"Mary Sue" by Ghost in the Machine

Another essay of questionable value by little ol' me. (I will be concentrating on the female of the species, but a good chunk of this applies to Gary Stus too.)

-----

Many moons ago, I wrote a few essays on bad fanfiction and what could be done about it. But I specifically did not deal with the concept of Mary Sues. I think it had something to do with the fact that I couldn't pin down what I hated most about her. Was it that her beauty was so shoved down everyone's throat? Was it her limitless skill in any talent that she needed to have in order to show up someone else? Was it her ability to solve every problem? Her total inability to be wrong? It wasn't her ability to die a tragic death, that didn't bother me much.

Of course, this essay wouldn't exist unless I'd had some epiphany about the concept, so here it is: Mary Sue gets away with stuff that no other character can.

Whether it's having long flowing locks that never tangle, the biggest can of whupass in existence, or the ability to rearrange canon relationships with the bat of an eye, Mary Sues do, usually with ease, that which the author would never allow other characters to do. (I realize that is a run-on sentence, but I think it works anyway.)

What I like most about this definition is that it's flexible. A character doesn't have to be a self insert or even an original character to qualify. Any character that is blatantly and ridiculously favored by the author (fanfic or pro, doesn't matter) can properly be labeled as a Mary Sue. What do I mean by blatant? Well, you didn't ask, but I'm going to tell you anyway.

Let's start with the most common Sue trait: unearthly beauty. Many a Sue has form and figure so perfect that men fall about her feet like rose petals and women have no recourse but to become shrewish harpies in response. Her long flowing locks never tangle, apparently being made out of Teflon®. Her eye color changes with her emotional state. Her breasts defy gravity and never, ever lead to nagging back problems. The clothes she wears, no matter how impractical for the task/environment at hand, always show her in her best light. How is this blatant favoritism? 'Cause it's crap.

Let us take these in order...

Many authors make their Sue astonishingly beautiful. A good chunk of this is wish fulfillment: The Sue looks how the author wishes they looked. In the case of a male author, the Sue mirrors the author's personal preference. Another large part of it is to have their character stand out from the crowd. In some genres, this leads to odd hair and eye colors. In others, a merely 'exotic' appearance will suffice and may provide clues to the Sue's special abilities. In and of itself, this isn't much of a problem. It's when every other character notices said appearance that there's trouble. When they alter their behavior in response to the character's beauty, it's a flare lit tipoff that you're dealing with a Sue.

A normal woman running through the forest primeval with unbound waist length hair will soon find burrs in it, assuming it doesn't get caught on a tree branch and bring her to a quick and painful halt. Long hair can be grabbed by an enemy and used to restrain, injure or even kill someone via strangulation. However, part of being a Sue is that her enemies are too stupid to attack such an obvious target. Or if they aren't, they soon become so as a Sue tends to lower the IQ of those around her in order to demonstrate her superior problem solving skills.

Eyes that change color with the character's emotions are another sure indicator that the character in question is a Sue. But only if it's in response to an emotional shift and not for some other reason. My eyes appear to change colors under different lighting conditions. I've got one character who routinely wears colored contacts. I can see an emotional upset causing the pupil to expand or contract, thus leading to a slight apparent change in eye color. If a character is a mutant, vampire, or other not-strictly human type, a change in eye-color, even if related to emotional states, may be considered acceptable, if annoying. But for a normal human's eyes to go from sky blue to emerald green because she's in love or sea green to bright red because she's angry is simply a dead giveaway of Mary Sue status.

Next up: Big Boobs. I'm a guy, so it's hard to deal with the concept of unnaturally large breasts without being sexist. Ah, to heck with it, I can be sexist for awhile. It won't hurt me any. Those who are excessively politically correct might want to skip down a bit, this could take a while.

Mary Sues tend to be in great physical condition and possess giant hooters. These two things do not naturally go together. Bras that provide enough support to large breasts are difficult or impossible to find. (In certain fandoms, bras shouldn't/don't exist.) Large breasts make jogging or running painful. (When was the last time you saw a female triathlete with big boobs?) While there are other, low impact, forms of exercise available, the Sue is seldom seen partaking of them, or indeed of any physical training at all. But they're still strong enough to swing a fifty pound greatsword with consummate ease and their double (or higher) D's never interfere with their incredible combat prowess. In real life, the damn things get in the way occasionally. But on the plus side, hypertrophic breasts make nice flotation devices if the Sue is swept overboard in a storm.

Now onto the social side... Ask any woman who actually has oversized breasts about the problems that come with them. Many men (and some women) think women with large breasts are morons and/or 'easy'. Stereotypes run wild and I will admit that I can be distracted by a nice rack. (Shame on me I know, but I did warn you in advance.) Still, one of the reasons why people have breast reduction surgery is to reduce or eliminate the negative social consequences of excessively large breasts. It isn't just the discomfort. The problem with the Sue's large breasts is the social consequences for her seem to be either nonexistent or strictly in her favor. Whether to gain the attention of Mary Sue's future love, or to clear the path by making any competing female insane with jealousy, they always work to her advantage, as do many other Sueish traits.

Clothing: Many authors use clothing to make their characters stand out from the crowd. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. Superheroes wear costumes, most of which tend to be skin tight and very colorful. It's part of the genre. The problem with Sue clothing is that is described in excessive detail and is seldom appropriate for the setting in which it appears. Long, flowing, white dresses with low cut bodices are impractical for running through the swamp when you are being chased by ferocious lizard men. Spike heels aren't meant to be run in, no matter how often you see it in the movies. Exposed skin in the wilderness draws bug bites. The description of an outfit should not be longer than the rest of the chapter the description appears in.

"But it's a sign of her rebelliousness!" the author replies when questioned about an 'odd' choice in clothing. (For some reason, that brings to mind the quote: "Let's all be different, just like me." Unfortunately, a discussion of that quote isn't appropriate here.) Be that as it may, it's still an indicator as Sues are frequently rebellious, rules don't apply to them and they may flout authority without risk. (Just a little example of the 'blatant favoritism' thing I mentioned earlier.) If the dress code is 'business professional', someone dressed in a halter top and low rise jeans isn't going to garner a favorable impression. Yet such an outfit might be perfectly acceptable if the character is out clubbing. When the clothing is clearly inappropriate for the setting, and there are no negative consequences because of it, that's when clothing makes the Sue.

Incredible beauty isn't the only thing that can make a character a Mary Sue, even it's their most common trait. Personally, I find a character possessing uber-leet mad skillz just as annoying and just as clear an indicator of Mary Sue status. I have nothing against a character being skilled in some area. Or skilled in multiple areas. Or even having a knack for something and being better at it than their background and training would suggest. But when a character does everything better than everyone else, they are a Sue.

I read a lot of comic books. I've played a lot of superhero RPGs (pencil and paper, not the online stuff) in my day. I've got stories with superhuman characters here and on ff dot net. (Rasser frassing auto deletion of anything that looks like a web address.) I'm used to characters having abilities and skills beyond those of mortal men. But I can still spot a talent-Sue pretty quickly. It's easy because their list of talents is never-ending, or at least extremely implausible.

Proficient in six forms of martial arts, fluent in half a dozen languages, a crack shot with anything from a pea shooter to a rocket launcher, an expert fencer who plays half a dozen musical instruments, they've built their own computer, their own car, and their own multi-million dollar corporation... By age 12.

Thing is, if the character were 35, or even 30, I wouldn't bitch. Once you've mastered one form of martial arts, picking up additional ones isn't too hard. Accuracy with one weapon can be expected to carry over to others, although the people who really can shoot 'any gun, any time' are rare. Friend of mine from high school spoke four languages fluently by age 16 and could get by in at least half a dozen more. She played piano too. (And was blind, but that's not important.)

The problem is, it takes time to develop skills, learn languages, build things, etc. More time than a 12 year old is going to have had available. But just as, or perhaps even more, important is the favoritism shown by the author for the character's skills. Nobody is allowed to out skill the Sue in something the Sue is good at. Ever. She's not just a martial artist, she's the best martial artist in the story. Not just a musician, but a virtuoso whose skill can melt the hardest heart. Angels cannot sing nearly as well as the Sue and no language, no matter how obscure, provides a barrier to communication. (Because if someone doesn't know how special the Sue is, a way must be found to inform them of this fact immediately.)

Separate, but still related to the talent-Sue is the power-Sue. Power is a relative, not an absolute term. Moderate power in one setting might be too much in another and barely noticeable in a third. (Example: Spiderman is too powerful to exist in a real world setting, but barely a blip on the power radar in Dragonball Z.) So a power-Sue has to be judged not on her abilities, but how those abilities stack up to those belonging to other people in the universe she's in. A character with an ability no else has, when that ability allows them to defeat everyone else, is a Sue. If it's an ability that other characters possess, but hers is clearly strongest, that's Sueish, but not a dead giveaway.

And just to be clear, it doesn't have to be a 'super power' in order to make someone a power-Sue. Having a magic weapon, in a world where there is no magic, can make a character a power-Sue just as much as being able to bench ten tons when everyone else has human strength levels.

The final major area where Sueism can be apparent is in interpersonal relationships. If people don't act like themselves when the character is around, odds are she's a Sue. Mary Sue's mere presence can warp personalities to extents that are difficult to comprehend. (Because the author blatantly favors her, not because of any intrinsic interpersonal skills.)

Mary Sue can break any rule. Authority figures just love her spunk, even though anyone else who did the same thing would be punished. Or the ends somehow justify the means. Or the rule is simply a bad one and it takes the Sue breaking it to make that obvious to everyone. (Actually, I kind of like the last one, but I thought I should mention it anyway.)

Mary Sue can get any guy. Beauty alone is normally enough to ensure this, but if not, it may be done by authorial fiat. Previously existing relationships can be dealt with in a variety of ways. One: In response to the Sue's beauty and charm, the existing partner becomes a shrew and the guy in question breaks up with them. Two: The interfering party is hooked up with someone else, occasionally someone 'better for them', but normally with the first person that wanders by, regardless of their sexual orientation. Three: By stepping aside voluntarily once they see that the Sue and their boyfriend make a perfect couple. Four: By not being in the story in the first place, leaving a vacuum for the Sue to step into. There are other methods, but they're not really Sueish methods so we can skip them.

Mary Sue can solve any problem, personal or otherwise. Because Mary Sue is never, ever, wrong about anything, the solutions she comes up with always work. Her ability to warp others' personalities makes certain that no one ever questions or objects to these solutions either. It doesn't matter if her tactics amount to bullying, blackmail or fraud either, because since she's one of the good guys, everything she does must be good. Yes, there was an element of circular reasoning in there, nice of you to notice.

So far, this essay has concentrated on the characteristics of a Mary Sue and how to know one when you see one. Now, it's time to work on what comes next.

If your reading a story with a Mary Sue in it, ask yourself this question: Is the Sue affecting your enjoyment of the story? If the answer is 'no', then you've got nothing to worry about. Carry on. If your answer is 'yes', then you need to make a decision. You can drop the story, which is the easiest thing. You can continue reading, but with a jaundiced eye toward the Sue and what she does. You can call the author on the Sueish behavior of the character in a review. This can be cathartic, if not always helpful. The author is under no obligation to rework a character simply because you object. (See my other essays for reviewing tips. This concludes the blatant plug section of this essay.) But whatever you do, don't have a conniption fit over it. Your cardiovascular system will thank you in the long run.

If you're the author... you may have a problem. A Mary-Sue can work as a character, but I find they work better as an antagonist than as a protagonist. My short definition of the two terms is that a protagonist, the reader wants to see succeed against the plot problems in a story while an antagonist, the reader wants to see thrown into an active volcano. Doesn't mean they're not interesting characters, just not very sympathetic ones.

I'm not going to go into methods of how to de-Sue a character. Mostly because there aren't any good ways to do so. A beautiful character isn't likely to become ugly. If this happens anyway through some disfiguring accident, they become figures of pity and that can be Sueish in its own right as everyone feels so sorry for her about the tragedy. A highly skilled character is unlikely to forget those skills, although they can become rusty from disuse. A powerful character, if they lose their power, should be attacked/killed by their enemies as paybacks are a bitch. As to an infallible character suddenly losing that infallibility... I got nothing 'cause I can't imagine that ever happening.

As an author, you're best bet is to not write the Sue in the first place. Some folks insist this can be done by giving a character flaws. I don't agree. Some flaws... aren't. 'Caring too much' isn't a flaw. 'Can't hold her liquor' isn't a flaw in a story where nobody drinks. 'Use of this ability will injure and possibly kill the character' can be a flaw, if use of the ability is integral to the plot. But like I said, I don't see the need for characters to have flaws.

Far better, if not always easier, to write them as balanced characters in the first place. If they excel in one area, they should be weak in others. Spending a childhood in intense physical training leaves little time for social development. If social development is tended to, perhaps their academics are weak. If that's good too, then tone down the physical training because there's simply not enough time to do that and everything else.

A beautiful (or clever) girl probably doesn't fight people herself, she has her boyfriend(s) handle that for her because she feels she is too important to risk. But just because a character is weak in an area, doesn't mean they should be completely helpless. If forced into a fight, the pretty girl should at least go down swinging, not simply stand there getting beat to death waiting for her knight in shining armor to arrive.

For new characters, skills and abilities should be on par with the existing cast. There might be things a new character does better, particularly if none of the existing cast is known for skill in that area, but if someone else is already considered 'the best' at something, they should probably remain so unless there is a good reason why they shouldn't. Example: Ranma 1/2 features insanely powerful martial artists. A new character might easily be academically superior to the existing cast as they aren't really known for book smarts. But having someone in his age group be a better fighter than Ranma, without some form of 'cheating' involved, and without the intensive training Ranma has undergone, is probably not a good idea. (Unless, as mentioned earlier, the character is an antagonist and not a protagonist.)

For existing characters, writing them in character prevents most problems right there. A strong character goes through obstacles, a smart character thinks his way around them and so on. Explaining and/or showing the development of new abilities does wonders too.

But the biggest thing, for new characters and existing characters, that an author can do to avoid Mary Sueism is this: Have the consequences to what the character does make sense. Break a rule without good cause, get busted for it. Pick a fight with a superior opponent, lose. Steal someone's boyfriend, make an enemy. Show someone up in a way that makes them look real bad, make an enemy. Beat someone up, make an enemy. Betray a trust, never be trusted again (and make an enemy).

I'll admit that you can bend the guidelines in the previous paragraph quite a bit in comedy. Getting an unexpected result can be funny. But for more serious work, solid links between actions and their consequences are vital. Start as you mean to continue because when you start from a solid base, you can do just about anything. That includes avoiding the perils of Mary Sue.