A rant about Mary Sues

[lesbiassparrow]

This was prompted by a comment somewhere about the history of Mary Sues which included Richardson's Clarissa in the list. I doubt it will interest anyone except me, though.

I know that Mary Sues are the bane of fanfic's existence; I don't dispute that. But I am perplexed by the extension of that term to include original characters in fiction and on screen. It seems that the term has grown to cover characters that the viewer or reader finds annoyingly perfect or too central to the plot. This strikes me as a problem: in expanding the term it becomes almost meaningless to my mind. There's a plethora of female and male fictional characters I can't abide (Little Nell would be at the forefront), but I think that's the nature of certain periods and styles of writing. Victorian fiction is obsessed with the iconic angel in the house character; it's part of the period's cultural background. Classifying such figures as a Mary Sue seems to me to miss a salient feature of Victorian culture and thought.

The other issue is that using a modern term flattens historical reality; Helen of Troy is perfect (except for the adultery and getting Troy burnt to a crisp bit, but we'll ignore that for the moment) but she's a creation of a particular culture's fantasies and myth. Popping her in the same category as the miraculous sister of Legolas who has flashing eyes and the ability not to be influenced by the One Ring seems to miss the point.

My other issue is that calling so many characters Mary Sues legitimizes the use of such characters in fanfic. As I see it the challenge in writing fanfic is to take on an established universe and write within its parameters of characterization even if you alter the storyline (and I have no problem with altering the storyline as long as it fits the characters) and no making the characters over into everything that you want them to be. They've got to reflect what is there as much as they do with the narrative you want to write - though, obviously, everyone has different perceptions of the characters. But if every character you despise in fiction is a Mary Sue then you're just following historical precedent and that makes creating your own Mary Sue something more, not less, acceptable.

Or am I wrong about this? Is there a good reason to expand the term Mary Sue to include original characters? Is it a useful literary term outside fandom?

Comments

[k-julia.livejournal.com]

Interesting stuff. I would agree that the term becomes useless if you slap it onto every character you don't like, be that because they take up too much focus or because they're too close to perfect. On the other hand, there are characters outside of fannish writing for whom the term just rings true, at least in my experience.

The example that always comes to mind when I think of Mary Sue in pro fiction is the Kay Scarpetta novels. (Note how with me, it's hardly ever going to be an example from the literary classics. *g*)

I read those novels as a teenager without ever discussing them with anyone besides my mother. I wasn't very analytical about them, and wasn't thinking in terms of categories of characters. I don't think I even knew the term Mary Sue yet, but there was this combination of stuff that came to annoy me about the main character that I couldn't quite put my finger on even though it seemed familiar from other characters that had annoyed me. It was years later that it all fell into place when I realised she's a prime specimen of Mary Sue.

I wouldn't expand that to 'any character that annoys me'. There are plenty of reasons to dislike a character. But there are combinations of annoying traits where it just... fits.

[lesbiassparrow.livejournal.com]

It's interesting that you say this and point out that it is difficult to say exactly what makes a character a Mary Sue. The term seems to have expanded so widely these days that I'm not sure what it covers anymore - certainly it's gone beyond blatent self-insertion in a fandom.

I've never read the Kay Scarpetta novels (and given what you've said I probably never will). Do you think the author was/is motivated by the same urges that make fanfic writers go into Mary Sue territory? Or is there something else at work in original fiction?

[k-julia.livejournal.com]

It's interesting that you say this and point out that it is difficult to say exactly what makes a character a Mary Sue.

No, I didn't know back then what a Mary Sue was. There were a number of things about the main character that annoyed me and in a way that felt familiar, but I hadn't heard the term Mary Sue then.

The character starts out as a successful, highly competent professional with a not uncomplicated private life. Then she morphs into this much maligned but unbelievably brilliant Jeanne d'Arc of medical examination character, with the plots seemingly either serving the purpose to underscore a) how maligned she is, b) how brilliant she is, c) or how everbody wants her.

And everybody wants her. Her best friend. The serial killer. The other serial killer. The creepy twentysomething traitor guy. The suspicious female boss. You name it, they either flat-out say so or have a weird obsession thing going on with her.

I'm writing this from memory, so I might be unfair with regard to some of the details. I don't remember much about the plot with the creepy female boss, I admit. But the admiration/obsession of just about everone with the main character, at the expense of good storytelling, makes me think of the later Kay Scarpetta as a Mary Sue.

There were a few news items I came across at the time that suggested the author had a serious case of overidentification with the character going on, but that's speculation, and I don't remember enough of the specifics.

[ehab-it.livejournal.com]

Somehow I missed this post. Now I'm self-concscious because I used the term to describe The Traveller's Wife with you.

I've never really understood the term well and that right there is reason enough why I ought not use it. I always took it to mean a character that embodied the writer's idealized self...but even more salient I find the stories around these characters self-indulgent and narcissistic on the writer's part.

I do not on the otherhand have the same problem with say Elizabeth Bennett or Emma who are arguably an idealized version of Jane Austen. A great character with a good story told by a talented writer does not inspire Mary Sue analogies.

You've certainly made me think about my cavalier use of the term. I agree we veer into dangerous territory whenever we use shorthand terms to describe a character and our reaction to them. Certainly, they don't all deserve to be lumped together under the same definition, in classic fiction or fan fiction for that matter.

PS I enjoyed reading your thoughts on meyerlemon's journal about academia and fandom.

[lesbiassparrow.livejournal.com]

Don't be self-conscious! I'm beginning to come around to the idea (thanks to K_Julia) that it probably is a useful term especially for modern fiction. And I like your distinction between idealised characters and ones that are self-indulgent and narcissistic; it's a good point to make.