Everyone, begin your shuddering.
Mary Sue.
(cackles gleefully)
I love doing that. All fan fiction readers and writers shudder at the mention of the Dreaded Character Bane of Existance, yet we are all guilty of Mary-Sueism at one point in our 'careers'. It's usually the first character that the writer makes up, because the Mary Sue embodies all that is familiar and comfortable to the author. As their writing progresses, so, thankfully, does character creation. More originality appears and less of the author's fantasies take control of the plot.
But are Mary Sues really the root of all evil, like many fan fiction writers and readers claim? Yes, they are silly, sometimes utterly ridiculous, often written badly (mostly due to the youth of the writer or lack of writing experience), but they are fun, you have to admit. Who in their life never wanted to be a rock-n-roll superhero? Dreamed of being the one person that everyone admires and adores? If you're honest completely with yourself, at one point, even for a fraction of a moment, everyone has wanted to be the hero, the admired, the adored, the person that gets the good-looking guy or girl and saves the day. It's a natural human feeling. The Mary Sue merely embodies that daydream on paper (or computer screen as the case may be).
Yet what is a Mary Sue? Is she a character avatar of the writer? A place holder for the reader, that character that the reader can substitute him/herself into the story? Is she an annoying wanna-be hero that merely winds up being a pain instead of something useful? Is there a difference between an OC, or original character, and a Mary Sue? Well, yes to all the questions, and no. Let's explore, shall we?
According to this essay by Pat Pflieger, the Mary Sue is older than fan fiction as we know it, spanning easily back in the 19th century. Interestingly, these early Mary Sues by well-known authors like Louise Alcott usually died at the end, after saving the day. Modern Mary Sues usually don't die, but save everyone and everything, thus making sure existance with their perfection lives on. Yet the fact that the Mary Sue existed long before "fan fiction" as we know existed is tantalizing; does this mean Mary Sue isn't the literary misfits her denouncers make her to be? Is Alcott suddenly a horrible writer merely because she indulged in Mary Sueism? No.
The author of this essay makes a very valid point: "The author of a Mary Sue Adventure operates on the simple principle of wanting to be liked, thus he or she makes the character likable. All the regular characters want to be friends with her or him and the author expects the readers to feel the same. Unfortunately that runs against the readers' fundamental wishes. The readers don't want a character they can like, they want a character they can identify with." Readers want to identify, not like the character in the story. Original or not, that character is the focus of their reading and thus they must want to care about that characer. In order to do so, they must acknowledge they have something in common with the character, not just think they'd be great to go have a coffee with.
Let's get back to our questions above, though, shall we? The first was "What is a Mary Sue?" Well, I've explained a little but there's nothing like a good old fashioned test to make sure your beloved character hasn't sunk to the level of the dreaded Mary Sue (unless she's a Mary Sue on purpose, in which case, these tests are an excellent way to create one!). Litmus tests are what these are normally called and its basically the answering of yes or no to the questions, adding up your points and finding out whether or not you need to do a character clean up. Most fan fiction genres have a Mary Sue litmus test and there are plenty of general Mary Sue tests as well. Here are a few links to some Harry Potter litmus tests and one or two "in general" tests.
Harry Potter Mary Sue Litmus Test (1)
Slytherin Mary Sue test (not Litmus but friggin' hysterical! I'm the NOT!Mary Sue)
General Mary Sue Litmus Test
Now, on to question 2, "Is the Mary Sue a character avatar of the author?" Ah-ha! That is the first major question of the hour, I assure you. In all honestly, the Mary Sue here is in the eye of the author and the reader. The author may not think so but the reader may definitely think so. There are even some authors who blatantly attempt to make a Mary Sue and fail miserably, so adept have they made themselves at avoiding MS like the plague. This also ties in closely with question 3, "Is Mary Sue a place holder for the reader?" Well, first of all, to explain the idea of the place holder...most of us women/girls have been guilty of reading at least one romance novel. Just one, admit it. Even if its just to find out what the fuss is about. Me? I'll admit to reading them quite frequently...I usually skip the sex scenes now, nothing new to learn at my age! I just like to have a few hours of daydreaming with words on a page, which is exactly the point. The heroine of these books is essentially me, the reader. Have you noticed that the heroines are almost always the same but the heroes/love interest have some spark of difference to them. The heroines are pretty, defiant, tough, blah blah...can we say MARYSUE?...while the guys are tormented, burned in love, cynical, etc. ad nauseum. The girl, of course, changes his mind, makes him realize that love is not something to be avoided, blah blah blah...well, you get the nauseating idea. It's mindless and fulfills some psychological need within the female reader. What, I don't know, I'm a history major not a pyschology major. I just know I enjoy the hell out of them though I know there's not a chance in heck these things could be true. A well-written, well thought out Mary Sue essentially should do the same thing. I said should, so don't bark at me! Unfortunately, Mary Sues usually fail as place holder miserably. No one in their right minds want to be THAT perfect unless they are 12 years old and just discovered boys. So for both question 2 and 3, the answer is depends on the story, the characterization and the writing itself.
Question four asks if Mary Sue is just a pain in the rear or does she serve a useful purpose? My personal answer is yes, she serves a purpose. She gets most of us into writing and occassionally, writing a Mary Sue is a good way to get that personal fantasy of yours out of the way and get back to writing that will be read with minimal ridicule. You don't have to post her story, just get it out of your head so that more important stories can filter through. And Mary Sue is often the first character that any of us has written, whether you want to admit it or not. Even the greats are guilty (see Wesley Crusher from Star Trek the Next Generation, whose first name is Gene Roddenberry's middle name). Using some part of yourself even in the smallest form is a way of stamping th story as yours, but going overboard and making a perfect version of yourself is idle daydreaming and wishfulfillment. We all have wishes we want fulfilled, dreams we love to fantasize about. Sometimes they jibe with other peoples, but mostly, it's for yourself. Which leads us to the grey area of-
-is the Mary Sue and the Original Character (or OC) different? This is the crucial question in fan fiction at the moment. Has Mary Sue merely evolved into the OC? The OC often has many of the elements of Mary Sue but the OC is usually much better written, not so damned perky perfect, and doesn't always get the guy/girl at the end. Many readers will read an OC but not a Mary Sue. Many authors don't realize they are writing a Mary Sue when in truth they are writing an OC? What is the difference? Well, to be perfectly and brutally honest, there isn't much. The OC is probably just an evolutionized Mary Sue. The author has just taken enough Mary Sue litmus tests to know what to avoid the most. Yet some elements of the Mary Sue just cannot be avoided, even if you are using a canon character. For example, Pansy Parkinson of Slytherin. No one really knows her story, she's mentioned here and there in the HP books but Pansy's story isn't really known. She's an intriguing little character and so much can be made up about her. She's not exactly an original character but elements of Mary Sue can be given to her in order to give her a back story. Yet since so little is known, anyone giving her a story and more life than Rowling has up to now is essentially making her an OC. Pansy's entire life is from the author, not from canon. The same applies to a character with a name provided by the author. An entire life created by the fan fic author, yet not in canon. What's the difference, other than Rowling created Pansy as a name, gave us a description and a brief glimpse into her personality? Not a damned thing, honestly. Not one thing.
The problem with the label "Mary Sue" is that it now carries a negative connotation, often unfairly. There are good Mary Sues out there, yet it is easily pointed out those are far outweighed by bad ones. Can Mary Sues be avoided? Should they be avoided? Well, no, because then you've got nothing to write about. Every author puts an element of his or herself into every character they write about, whether they know it or not. That's the process of writing, period. It cannot be gotten around. Yet knowing the pitfalls of Mary Sue in her most hideous formula is a good thing; the best anyone can do is go for the Original Character and hope the readers aren't those who assume that if the character came from the writer's imagination, it's automatically a Mary Sue anyway, regardless of development, etc. Mary Sue is a pitfall, a stigma, a label designed to terrify, humiliate and, essentially, flame a character or batch of character traits that aren't popular with the readership at large.
There are many new lists, message boards, and journals dedicated to nothing but Mary Sue bashing. These people delight in taking a character and just ripping it apart. They attack any character that is original, be it an obvious Mary Sue or just a character that randomly pops up in a fiction. They attack the author and the author's readers (if there are any) on their boards and lists, sometimes sending the author an email alerting them of the diatribe in order to get a response. I usually call these people "Mary Sue Hunters" and, to me, they are about one level short of flamers who hate a story just because it doesn't jibe with how they see the universe. Instead of improving the writers, offering advice to avoid such hideous pitfalls, or shrugging when the author states they made the Mary Sue on purpose because it amused them, these Mary Sue Hunters ruthlessly continue picking at the author(s). It's like the neighborhood bullies who have nothing better to do than tie tin cans to the local stray dog's tail and throwing rocks at it, even when the dog is cornered and terrified.
Fan fiction is a genre that has always been open to the fantasy of the writer's mind. Shoot, that's exactly what fan fiction is and the Mary Sue is the backbone, the foundation (if not the red-headed step child) of fan fiction. Mary Sue should be celebrated, read with amusement and then go on to other things, secure in the knowledge that most fan fiction has progressed to more depth and style than it's predecessor.
Links to Mary Sue Resources
Dr, Merlin's Guide to Fan Fiction
Mary Sue, and How to Avoid Her
Mary Sue Whippie's Really Cool Webpage
I'm not sure if the author is really this warped or its a joke, but either way, it's friggin' hilarious!
There are others out there but this is a decent enough start!