What is your definition of Mary-Sue?

[C2_of_Omegon]

A friend and me got into a discussion about this. We tossed around some common traits but felt like it was still too vague. You know, the common 'They're perfect', 'They don't have flaws' or 'They're powerful', etc. So we kept talking and evenutally came up with this:

"A Mary-Sue is any character that unnaturally warps the narrative or world of their story."

But what do you all out there, think? Do you have an example of a such a character on the wiki?

 

[MagiSinbad]

"No struggle" That's it.

To me, it's fun to see OP characters struggle on how to uses their power in the right way. But if they are too good that there's no problem in their life then the story would be hard to swallow.

It's fine for the protagonist to be Mary/gary-stu, but the other characters have to be the ones to struggle to make the story better.

 

[Eficiente]

See this reproduction list.

The term isn't as interpretable as many think, that's just some misinformation used to undermine criticism.

 

[YungManzi]

Eh?

"A Mary-Sue is any character that unnaturally warps the narrative or world of their story."

By this definition quite a few characters who aren't Mary Sues would be considered them. Like Saitama.

I would say a mary sue is much more than that, but also more simple.

They are self-insert wish fulfillment, plain and simple. Their purpose in the story being to be the best, or the strongest, or the most compassionate, or the sexiest, or all of the above really. With not much more to their character than that. Put another character in their role and the story wouldn't be any different.

That's my interpretation of a Mary Sue.

 

[PsychoWarper]

To me a mary sue is someone whos just to good at everything they do, beating/surpassing people to they really shouldnt (At least at that point) and have like no personality.

Personality is a big thing for me cause if a really OP character has a decent/interesting personality then I will let it slide.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Plain and simple, a character can be broken powerful within their setting and still be good characters. Saitama is funny and bored with his own power. Thrawn is stupidly smart and competent, but has an interesting moral compass that doesn't mesh well with side he's on, leading to moral compromises and character study (talking about Disney Thrawn here). Steven can pull new powers out of his ass as needed, but he reacts realistically to the trauma he's been through. Etc.

It's only when a character doesn't have these traits that they become boring.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

I know you didnt call Steven a mary sue

 

[The_Wright_Way]

I didn't. In fact, I was explaining why he wasn't one.

 

[C2_of_Omegon]

Wright ninja'd me about Saitama but I elborate my own take on that. Saitama's power is unusual in his verse but that leads for problems for him. In addition he's not perfect. He's not academically inclined, he lacks finesse and skill as a fighter because he's never needed to refine, he's ignorant of certain things despite living in a superhero world and his powers have really messed with his life and outlook.

Characters like Saitama, Thrawn & Superman are studies in the struggles that the characters face outside of their talents or because of them. Saitama's power allows the focus to go from the fights to Saitama's development as a character and how that development affects the people he comes into contact with.

Superman's struggle is that of a person who strives to stay hopeful, idealistic and real hero in a world that doesn't always make that easy. Superman: Grounded is a perfect example. It's a story about Superman realizing that he's been so focused on the big world ending threats, that he hasn't been around for the little small stuff and that he's failed people because of that.

To give another example: Ciaphas Cain from Warhammer 40K. Cain is interesting because his entire story is about whether or not he's an actual hero with a very low opinion of himself and a lot of common sense or a self-serving oppourtunist who knows just the right thing to say or do to keep up his reputation. Cain, throughout his books, accomplishes great things but is always trying to avoid danger and will take the first chance to do so. It the muddies the waters with Cain being legitimately competetant but you can never truly say if he's doing legitimate heroism or because he's found a way to make himself look better. The fact that Cain admits to not being able to tell which act is the real him just never lets you fully settle on either intereptation.

The thing about all these characters is that the writing takes for granted that they are good about their jobs and insteads uses the rigours of said jobs to develop and humanize them. Or to help tell another character's story. The point isn't about their character or even using the character to tell other people's story. Thrawn's recent books do this, especially the first one with POV character Eli Vanto. Another one is Yumeko Jabami from Kakegurui. She's an intelligent compulsive gambler who doesn't are about winning or losing and gambles for the thrill. The series does a good job of just using her as tool more often or not to prompt other characters' growths through interactions. She's not the hero, she's just the protagonist. Or Ainz from Overlord. His true problems and wants aren't things his massively OP status or OP minions can directly do anything about.

But the thing that all these characters have writing to make them work. The series and stories around them go to great lengths to make the characters and setting work together to make a great story.

Mary-Sues don't do this.

Mary-Sues do not work with their setting. The setting is just a playground to show how awesome they are. They don't suffer true setbacks, they don't truly struggle, they don't form actual relationships with other characters, and they don't usually grow or develop in meaningful ways. The character turns into a Mary-Sue when the character isn't properly utilized or implemented into the greater story. The story is just an excuse to show them off and try and look cool, not realizing that the character has no true heart to them, so everything falls flat. That's what I mean when I said that the character is unnatural to their story or setting. Not exceptional in their story, because let's face, most series are about exceptional people or people in exceptional circumstances. Instead, the character doesn't fit into the story being told.

 

[TartaChocholate]

Well... just sharing some thoughts, they bend the narrative to their whims (or the author's). The story goes out of their way to make them important, it always twists itself so things can be about them or work out for them, show them off, side with them (such as justify their mindset and actions, try to force the reader to be on their side) or displace other characters or vilify them to place the Mary Sue in that special place. This not the same as having a huge impact in the story, being a central figure or such, rather have the story work out in your service.

I mean, IIRC there's the term "anti-sue" to describe a character that opposite of a gorgeous, perfect good at everything Mary Sue, this character could be only flaws, yet they still are adored by the narrative.

The same way, as mentioned above, a very talented, overpowered or ideal character can still be compelling, well written and fascinating to read about if well executed and developed. I'd even say that power fantasies themselves are okay in themselves, becomeing an issue when it becomes more about showing off than working for the story.

But this is just an aspect of it, as Eficiente mentions, it's not as simple to narrow down a concrete definition to perfectly encompass all examples. Especially as who qualifies is subject of debate.