lawful Neutral: as long as order is maintained in the multiverse, they don't care how it gets done. However, they also don't usually go out of their way to be horrible to the agents (unless they are Legal), but they just don't get what the big deal is a lot of the time, because they are giant plants and the agents by and large are not. They don't stop the agents from organizing themselves to make their lives better, because that furthers the cause. It's just tough to organize in a place where time and space can shift on you without notice.
OCs run the gamut of Good and Evil as far as how they present themselves, but that isn't what matters to the PPC; all that matters is whether or not they fit in with their host universe. The more they act like destructive parasites, warping timelines, minds, physics, etc., the more the PPC objects, regardless of whether they're there to Kiss the Baby or Kick the Dog.
... And I always wander into this metaphor of Suvians (and badfics in general) as disease vectors and the PPC as an immune response, because I think it's a good fit. White blood cells and the aptly named killer-T cells are stab-happy psychos (if you've seen Cells at Work, you know exactly what I mean!), but only when their body is under threat of invasion from harmful foreign cells—usually, anyway. If they start going after neutral foreign bodies (allergens) or good, healthy cells, then you've got a problem. Same with the PPC. It's got a helluva potential to wreak bloody havoc, but it's fine as long as its targeting system functions correctly. Fortunately, the system has improved over time. {= )
Now, whether individual agents are Good or Evil is a whole 'nother question...
~Neshomeh
... literally just release a mission for the Phantom of the Opera and a Murder-Viking? ^_~ (I know, I know...)
The Canon Protection Initiative is a classic example of the end justifying the means. They function in the same moral space as the people who try to use the Dark Side of the Force to fight the Sith, or Unforgivable curses against Death Eaters. Come to think of it, have they stopped using actual Unforgivables yet? I know they were tossed around like magical confetti at one point.
Were it not a point of canon, the PPC as a whole would listen to Galadriel's "in place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen" speech and go "yeah, but she'd be on our side" (Dafydd basically did this). Has there ever been anything which the in-universe PPC has looked at and said "that's not right, we can't use that"? Not 'it does more damage than we want' (blowing up universes), or 'it won't actually help' (torture), but 'that's wrong'?
I honestly can't think of an example.
hS
I think the in-universe PPC takes a very dim view of agents behaving like their targets. Witness Sue-tracking anklets, the DIO (formerly), and Legal just waiting to pounce on anyone who seems to have it too good with ironic misfortune. Granted, some things have historically slipped through the cracks, but that just goes to show the PPC isn't perfect, which is good, right? ^_^
And again, I think it's important to distinguish Upstairs from the bulk of agents here. Even if Upstairs only frowns on torture because it's ineffective and inefficient,[citation needed] there are plenty of agents who frown on it because it's wrong. Enough to (usually) keep their more bloodthirsty partners in check when they want to go off the deep end, anyway. The existence of both sorts is more or less explicitly in the service of balance: just enough Evil to be motivated, just enough Good to be safe. Thus the whole operation keeps ticking at peak plot tension efficiency.
Re. Unforgivable Curses, interesting question: while only the bad guys use them in the Potterverse as a narrative device to show who's evil and who isn't, does that necessarily apply outside Harry Potter? Even in-universe, I actually don't recall if the books take a stance that killing is Always Wrong or not, but I don't think so? Mind-control is another matter; that's pretty firmly Always Wrong. Torture, too. But I don't think I've seen agents use Imperio or Crucio; just Avada Kedavra. Correct me if I'm wrong, and it wouldn't surprise me if there's a case or two out there, but this makes sense to me: mind-control is a hallmark of Suvians, and we just covered torture. Most agents ought to be predisposed to avoid those two.
I will admit that Nume has used Avada Kedavra, but then, we already knew he's not very nice. {= P
~Neshomeh
... through the Grand Archive, and there are no instances of a PPCer voluntarily using the Cruciatus curse and only one Imperius (from 2004). So I stand corrected on that point (though isn't the AK the one that literally tears your soul apart?).
You said "I think the in-universe PPC takes a very dim view of agents behaving like their targets", but you yourself just got done saying that Suvians aren't a force of evil so much as disorder*. The whole point of, heck, even Jaycacia is that she's not Evil - in fact she's a lot nicer than most agents! But she's also a flaming Suvian, and deserves everything coming to her. >:D
*Disorder... entropy? Has anyone asked the Lone Power what their role was in creating Suvians?
...
Okay, that would make for a perfect teamup between Kaitlyn (who always wanted to be a wizard) and Yasmeena (whose Manual has been repossessed by the Canon Librarian). Do we have any other YW-related agents bobbing around? I feel a Quest to Chuck Rocks at the Lone One's Head coming on...
hS
I believe the "tearing your soul apart" thing is what you're thinking of in regards to the creation of a horcrux—in the Potterverse, the act of murdering someone in general tears your soul, and a horcrux can only be made after you've murdered someone and captured that bit of soul you want to store.
The Killing Curse is one of the Unforgiveables because it cannot be blocked—Harry's situation was so unusual because he was the only person in history to ever survive it (because of Lily's sacrifice and the unusual protection spell it placed on him).
Otherwise, it's a painless way to die, which seems like a pretty alright method of assassination to me. (Though my Agent Ix would still never use it, due to the taboos from her home 'verse...)
... discussions on the Board about how the Horcrux reveal meant that Avada Kedavra was inherently bad for you, but I've had a look and can't find it... I think I might be crossing it over with the reveal that Scape referred to, the 'you have to mean it' one. So thank you!
hS
Harry Potter himself uses or attempts both Crucio and Imperio, and he gets away with it. McGonagall uses Imperio while it's technically legal, too. {= O
~Neshomeh
Does that mean the Catastrophe Theory timeline is Cells At Work: Code Black?
...
Agent Luxury put down the U-1196 White Blood Cell costume that is NOT SUITABLE FOR THE MEDICAL CENTRE-
and provide the reason as inaccuracy and/or bashing.
Internet fandom spaces are, like, defined by making really hard stances based on mostly exaggerated, inaccurate information. I don't see why we need to acknowledge this one, let alone march up to their faces and exclaim 'uuhhh actually you're incorrect.'
It would be nice if they came in with a more accurate idea of what we're about, no?
'Course, the last time we made a concerted effort to make TVT's representation of us more broadly accurate, less skewed toward mostly Laburnum's and Tawaki's spin-offs (since they were the most active editors over there for a while), TVT banned the people involved for "whitewashing," so I have no faith that we would be allowed to make improvements even if we tried. This is the main reason my preferred source for trope reference is All the Tropes.
~Neshomeh also likes being able to interlink with it easily from the wiki.
And it's worth remembering that we need to be careful how we write our agents to avoid the "without fault" bit at the end there.
That said, I think claiming that PPC missions have a moral to them is pretty funny. I mean, sure, there is a message or lesson to be gleaned from any given mission, so the word technically applies, but come on, we're not talking about ethical good and bad. (Well, not usually.) We're talking about what makes good or bad writing. I hope it won't shock anyone when I say the quality of one's writing has no bearing on the quality of one's personal character. {; P
Also, the description of said "moral" is at the very least outdated when it comes to us, and the assumption that the hunter character must be more powerful than the Mary Sue to achieve victory betrays the same flawed thinking that leads to writing Mary Sues in the first place. IMO, the quote fundamentally doesn't know what it's talking about.
But, again, it doesn't hurt to be reminded that we're not above criticism. It's important that we don't get flustered about it, but simply prove false ideas false by taking them on board and making sure to avoid them. Keeping out blatantly smug, OP, curbstompy agents is one reason we have the Permission process, after all. The risk is real.
... Now, I wonder, what would be a good moral for the average mission? A good moral should be succinct, pithy, easy to remember. Something like "writing that's careless makes readers that care less," maybe. "A character is only as strong as her struggles are meaningful." "Exploring wish-fulfillment fantasies is healthy and normal, but best done in private." "An edit in time saves nine." "Fact-check twice, post once." Perhaps the classic, "The rules of writing are not arbitrary."
'Course, for ourselves, we should always keep in mind the MST3K mantra: "It's just a show story. We should really just relax." ^_~
~Neshomeh