The Pillars of Literature—Side Pillar: On Mary Sues · 11:05pm Apr 10th, 2014

This pillar is all about the idea of Sues, and what makes them fall into this category. For characters in general, look at the previous installment of this series: Pillar One

For a long time, the idea that a badly developed character is automatically a ‘sue’ has persisted in the world of fiction. Such characters are seen with scorn, even hatred. Granted, the reasons they seen as such is warranted, as sue stand for just about everything that’s wrong with a possible piece of work. However, this trigger-happy tradition to cry out “SUE!” and then burn the work that said sue exists in has led to much misconception on the idea of what a sue really is. Today’s posting will be about the nature of what a ‘sue’ is, the established criteria for sues, and why certain characters, despite having many qualities normally associated with sues, do not actually fall into the category.

First, I think it’s fair that you all know how the Term “Mary Sue” came into being. For that, we must dwell into the past, to where it all started.

The term ‘Mary Sue’ comes from the name of a character created by Paula Smith in 1973 for her parody story ‘A Trekkie's Tale.’ This story was published in her fanzine Menagerie #2.

The story starred Lieutenant Mary Sue the ‘youngest Lieutenant in the fleet — only fifteen and a half years old,’ and essentially satirized unrealistic Star Trek fan fiction and characters, which were generally female adolescents who had romantic liaisons with established canonical adult characters—or in some cases, were the younger relatives or protégées of those characters. By 1976 Menagerie's editors stated that they disliked such characters, stating:

Mary Sue stories—the adventures of the youngest and smartest ever person to graduate from the academy and ever get a commission at such a tender age. Usually characterized by unprecedented skill in everything from art to zoology, including karate and arm-wrestling. This character can also be found burrowing her way into the good graces/heart/mind of one of the Big Three (Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, if not all three at once). She saves the day by her wit and ability, and, if we are lucky, has the good grace to die at the end, being grieved by the entire ship.

The term Mary Sue has changed in the modern age from its original meaning. Now, it carries a generalized—although not universal—connotation of wish-fulfillment and is commonly associated with self-insertion. True self-insertion is a literal and generally undisguised representation of the author. Most characters described as ‘Mary Sues’ aren’t actual self inserts, though they are often called ‘proxies,’ since the author will put attributes he or she bears to said characters. The negative connotation of the Sue comes from the wish-fulfillment implication: the Sue is judged as a poorly developed character, too perfect and lacking in realism to be interesting.

With the history out of the way, let’s talk more about the qualities that make a Sue so infamous in general fiction. As stated above, Sue characters are often viewed as little more than wish fulfilling proxies for the author (if not direct links to the author via self-insertion).

However, it can be argued that the very nature of writing any piece of fictional work is in itself, a form of wish fulfillment. After all, don’t some of us visualize a world we would like to inhabit? Characters we would like to converse with, and situations that may or may not be what we often wish would transpire to us?

Because of the nature of fiction as a whole, it can be argued that the definition of ‘wish fulfillment’ given to Sues is fundamentally flawed. It is because of this that you rarely see any character have the term ‘Sue’ in historical fact stories. It is not only much harder to shape the world to fit the sue character when all events are based on real happenings, but also certain actual historical figures were, in fact, larger than life and almost perfect in nature, thus rendering the idea of a sue meaningless.

So then, if the idea that sues are purely wish fulfillment is a fundamental misconception, then what is the true definition of a sue? Well, let’s break it down piece by piece.

1. Ad perfectam rationem (perfection)

The next ‘definition’ of a sue, after wish-fulfillment, is perfection. A Sue is generally viewed as a character that’s perfect in almost all possible ways, often to the point that it overshadows all other characters present in the story (be it fan-fiction or general fiction).

Naturally, this is a great issue, especially if it is used in the world of fan-fiction, which requires the use of established universes and characters. When an original character (abbreviated to OC) takes the spotlight away from others, he or she plays a very risky game. The audience looks for someone they can relate to. They often want to see that character fail in order to witness his rise. They wish to be enthralled by his determination, his quest to overcome obstacles, however mundane they may be.

When a character who is too perfect takes the stage, he faces none of the tribulations that keep the audience enthralled. He can breeze by any kind of issue, face any sort of trouble without batting an eye, and often ends in a better position than the characters that dominate the story in the first place. This leads to the audience losing interest, because this character has no room to develop, no room to learn anything new. Perfection may have been what let him or her conquer the story, but it was his or her ultimate downfall in the eyes of the viewer.

2. Qui procurator votum syndrome (proxy)

All characters are based on something. They don’t have to be directly based on an existing person or individual, but they are based on existing ideas passed down from generation to generation. as Ralph Waldo Emerson once said: “All my best ideas were stolen by the ancients.”

In this regard, originality is a half-truth. No one character is wholly unique. What is unique about them is their personality, their views on life (or death, if applicable), their ways of going about their lives, and the way the go about solving the tribulations presented to them by the hands of fate. In these things, even a character who has been done thousands of times can find a new life.

Proxy characters are… unique.

Proxy characters, in a nutshell, are characters that, while bearing a different face than that of the author, bear all of his ideas, skills, and even tone of voice. They are essentially the avatar of the author given life through his written word. These characters can vary in complexity, from being simple re-skins of the author, to serving as clever mirror images and foils to the author’s own being.

However, the danger of proxy characters lie not in their use on a story, but rather how they can be given proportions that cause them to overshadow all of the other characters in any one story. This isn’t much of an issue in original fiction, as the characters can be written to nicely fit along the mold of the proxy. The issue lies when proxy characters are used (or even abused) in fan-fiction stories that already have established characters that cannot be altered as easily. while it is true that a very skilled writer can find a way to make his proxy character play nice along the lines of the established universe, the results are more often than not disastrous, leading to the audiences outcry and scorn of the character.

3. Et stipulam quis (poor character development)

A character that’s poorly developed does not go far in his or her story. This is one of the major trade marks of a Sue. Without in-depth development, no character can show growth or depth. Any emotion given is shallow and artificial, feeling more like doll than an actual three-dimensional being. It is for this reason that sues are often so criticized, because they are written in a rushed state. No care put into fleshing their individual personas out to the point that they are believable, and no reason is given as to why they lack attributes that many of you have.

Keep in mind that there is a difference between a poorly developed character that arises from the writer’s lack of experience on that particular matter, and a poorly developed character that was created so (intentionally or not) by a writer that couldn’t be bothered to give his or her creations more depth.

4. Quod homo, qui non habet veritatem (realism)

Perhaps one of the most critical aspects of any character is their ability to appeal to the masses. This is achieved by their level of realism.

Realism is, in a nutshell, just how much a character strikes us as ‘real.’ How much we feel for them—applaud their heroic actions, or scorn their villainous deeds. The more believable a character is, the more we are engrossed by the narration they are a part of.

A sue character not only stretches the boundaries of belief, they often snap it, leaving the story in a position where it’s may be humorous for all the wrong reasons (especially when the story is supposed to be taken seriously). When mixed with their tendency to be perfect, and their inability to grow (due to their lack of depth), this ends spelling complete disaster for the narration.

5. Se uelle… (self insert)

Despite what popular opinion would want you to believe, the act of self-insertion does not automatically mean a sue is made. Self inserts can be well made, especially if they serve to further the story, deliver a message, make a point, or all three combined as one.

The reason self-inserts are often labeled as ‘sues’ from the start is the fact that writers use them without any thought or reason. They insert themselves into a story only for the sake of being ‘in the story.’ What’s worse, they often forgo the proxy process and make themselves little more than shallow shadows of who they are in reality. They do not give themselves depth, emotions, goals, or weaknesses. What’s worse, the nail in the coffin is often the fact that self-inserts are directly used to interact with established characters, rather than sitting in the background as observers. The results of these direct meddlings can have… unique effects on the overall story.

Now, there is also another extreme to the self insert. In some cases, when an author does decide to use a self insert, but is aware of the pitfalls the technique can have, he chooses to give his ‘persona’ far less prowess than he or she would have in real life. This can lead to a type of sue that goes in the opposite direction of the adequate character, and instead becomes what is often referred to as an ‘anti-sue.’

The anti-sue, in a nutshell, is a character that has all of its qualities purposely handicapped so that it cannot be labeled a sue. However, in doing so, the character becomes so underpowered compared to the rest of the cast in any particular tale, that his inability to keep up ends up becoming the very trait that sets him apart in a negative light. A character that is not balanced is not a well-developed character.

Now, you’re probably wondering, if all the facts stated above can turn a character into a sue, then just what can avoid all that?

The simple answer is to think more in-depth about your character. Does he have goals? Does he have depth? Is he more than just a subtle proxy for your ideas?

Finally, an established character cannot truly transition into a sue. Even if a character is blamed for ‘becoming too perfect,’ as a story progresses, them turning into sues isn’t the reason. If they develop from lowly recluses, to out-going centers of attention, that’s their characters having achieved growth.

It is possible for a character to reach the pinnacle of his or her character arc, but even then, they don’t become sues. Rather, they characters begin to deteriorate, which is a natural aspect of character development. So long as a character has conflicts to deal with that challenge him as an individual—physically, morally, or emotionally—a character is moving forward. A sue stays in place.

Keep all this in mind next time you write a character. It might just mean the difference between creating an endearing character, or hollow shadow.

Until next time, have a good day or evening, and never stop writing.

Report Dconstructed Reconstruct · 1,454 views ·

Comments ( 48 )

Viewing 1 - 50 of 48
- Newest First
- Oldest First

SpaceCommie

SpaceCommie #1 · Apr 10th, 2014 · 5 · ·

"In this regard, originality is a half-truth. No one character is wholly unique."

Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.

-CS Lewis

TheStratovarian