Subject: True...
Author:
Posted on: 2010-08-29 04:26:00 UTC
I am, however, inclined to say that legends such as the Arthurian tales have different rules for characterisation.
I will agree, though, that Galahad is a total and utter Stu.
(Though I loved Python's Galahad to pieces)
Is it possibly for a Mary Sue to be in a good story when said story is not mocking or deconstructing the concept of a Mary Sue?
So I'd have to say no, but that's just my opinion, so feel free to disregard it if you want. Just that I've always figured a Sue, by its very nature, drags the story down; if it's a good character, it isn't a Sue.
A Sue is, by definition, er... there are several definitions, all too lengthy to post and deconstruct in the short time I have remaining before work.
Some characteristics, instead:
-Authorial Self Insert
-Uncannily Good-looking
-More Powerful than really possible
-Center of the Plot
...etc.
I've seen implausibly entered characters who were altogether unbelievable, but the author actually spent some time on their personality and gave them a few weaknesses, as well as putting together an actual Plot. A Sue is almost always a hallmark of poor writing ability-- someone who can't write a decent character and has trouble writing a story with good details is... well, the average fangirl. But poor writing ability is not always a hallmark of a Suefic, and sometimes, very rarely, someone pulls it off. I should clarify-- at least 95% of the stories out there are absolutely terrible.
For example, JulyFlame just started a roleplay where all of the characters are supposed to be Sues/Stus. It's one of the most fun, intricate, and mind-bendingly thoughtful things I've done in a long time. (It's located here, if you were wondering.) Whether or not a 'Sue is a terrible character depends entirely on the author. If the author writes Sues/Stus because they have no imagination to write more realistic characters, the story will be terrible. If the author is a good author who writes Sues/Stus for fun, the story might not be absolutely terrible.
...all of us are too good at writing for the characters to all be true Mary Sues. They all have plausible flaws and are written well, plus they can't exact their plot-altering powers well since we can't affect the actions of other characters.
I've been amused before at how, as hard as some of us try to write Sooper Speshul Teh Awesomez characters, it's actually... it's like trying 2 rit3 n3tspk. Doesn't come naturally. (I would know. My boss tried to make me use @ instead of at in a document yesterday, where the word "at" actually fit, and easily. Biggest argument we've had in weeks.)
Some fics can survive Mary Sue because the Sue is weak and/or the fic is particularly well-written. They would be better if the character weren't a Sue, but are still goodfic even with her in them.
Check out the "Historical Sues" wiki page for canon examples.
If you define a Mary Sue as a character with special powers and no decernable flaws, she could be in goodfic, because it is not the special powers or the lack of flaws that actually make a fic bad.
If you define a Mary Sue as a character that causes canon characters to behave unlike themselves and causes the plot to be nonsensical, then a Mary Sue can't be in goodfic because her very definition negates goodfic.
...the Holy Grail story (Mallory, not Python) thrills despite Sir Galahad's urpleness.
I am, however, inclined to say that legends such as the Arthurian tales have different rules for characterisation.
I will agree, though, that Galahad is a total and utter Stu.
(Though I loved Python's Galahad to pieces)
Of course it is. The issue is making the Mary Sue so minor or inconspicuous that Willing Suspension of Disbelief allows the readers to enjoy the story despite the presence of a Mary Sue.
On one hand, I WANT to say that even if a character is absurdly overpowered, if she's in a story that does not play up her overpowered-ness and make her the driving force of the plot-- if she exists in the background only or in no more limelight than any other characters... yes.
BUT...
One of the big things that makes a Mary Sue a Mary Sue is that she sucks the plot up into her. So if a character that overpowered exists without really compromising the story's direction, then she sort of ceases to be a Mary Sue and turns into merely an absurdly strong character...
So no.
If a Mary Sue is in Goodfic, she ceases to be a Mary Sue if her quality matches the goodfic. If not, then the goodfic ceases to be goodfic-- ruined by the appearance of the Sue...
Or at least I think so. I could be totally wrong, though...
It's all a matter of persaonal definition, I think. In my book, a Mary Sue is a character who steals the show by way of being excessively pretty/powerful/adorable/angsty/et cetera/all of the above. The ridiculous over-the-top-ness of the character is a major part of that definition, but not all of it. If such a character appeared in a story but didn't steal the show, I wouldn't be so quick to label it a Sue - it might be, but I'd want to judge each such case individually.
It's not a foolproof system - the matchmaker Sues who exist to force canon characters into OOC relationships may well be an exception - but that's how I go about it.
So to answer your original question, Charlie, I'd say not - I agree with Aster; if a Mary-Sue-like character were to be in a good story that isn't deliberately playing on the concept, I wouldn't call it a Sue - not outright.
In my opinion, if a story revolves around a single character, then that fact ruins both the story and the character.
Especially with short stories.
Any story in which there is only one viewpoint character will typically revolve around that character to at least some degree. Even if only to the degree that it is limited to what said character perceives.
I can think of one exception to this. However the narrator is telling a story that he pieced together both from his own experiences and what he learned from others.
I can't, however, think of an example of a good story in which the entire fictional world revolves around one character.
What I meant was that all the events in the story and the behaviour of the other characters only relate to the main character. As you say - the entire fictional world revolves around one character and there's never a hint that there's anything more to it than scenery with which the main character can interact.
I definitely agree about viewpoint constraints meaning that a single-POV story will focus on a single character, but I think that there should be some suggestion that there are other things going on, even if we never get to see them. For example (and I know this is hardly an example of a short story) the Harry Potter books were usually very tightly focussed on Harry, but sometimes other people's stories intersect with his and we get to see that they do have thoughts and feelings separate from him, and things do happen that don't directly tie into what he's doing.
Not sure how much clearer that was...
I see what you're saying, and I agree.
The only exception would be a story so short there isn't room for anything outside the main idea.
An over powered character can be use to drive the plot, but only if they are not the main character, otherwise the story becomes boring usually. Having them as a single enemy against a team works well.