I'm curious about this, but how does one define such a term on the basis of writing a story?

Could be from anything. Personality, skills/abilities, design, the way they talk to themselves and to others, and the list goes on to even minor aspects on how they operate.

I have known of one particular concept about this when it comes to the MLP community: red and black alicorn OCs.

Ok. I can actually understand where people are coming from on the basis of said OCs having that kind of design layout. Such a design is considered to be cringe, lame, low effort, poorly thought out, and really shows lack of imagination.

Granted, yes, I do happen to have an alicorn OC, but it's no where near the red and black scheme.

Here's what my OC looks like.

Moonstone Arcana (last name may not be official, and she is NOT related to Opaline despite the last name being what it is).

As you can see, she's isn't a poorly designed OC that I had commissioned a few years ago. Coat, eyes, mane and tail colors, and even the CM fits her perfectly fine.

In the universe that Moonstone is from, she's the daughter of Nightmare Moon/Luna, with her father being known as Horizon; a demon peagsus that came from Tartarus. This universe is where Nightmare Moon defeated Celestia and became the sole ruler of Equestria. She's the queen of said kingdom.

I already have a story which discuses how Nightmare Moon met Horizon on this site. You have the universe, the lore, and how Moonstone would eventually come to be.

However, despite my views on what a Mary Sue/Gary Sue are, how do you define them? How do you write a good OC?

I really want to hear what you guys think about my question.

According to most

It almost applies exclusively to human protagonist OCs. The criteria? Just existing.

7966368
Here's a good primer and in-depth explanation.

Being a Better Writer: The Mary Sue

I have a black and silver OC Alicorn but he was disguised as a unicorn for the first 11 or so Chapters.

7966370
So true

7966368
On a more serious note, it pretty much describes a character within which the universe revolves around them, where they can do no wrong, everybody worships them (even the villains), and always wins in the end; or something like that.

7966368 It's not about the looks. It's more about the story than the character.

You get a Mary Sue when the story bends itself around the character.

7966368
Personally, I think Mary Sue status arises specifically from the storytelling and writing and all that. I don't think design or concept by itself is ever really enough. Even a red-and-black alicorn I wouldn't automatically write off--it's a meme, sure, but there's no reason you can't make one that's actually a good character.

As for what exactly makes a character a Mary Sue, I'd say it mainly comes down to a character that feels contrived. It's someone whose backstory doesn't fit into the world at large and doesn't adequately explain their capabilities, who's perceived by other characters in a manner incongruent with their actions, that kind of thing. For the most part I think a lot of qualities commonly associated with Mary Sues--being overpowered or beloved by everyone, for instance--aren't fundamentally bad qualities for a character to have, just things you need to properly contextualize and integrate into the story and all that.

7966368
From my experience, what makes a Mary Sue is a combination of three things:

1. Character Accountability: Most if not every symptom of a Mary Sue is the lack of Character Accountability for said character's actions. For example; for every wrong doing that would have given harsh punishments to lesser characters the Mary Sue seems to not only get away with it but was somewhat praised for it, as though the plot made it conveniently so.
2. Character and plot dynamic: Following the first point, every Mary Sue always seem to break the rules of the established world and yet somehow the plot conveniently works around to their favour. Take Rey from Star Wars for example; What would have taken weeks, months or even years to master the Force somehow she managed to master it with ease with no training whatsoever. It is one thing to be a prodigy but there was no implication if she was one, let alone an explanation or foreshadowing before the Luke's Lightsaber was revealed.
3. Everyone around the character: If the characters around the protagonist only serves as cannon-fodder then it is a good chance your protagonist is a Mary Sue. When I say cannon-fodder I mean characters who only exist to make the Mary Sue look good or sympathetic to the highest degree. Admittedly, this may not have been a problem if their attitude towards the Mary Sue wasn't deserving (which goes back to the last two points). Take for example, Harry Potter; for the longest time I've been telling people that he is an A Grade Mary Sue because of this third point. Everyone seems to either praise him just for surviving Voldy, or for the case of his adoptive family despise him just for existing. Neither of those points warranted such reactions. But I digress; sometimes the bigger Mary Sue can be seen around said Mary Sue.

I hope this was useful, and do note this was just from my experience writing and analyzing stories.

7966368
These are my criteria for a Mary Sue/Gary Stue character (I'll just be using the Mary Sue term from here on out to make this easier to read).

1, Self/Audiance-Insert:
This one isn't always a for-sure sign of a character being a Mary Sue or not. Pleanty of Mary Sues aren't self-inserts, and many self-inserts aren't Mary Sues. But there is definitely a fair share of self-insert Mary Sues out there, so I felt it was worth mentioning. There are also a fair bit of Mary Sues designed to be as generic as possible so that the audience may insert themselves onto the character, a lot of Isekai Anime use this approach for their main characters (even the ones that aren't necessarily Mary Sues).

2, Phenomenal Skill/Ability/Power:
Mary Sues, especially those made to be Self-Inserts, are made to fulfill some kind of power fantasy. This can be achieved by making them infallibly talented, smart, or even just strong/powerful. For example: imagine a story (MLP-based or not) with a definitive hard magic system. Where the magic works under a very specific set of rules that nobody can break. Nobody except for the Mary Sue, that is, who is inexplicably able to defy these rules to do incredible things, simply because "they're a prodigy," or "they were born with a rare type of magic that nobody else has."

3, Universally Loved/Hated:
At least in my experience with seeing Mary Sue characters, they tend to either be loved by most people or hated by most people with very little in between. And these extreme feelings of love/hatred are usually not justified. They're either beloved by everyone around them because they're so perfect, or despised for similar reasons. And in the case of characters who hate the Mary Sue, the narrative will usually go out of its way to make it explicitly clear that these characters not liking the Mary Sue is a very bad thing, punishing them for their foolishness or having their perspective changed when the Mary Sue "earns their unconditional love."

---

I should also mention that being a Mary Sue isn't necessarily a bad thing. A lot of people will say it is, but those people are usually referring to the "blatant" Mary Sues. The ones that are usually OCs written by inexperienced writers who just wanted to make a cool character. But a lot of characters can fit into any or even all of these classifications I listed above. It all depends on how the character is presented/written. Sometimes having a Maru Sue in your story, main character or not, can add an interesting flare to what you're writing. A good example of a Mary Sue done right would be the titular character from the show Kamen Rider Geats, if I may. I won't spoil all of the details: but Geats was an incredibly talented and skilled individual who was born with special abilities that nobody else had. It's revealed a decent portion into the series that he has been reincarnating for at least 2,000 years. Explaining that his skill and intellect has come from literal lifetimes of experience. There's a bit more to it than that, and he ends up getting more special abilities later on due to the unique circumstances of his birth, but I won't bore you with an entire plot summary. But the story is written in such a way that not only justifies and explains these traits, but also makes Geats himself an interesting character to watch.

There are a few good trope/writing channels that cover the topic in depth. Here's a couple links to some I've found helpful.

The TLDW is that the fundamental core of a Mary Sue / Gary Stu story is that the character warps the in-story reality around themselves in an immersion breaking way. Any flaws the character has will not be narrative significant, and will only serve to highlight just how cool/relatable/edgy/etc. the character is.

Simplest idea of a Mary Sue that comes to mind for me is an unbalanced character, or rather a character with no flaws.

But then someone somewhere (I wish I remembered) said once that it's impossible to create a character without flaws, which I've come to agree with. What constitutes as a perfect person would be subjective, after all, and therefore the perfect person doesn't exist. The difference between a regular OC and a Mary Sue is just whether or not the writer knows about/acknowledges their flaws.

The thing that's bothersome about Mary/Gary, I think, is not necessarily when everybody in the universe loves them for instance, but rather when the writer doesn't think critically about it and just writes it as though it's a given. That's when the bias of the writer toward the OC glares through the page more far than storytelling ability.

Note that there could be such thing as a character who is beloved by the entire universe that is not a Mary Sue. Perhaps the universe loves them because they used magic to make that so. Or perhaps it's because people only see the best of them and idolize them unrealisticly, projecting a perfect image onto them even though in reality they are only human (or pony or- you get it, it's a figure of speech). Could be any number reasons, it just comes across as poor writing to treat something like that as a given that won't be questioned based solely on the (false) assumption that one's character is just indisputably, unquestionably perfect.

I'm using this 'universally loved' example because it feels like the easiest Mary Sue trait for me to explain with, not because this is necessarily the only way it appears. Hopefully my point seems broadly applicable. In basic summary, in order to avoid a Sue, just don't forget to acknowledge your character's flaws when you write them.

Edit: I took such a long time typing this that many more people have responded now so I'm sorry if I just repeated other people's points before I saw them

7966368
While a lot of people thing that a Sue is an 'overpowered' character, or a character without flaws; that isn't strictly true. A character can be a Sue without any special power, and most Sues exhibit a wide range of personality flaws (although they are never held accountable for those flaws).

A Sue is a malformed plot contrivance pretending to be a character, they warp the narrative around them until they cannot fail. Similarly, other characters are warped into caricatures of themselves who are obsessed with the Sue (typically 'good' characters love the Sue while 'bad' characters hate the Sue, but this isn't always the case). Essentially, everything about the story is warped around the Sue.

Here is a short example of what a Sue might look like:
>Sue is introduced as a 'genius strategist'.
>Every major character instantly heaps admiration on Sue except one character who just hates Sue for no reason (we will call him 'Jerk').
>Sue comes up with phenomenally stupid plan that should get everyone killed.
>Major characters see nothing wrong with obviously flawed plan.
>Jerk protests against plan because he hates Sue (and no other reason).
>Despite using a stupid plan, the enemy suddenly becomes even more stupid and the plan works flawlessly.
>Jerk is revealed as a traitor.

7966368
The question gets thrown around a lot and the best way to describe it is the idea that the universe confirms to the main character to the point nothing feels like and obstacle anymore. Like looking at a delusional narcissist walking in front of a painting of a park while they think they are passing by an actual park.

7966368
7966370
7966376
7966377
7966379
7966380
it really depends, because a Mary/Gary Sue is the modern incarnation of the clasical hero/Seer (from akadian and Hebrew), best modern example of this is Bella from Twilight
7966375
7966387
7966393
7966412
7966421
well... while this is all true see the above for a more fitting definition, and just to give you some examples of those, wait for it: Jesus, Indra, Sirtatra/Chu-Chulain and pretty much every classical heroes that exist out there including Hercules, Gilgamesh and Theseus

7966408
nice vids but also see the above

and now, for a different thing you might want to avoid, never try to fix the characther, you'll only drop it down a level to that of the fool, and as much as I love that trope I also hate it with the pasion of a burning sun, so please avoid writing fools

7966425

it really depends, because a Mary/Gary Sue is the modern incarnation of the clasical hero/Seer (from akadian and Hebrew), best modern example of this is Bella from Twilight

No, just no. You have no idea what you're talking about.

7966428
oh really? because if I recal corectly Hercules and Jesus fit the description to a t and so does Bella

7966430
Heracles was cursed to murder his family by a vengeful goddess and spent the rest of his life trying to redeem himself by doing his labours.

Jesus was tortured to death after having most of the people turn on him.

You have no idea what a Sue is.

7966428
7966425
I have to agree with Nuke here. You really don't seem to understand the homework.

7966428
7966430
7966436
Let's...keep it civil, alright? It's a discussion, so there are bound to be differences of opinion.

7966435
7966436
OK well then explain why every Classical hero still fits the description of a Sue even if their motivation is fame and richness instead of greater good, or that they do the actions they do because they can and not by accident, they are not the perfect fit for the modern description but they still are the core of the trope, they are the primordial Sue trope, the modern one is just them without any flaws

7966446
I think there's a fundamental difference between somebody who has the confidence to be a "hero" or was born with the power to do "good things," where a Sue seems to exist mostly for the satisfaction of an author to justify a fantasy of theirs in a way that bends the logic and characters of their own universe to their will; ie a Sue who doesn't beat the bad guy through merit of defeating them, but because something else has done it for them. Like, imagine a Sue is waging battle with the evil fucking idk, Wizard, and just when the Wizard has seemingly won, the prince they fall in love with later makes his first appearance and disables the wizard, and suddenly he wants to repent for his evil ways for some reason. Then blah blah the Sue becomes Queen and everything is sunshine and rainbows because she's perfectly suited for this role even though she was an adventurer before with no understanding of politics. Maybe this is a bit exaggerated, but my point is that while a heroic epic tells the tail of somebody slaying an evil monster, or a magical man that can turn water into wine, a Sue has everything given to them and pretends like they earned all those things even though it was just the author bending the universe to coddle them (and throwing in romantic drama or setbacks to create the illusion of an imperfect character.)

Idk tell me what you think

Edit: I also just had this thought, but I think Sues and Power Fantasies can be separate things. Like a heroic epic can probably be classified as a power fantasy in many cases, they tend to be pretty cool in their own right, but a Sue doesn't accomplish anything by themselves. A hero does in many cases, and often times, even die in their pursuit to kill the big baddie. When has a Sue ever lived or died accomplishing something without something conveniently being thrown in to push them to the top?

7966446
I don't think you truly understand what Mary Sue is, do you? Because if you did you would have understood the context of Classical Heroes and their motivations, power scaling and the world around them. Mary Sue does not mean overpowered or flawless, it means the lack of character agency of the world around them. You can still have a flawless character and not be a Mary Sue (take Jesus Christ for example if you look at the Bible in a narrative perspective). In fact, there are more flawed character tropes that are classified as Mary Sue when you take my three points into account.

7966462
well that's why I said that if accidentally manage to write a character as a Sue, don't fix it because in most cases you'll end up with the middle ground between a Seer and the Sue, the fool, aka the character that either does the things because they can or accidentally have the things done for them but don't really bank on the results and more often than not just move on to the next task, the way I see it all three are the same concept but different flavours.
the seer is just a hero that does all they do because they can, want and like to bank on the spoils of their actions
the fool is just someone who just does the action either because they can or accidentally, but don't bank on the spoils nor did they done it out of some duty
the Sue is someone who does it accidentally most of the time but doesn't bank on the spoils because they done it out of duty and not because they wanted the spoils, which they reluctantly accept in the end

7966470
see my latest comment for how I define them

7966472
That is hardly a Mary Sue, that is just a character trait. By that definition Ciaphas Cain from Warhammer 40k is a Mary Sue, which I know he isn't because of Character accountability.
Sure, a Mary Sue can be that way but not every one of them. I really am sorry but I honestly think you don't quite get what makes a Mary Sue.

7966444
I really don't want to make a new thread of this if this one gets locked.

7966480
I agree with the character accountability but that point fades when you look at the clasical heroes because they too lack it, granted not to the extent of the modern example or even to those of a fool and yet they all lack in that instance with variing degrees, the modern one being the one where it is way to blatant, I think that both our views should be considered, because even if you take your points in consideration but lack motivation, you won't be able to write a good character, and will end up with the other worst trope, the antiSue, the thing is that I actually stated that the three tropes of heroes I talked about fit both of our criteria in varied degrees and thus we need to make an over trope that encompasses all of them, and I think that that trope should be something akin to general heroic protagonist, because they really are just an evolution of the previous tropes, with minimal mutations, so yeah it is complex but not that complex

7966484
I don't disagree that Classical Heroes lack (certain) accountability, but they would fall under the umbrella of historical context. I also never said anything about character motive because I thought it is a no-brainer; a character without a motive is not an interesting one. I only put up my three points because they are the usual symptoms of a Mary Sue. Sure, not all Mary Sues tick the criteria but they at least follow two out of three of them.

On another note, while many would say otherwise, an anti-Sue is still a Mary Sue when you take into account the lack of character accountability and character and plot dynamic; they usually tick those two boxes.

That said, I will admit that I am far from an expert. In fact, most of what I write are paraphrased from my sister who does better story and character analysis than I do, so maybe I am missing a thing or two of a proper definition.

7966486
Again the only diference between the classical hero, the fool and the Sue is the amount of accountability and the motivation, and I agree with the anty Mary Sue take

7966482
I don't see that happening...I'm just standing by with the fire extinguisher for any flare-ups.

7966492
The difference is that the classical hero generally goes through a story arc (the Hero's Journey) in which they transform in some way that subsumes a beginning state of childlike individualistic concerns and causes that hero to undergo a process of meaningful growth beyond the self to represent the values or ideals of a larger society or culture collectively, while the Mary Sue often begins the story already perfect (or only superficially "grows" in ways that aren't truly earned) and represents merely the individualized power/competency/charisma fantasies of the author, and never truly goes anywhere beyond that.

They're NOTHING alike.

7966368

Well, I have seen many OCs, but if the design were related to a Mary Sue (or that in its other genre) I would detect it like this.

* Lack of harmony in colors (having opposite colors can work, but having too much is already a bad sign)

* Too many cosmetic elements (cosmic soul scepter, plus the symbiont biotech cape, plus a kawai crypto crown, that would make me stay away from that guy)

* Lore of the character as extensive as the filling of Naruto and of course they would not have altered the initial personality in the slightest. (evolutionary inertia)

*Character name too unoriginal (something like Larry Uchiba Skywalker, things like that)

* AND THE MOST IMPORTANT ! take it too seriously...

7966535
that's because the Sue is just the diluted version of the hero, just like the fool which is the middle ground, technically even that is not a good criteria, because most modern and postmodern protagonists don't have the hero journey in their characterisation so that is just a simptom of the times it actually appeared and not something specific to the Sue

7966499
Nah mate, let it cook.

7966554
I don't know what you mean by "diluted version of the hero." That's... not really possible. A Hero's Journey isn't a matter of quantity, it's a framework for conceptually putting identifiers on component parts of the hero's process of changing as a result of their adventure, on whatever scale that change occurs. It could be huge, or it could be tiny, it doesn't really matter.

That happens even in modern and post-modern stories - the post-modern deconstruction of the myths the hero is uncritically living in at the outset of the story, allowing the hero to grow as a person by seeing those constructs as what they are and thereby being able to let go of them when they prove harmful or unduly limiting, is the hero's growth arc and can also serve as the character transformation component of a Hero's Journey.

The critical thing that makes all stories ultimately able to be examined through the Hero's Journey framework is that all heroes undergo some form of transformational apotheosis at some point because that is what the audience identifies with - the universal human experience of the self undergoing change of some sort when confronted with the unfamiliar. It's the examination of how we, vicariously through the hero, encounter this experience.

A Mary Sue doesn't make for a good story because the Mary Sue doesn't do that. They're a 'perfect' character that never undergoes significant change. Thereby, skipping over this essential component to the audience's ability to identify with the experience of the character (because no one is actually perfect), the Mary Sue is literally incomprehensible on some level, and an incomprehensible character is alienating rather than engaging or empathetic. Maybe some Mary Sues find limited success as vehicles of wish fulfillment in the sense that sometimes an author and some of their audience might have the same fantasies, but that's all it is - the Mary Sue is a fantasy, not a story, and that's why people looking for a story of some sort of meaning instead of vacuous empty wish-fulfillment don't find the Mary Sue satisfying at all. It's because the Mary Sue is literally not built the same as a hero of any kind. They're NOTHING alike.

7966368
The funny issue of Mary Sue-ism is that it seems it should be a problem of the character in question. However, more aptly, it's an issue of the story in question. A story with a Mary Sue in it is a story that serves as a mere showcase of the character's greatness (or anti-greatness, if case of "reverse" Mary Sues that are hated by everyone and everything). It's more akin to a display case than to an actual story with conflict and plot.

It can be seen quite clearly here, in A Trekkie’s Tale by Paula Smith. This is the (presumed) original Mary Sue written as a parody of the trope:

”Gee, golly, gosh, gloriosky," thought Mary Sue as she stepped on the bridge of the Enterprise. "Here I am, the youngest lieutenant in the fleet - only fifteen and a half years old." Captain Kirk came up to her.

"Oh, Lieutenant, I love you madly. Will you come to bed with me?"

"Captain! I am not that kind of girl!"

"You're right, and I respect you for it. Here, take over the ship for a minute while I go get some coffee for us."

Mr. Spock came onto the bridge. "What are you doing in the command seat, Lieutenant?"

"The Captain told me to."

"Flawlessly logical. I admire your mind."

Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy and Mr. Scott beamed down with Lt. Mary Sue to Rigel XXXVII. They were attacked by green androids and thrown into prison. In a moment of weakness Lt. Mary Sue revealed to Mr. Spock that she too was half Vulcan. Recovering quickly, she sprung the lock with her hairpin and they all got away back to the ship.

But back on board, Dr. McCoy and Lt. Mary Sue found out that the men who had beamed down were seriously stricken by the jumping cold robbies, Mary Sue less so. While the four officers languished in Sick Bay, Lt. Mary Sue ran the ship, and ran it so well she received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Vulcan Order of Gallantry and the Tralfamadorian Order of Good Guyhood.

However the disease finally got to her and she fell fatally ill. In the Sick Bay as she breathed her last, she was surrounded by Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, and Mr. Scott, all weeping unashamedly at the loss of her beautiful youth and youthful beauty, intelligence, capability and all around niceness. Even to this day her birthday is a national holiday of the Enterprise.

7966601
Actually they are, because even that fantasy that the Marry Sue represents is obliged to have a hero journey ark, the whole difference is the amount of time spent on that ark, that's why I said diluted version of the classical hero, because the time spent on the ark is progressively shorter, if there's some character that fits the Sue template but doesn't have the ark than that character is redundant and should never exist, unfortunately everyone misses that memo at some point because even the villains should have such an ark due to the concept of everyone is his own story hero.
BTW I think I know who the first Marry sue character was, Julius Caesar as written in his own letters

7966368

I think it's probably worth mentioning that having Sue-esque characters and plotlines and such is 100% fine, and genuinely I think it's a creative stage that most people into storycrafting will have at some point and there's no shame in indulging and making stuff that's just for you. The biggest 'problem' with Sues is that they're not really fun for other people to read about.

They're most often the creations of teenagers who are just getting into writing and getting the hang of how to make stuff and refine their ideas, and the majority of flaws often seen in Sue stories are usually just blatant examples of intense teenage emotions & creativity x inexperience. Everyone in the stories loves the Sues except The Jerk because the writers are craving attention they're not getting irl and they're projecting all the assholes they know onto The Jerk so they can win one over on them in some way. The plot warps and forms holes around the Sue because they're not thinking about all that preplanning stuff, it's not in the repertoire yet! And so on and so forth.

Not all Sue stories are written by teens! But the inexperience and/or lack of willingness to learn is still going to be there.

I guess my advice here is that if you want to write Good Characters, no matter their abilities or appearances, then all you really need is time and practice.

To be honest, whilst there actually is a history to the term 'Mary Sue' which informs quite heavily what it means, the term has been frankly so diluted over time that it usually just means 'bad character'. I prefer not to use the term; it's just become quite shallow over the years to the point where if I use it, I've kind of got to re-explain what it actually means, which is usually self-defeating since that invites unwanted discussion on the trope, as opposed to the actual writing of the character.

As far as I'm aware the origin of the term has been cited by 7966608, which gives a lot of context as to what the term implies. It's a self-insert trope rooted in fanfiction, specifically, highlighted by parody. In that regard it's actually quite interesting to me; it's interesting to see a very fanfic-y concept get adopted by the wider writing zeitgeist.

Lots of great explanations and dissections of the term from everyone in this thread, although personally I agree the most with 7966775
Like all ideas and concepts: It’s a made up thing invented by humans, and has become socially relevant enough to sway public opinion so we are forced to acknowledge it as a prevailing truth.

In that sense, I’d rather add something else to this discussion. A counter-point! I’ll argue that such characters are not an inherently bad thing, and do not detract from a story just by existing.

Like all literary devices, tropes, and elements to a story, a Mary Sue is just another component and cog to the wheel that is story-telling. It’s used poorly often and people associate it with wish-fulfillment which puts off those that do not wish to indulge in such things. But that doesn’t mean that stories with them can’t work or be works of art. A good writer can make them work.

A lot of my favorite stories feature them. To name a few recognizable names: One Punch Man, Mob Psycho 100, and Shadow in Eminence. These are all stories that feature Mary Sues front and center. The difference for these is that those stories do a great job of complimenting those characters.

Mob Psycho in particular is the best of the lot, as the character grapples with his power in a world that demands for it. It’s a balanced story full of trials and tribulations just as much as it is wish-fulfillment of sorts, as it features a Mary Sue with equal amounts of flaws to his pros. But those characters don’t need to have flaws to make them work in a story!

Saitama from One Punch Man is a character devoid of flaws. To the point where that is its own flaw. Both the story and the character acknowledge it as so, as the character is bored and frustrated with his overwhelming power. You could say that Saitama’s personality is full of flaws, but it’s never something that he feels he has to change or work on. People flock to him naturally. In the case of One Punch Man, while the story does revolve around Saitama, Saitama himself is not always the focus of the story. So much emphasis and world-building is placed around him, telling the story of other heroes in usually, comically short quips. It all serves to prop Saitama further on a pedestal once he finally does arrive to the scene of a battle. It also does a wonderful job of showing the flaw of being flawless, as the world around Saitama doesn’t always agree with him or acknowledge him in the way that he wants. In a way, OPM is a tug and pull battle between the world Saitama lives in, and Saitama himself. Which makes for an entertaining watch/read.

Finally, and likely the most divisive of the things I mentioned, some of you may know a recently featured anime called Shadow in Eminence. About a boy named Cid who seeks to be stronger than a nuke. He is Capital MARY SUE, with all the worst qualities of one. The word around him and the story told of him all have the worst qualities of a Mary Sue-focused story. And yet, at the end of the day, it still WORKS. So far, I’ve mentioned the name of three animes, but I don’t want you to think that I’m only saying this because I found something worthwhile in the visual component of those stories. I’ve watched the anime, read the manga, and read the light novel for this story, so I can personally tell you it still WORKS. It works for many reasons. For one, the story never pretends to be anything that it’s not. It never takes itself more seriously than it has to, to compliment Cid. It’s a story entirely with its focus on creating and elevating this Mary Sue, and at the same time, it’s entertaining because the way its executed is not only hilarious, it engages readers to adapt to the narrative component of it’s Mary-Sue focus. To the point where the reader can shut off the critical part of their brain and say “That makes sense” to some random rug pull that came out of nowhere.

Before I go off on length, I’ll finish my thoughts by saying this:

Anything can work so long as you make it well enough. And peoples opinions are subjective. Did you know that there’s a lot of people out there that don’t like black licorice? Crazy right? Well, there’s a wise-saying about acquired tastes. “Truly appreciating something takes time.” And there’s a lot of people out there who won’t spare even a second to do so. I never trusted public opinion anyway.

7966943 Once again I feel I'm falling into the trap of debating what a Mary Sue is instead of actually discussing the merits or flaws of a given character's writing, but I don't feel any of the examples you provide are Mary Sues from the perspective of a Mary Sue being a cringe self-insert wish-fulfillment character. Most of them, particularly Saitama and Mob (since I'm actually familiar with them) are just a case of conflating powerful characters with Mary Sues.

If a Mary Sue was all about power, it wouldn't be possible to find Mary Sues in the vein as Trekkie's Tale parodies; fundamentally unpowered characters that nonetheless can do no wrong and are unable to sustain a meaningful narrative conflict.

Powerful characters, at least relative to the universe they're in, are actually dirt-common. It's kind of unusual to see characters that are fundamentally unpowered relative to their environment, and most tend to have some skill or advantage that sets them above the rest. Being powerful or skilled, even overwhelmingly so, doesn't make a Sue. Power is the least sue-ish of their common characteristics.

The other aspect, the self-insertion and wish-fulfilment aspect is also missing, but it's admittedly hard to say when an author is indulging in self-insertion. I would also argue that self-insertion isn't really that bad (I do it a lot, but usually in little pieces, since I find it helps me to write characters when I relate to them in some way, even if it's small). This is the aspect that is most often dropped in a modern sense. Is Rey from Star Wars a Mary Sue? I've heard many argue she is; however, I think it's a hard sell that Rey is Abrams and Johnson's collective self-insert character. This means she's probably not a Sue by the classical definition; she's probably just a poorly written character.

The final piece of the puzzle is that Sues fundamentally defeat narrative conflict. You will see them being unable to do wrong, and when they do it's always temporary and inconsequential. Characters will agree with them seemingly for no good reason and coincidences happen just to make sure they don't get in trouble or to show off how cool or correct they are. You might see them be mouthpieces for the author that never get adequately challenged.

This final aspect is pretty much why the only area in which one could maybe argue Sues are somewhat effective is in parody and satire, since absence of narrative conflict is killer to compelling stories that don't use it as a joke. In all other instances, Sue's are straight up a mistake to avoid and something that new writers usually learn to get past quickly as they learn about narrative conflict, detatching oneself from characters and not falling prey to the trap of self insertion, and if their interests lie that way, managing power scaling in stories where that may be relevant. One could even argue that a Sue is kind of just a symptom of a very specific mix of bad writing mistakes.

7966368

My best description of Mary Sue/Gary Stu is a character for whom the story itself breaks itself to cater to.

Like... characters are meant to exist within a story. The story happens; the characters live it. But when the story becomes merely a service to character, then that character is a Gary Stu/Mary Sue.

For instance, say the main character goes to the wise, old mentor and says, "I want to help my friends," and the wise, old mentor instead of guiding the main character in self-improvement just hands the main character more ability to help the main character's friends than anyone else in the story is even allowed to have, and this unique capability then becomes a defining characteristic of the main character.

Yes, I have a specific instance in mind.

In all honesty, I have no idea where these names originated from and why they exist in the first place, though I do try to avoid using them let alone OCs when doing my fanfics as much as possible due to not knowing how to work them properly.