[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 71 KB, 350x350, marysue.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2006956 No.2006956 [Reply] [Original]

Well since I can't really find a better board to ask this about:
>please define it
from what I've come to understand it originally referred to a self-insertion character who is completely perfect and only function to fulfill an author's fantasy. But I've seen it used/indirectly described in so many different ways/contexts, sometimes it seems to be an wangsty character that no one likes, a useless character, etc. so could someone help me understand a bit better?

>> No.2006962

Mary Sue:fictional characters::hipster:real people
It's completely lost what little meaning it had to start with, and is now a catch-all term for "person I don't like" used largely by idiots who don't know any better.

>> No.2006969

It's a term born out of fanfiction that means exactly what you think it does in your first sentence.

Now, people use it while discussing actual literature, television, and other legitimate artforms (which is a shame) to mean "any character that has any measure of success and/or gets a positive portrayal despite having qualities that I don't like.".

It's like "ironic" or "random" in that people use it without knowing what it means because they think it makes them look clever. Like those two words, it's pretty much lost all meaning at this point.

>> No.2006971

>>2006956
Yeah, in general if you're criticizing something for being "mary sue" you're better off being more specific about what you don't like. Because no one will get the point if you just used the watered down piece of fan fiction argot. If someone says "x is a mary sue" just assume it means littler more than they don't like x.

>> No.2006978

It generally just means any overpowered character, like Ender from Ender's Game.

>> No.2006983

>>2006978
sorry, but the rest of these guys definitions seem to sound a lot better than yours right noe

>> No.2006989

Mary Sue: A character descriptor meaning "I don't like them but I don't feel like explaining why."

>> No.2007004

Dexter from Dexter.
Superman from Superman
Anyone from Twilight.

Mary Sue means someone the author really is not SHARING with the audience, just showcasing....someone with plot armor and/or obvious favoritism from the author. Blah I tried.

>> No.2007005

>>2007004
Nope. That's shitty definition creep.

>> No.2007011

>>2007005
More insightful than your response. But you might have poor taste so how can I blame you?

>> No.2007016

ITT: A bunch of butt hurt fags whose characters got called Mary Sue.

Mary Sues are characters who are impossibly unrealistic in their own setting, with unique traits that either make him/her different from the rest of the characters, or make him/her better than them.

If you wrote a story about a seventeen year old who has natural green hair, is extraordinarily talented in all skills, has a great personality, is well loved, set in modern day North Carolina, and generally has no problems or flaws at all, he/she is Mary Sue. It's just unrealistic and, generally, these characters are flat and static.

>> No.2007017

>>2007011
>implying taste has anything to do with definitions.
That's not what the term means.

>> No.2007029

>>2007017
Implying your implication implies anything.

>> No.2007034

>>2007029
>implying my dick up your ass

>> No.2007042

>>2007034
>me gusta

>> No.2007047

>>2007016
The above definitions are still accurate because its such a broad, easily-abused term that is more often mis-used than not. If you have valid complaints about a character please share them, but when I read "mary sue" all I think is >>2006989
because
>>2006971

>> No.2007153

Bumping for truth

>> No.2007156

>>2007153
mary sue is infallable. So far as I can see

>> No.2007161

>>2007016

This is correct, traditionally speaking. The word is just so overused that it now basically means what these guys are saying:
>>2006989
>>2006971

>> No.2007181

>>2006956
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue

OP, you obviously took the picture from this wiki (unless it's the first result on google images or something?) so you've obviously read the wiki (if you sincerely cared about the question and answer) so the only thing that isn't obvious here is why you made this thread in the first place (inb4 begging the question). The wiki is very comprehensive.

>> No.2007182
File: 25 KB, 466x466, 1312777193530.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2007182

I've always understood a Mary Sue to be an author self insert first and a perfect character second

>> No.2007190

>>2007182
>>2007182
who's in that photo?

>> No.2007467

>>2007190
Mary Sue.

>> No.2007525

>>2007182
Nah, this would be an Author Avatar.

>> No.2007610
File: 45 KB, 425x315, 600full-dexter-screenshot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2007610

>>2007004
What's wrong with Dexter?

>> No.2007659

Dagny Taggart

/threads

>> No.2007674

>What is a Mary Sue?
>I'm glad you asked! A Mary Sue is any of the following:
>A character whose defining traits are that of, or similar to, the author
>A character represented as flawless in universe, but is clearly flawed outside of the narrative
>A character whose actions are completely unbelievable in such a way that willing suspension of disbelief can not justify them

>> No.2008893

>DONT USE "MARY SUE"
>IF YOU DON'T LIKE A CHARACTER, THINK IT THROUGH
If you have a genuine problem explain it with a less vague, bullshit term. Look at the guy above me. He defines it perfectly, but the term is TOO BROAD and people STILL MISUSE IT.

Got a problem with a character?

describe it using words and phrases that actually mean something.

>> No.2008919

I've been wondering about this myself, informative thread... good stuff

>> No.2008930

>>2008893
I bet you're one of the bitches that don't believe "hipster" has a meaning. Mary Sue is a perfect self-insert with which the author lives out his or her fantasies. You know Sonichu? Every character in that comic that isn't a villain is a Mary Sue.

>> No.2008961

>>2008930
Hipster does have a meaning, but, like "mary sue", it has a ridiculously inflated "perceived meaning" that makes it a bullshit filler word more often than not. A person can be a hipster, but unless you're talking about a specific social group you're using the word wrong and might as well just come out and explain what your ACTUAL problem with that person is instead of using a filler word.

With "mary sue" there isn't even ONE definition! Read the answers in this thread that defend the term. It is a ridiculously wide range of definitions for imperfect characters. If you think a character is a Mary Sue and you're not smart enough to explain what your problems with the character are in more than two words then you're wasting everyone's time by even talking.

>> No.2009141

>>2008961
I have a real problem with this. You see, Mary Sue used to have one definition. But because stupid people began to use the term after hearing it, without knowing what it actually meant (as stupid people tend to do), there came a set of circumstances in which smart people were expected to accept the incorrect definitions of every dolt, moron, and ape-brain who happened along. And suddenly, there were twenty different definitions of the term.

Fuck that.

I went through a similar argument recently on /tv/ with someone who claimed (because he'd read it on wikipedia) that "film noir" had no real definition. Of course it does. In the old days, you could find it in these things called books, where film theorists, filmmakers, and pulp writers all tended to agree, to a remarkable extent, on the definition of noir.

I bet you think "decimated" means "ruined," or "severely damaged."

On /lit/, of all places, we ought to be able to agree that terms have meanings. Whether we know what they are or not might be a different matter -- but at least, for fuck's sake, can we agree that there is a valid definition for every word or commonly-used term in the English language?

>> No.2009518

>>2009141

I never meant to say that words shouldn't have one meaning. I thought I'd made it clear that that is EXACTLY what I think and that my main complaint with the use of the term "mary sue" is that it is used as a filler word/insult more often than not, which I think hinders real discussion. If someone doesn't like a character or feels that they're unrealistically portrayed they label them a "mary sue" instead of explaining exactly what their complaints with the character are. This is not similar to saying that "Film Noir" has no meaning because, unlike "Mary Sue", "Film Noir" is a valid descriptor for a specific thing. Film Noir means a well-defined and specific thing, it isn't overly-broad even in it's original form, it isn't easily replaced by multiple more scholarly or precise terms, and it wasn't made up by neckbeards complaining about fanfiction on the internet. None of those can be said about "mary sue".

Is the character a preachy author-insert? Call them that. Are they overpowered? Do others react unrealistically towards them? Say that. Explain. Saying "Mary Sue" says that you think the character is SOMEHOW overpowered or unrealistic or perfect but does not actually count as a valid complaint. It's like saying a character is "shitty" or "retarded" or "annoying" or "totally gay, but not in the homosexual way. The bad way."

TV Tropes are fun and all, but most of the terms used there haven't caught on in scholarly debate and NOT because they have silly names. They're imprecise, have too much overlap, and, while amusing, are detrimental to actual discussion because they give you an excuse to NOT EXPLAIN YOURSELF FULLY.

My problem with the term "Mary Sue" is not that no one can decide what they want it to mean. My problem with it is that even when we DO decide what it means we could say so much more and have much richer discussion by skipping the fucking catchphrase and explaining our opinion using MORE THAN TWO WORDS.

>> No.2009529

>>2009141
I also know what "decimated" originally meant, though it has been used 'incorrectly' for so many hundreds of years now that it pretty much DOES mean "severely damaged". If people started using "decimated" as a catch-all to describe all manner of damages and refused to describe the specific nature of the damages they're complaining about then I would complain about that word, too.

Decimated STILL only means that one specific punishment? Really? Are we Romans?

And "quick" originally meant "alive". Hope you haven't used it to mean "fast", jackass.

>> No.2009544

>>2009141
i stopped reading after "but because stupid people..."

don't generalize so foolishly.
are you complaining to a class of middle schoolers?
who are "stupid people"
I could be one, for all your fingerpointing is doing

>> No.2009552

>>2009544
Stupid people are, in this case, people who misuse a term that was invented by fanfic writers to describe a kind of bad fanfic character. I'd think it would describe anyone willing to use fanfic terms to describe "real" literature, but hey... I guess we can call sex scenes lemons now. That's cool, right?

>> No.2009558
File: 70 KB, 382x787, mary sue.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2009558

>> No.2009566

>>2009558
Or you could just explain why the character is flawed using real words instead of spouting a fanfic catchphrase. You're going to have to explain what the hell you mean ANYWAY if you're talking to anyone who doesn't spend a lot of time online.

>> No.2009572

>>2009566
that's a hipster thing to say. Mary Sue is perfectly cromulent term.

>> No.2009577

>>2009572
I love you, you irritating son of a bitch.

>> No.2009585

>>2009518
I was about to explain that the term Mary Sue predated the internet, but along came >>2009558 which does a fair job of explaining it.

>>2009529
Decimated literally, directly means "reduced by ten percent." Have you honestly never noticed that "deci/deca" means ten in every other word?

>> No.2009588

>>2009585
Yeah, and it comes from the roman punishment. It has outgrown the original meaning. It did so a long time ago. See "quick". The original meaning is still valid, but it means something else as well.

Mary Sue predating the web doesn't invalidate the above complaints.

>> No.2009589

Remember: if you're ever wondering where something on the Internet came from, there's a good chance it came from Star Trek fandom in the 70s. In fact, most elements of 'nerd' culture can be traced back to three distinct sources: science fiction fandom (and in particular Star Trek fandom), wargaming hobby enthusiasts, and technological/computer programming circles.

>> No.2009591

>>2009589
Hilarious that it's now entered the vocabulary of people who have no respect for those things.

>> No.2009598

>>2009588
The meanings of words change over time. This is the nature of language. The meaning of decimated hasn't changed. Mary Sue has a specific meaning. They're just being used wrong by people who don't actually know their meanings. The above arguments are invalid.

>> No.2009600

>>2009598
But it's the height of fucking stupidity to just keep using the word in the old sense, if you acknowledge that the meaning of the word has changed. You can rant about how you're in the right and everyone else is wrong all you want, but seriously, the word means what people use it to mean.

>> No.2009606

>>2009598
>the above arguments are invalid
not an argument

>> No.2009612

>>2009600

I haven't acknowledged that the meanings of those words have changed. People are merely using them incorrectly. The meaning of a word doesn't change every time someone uses it incorrectly. It doesn't change every time several hundred thousand people use it incorrectly.

Give it a few hundred years, then we'll talk.

>> No.2009618

>>2009612
Decimate is roman. We've been using it to mean things other than the original punishment (which was applied to one tenth of a group) for hundreds of years. We've been using it in ways that don't have anything to do with a tenth for hundreds of years.

And that does nothing to change that Mary Sue is a shitty phrase and a shitty excuse to not explain your ideas. It's a prepackaged colloquial complaint and it hinders discussion.

>> No.2009625

>>2009612
When most people in a society use it in a given way, when it is commonly understood to have that meaning, when an average member of the society could reasonably be expected to associate meaning and word, I'd say the meaning has changed whether or not you like it. What is your picture of how meaning changes? Like, what's your benchmark here? When are we allowed to say that meaning has changed?

And, by the way, the decimate example is so ludicrously stupid, because no one uses it in its Latin meaning except pedants. It's used in common society to mean "destroy". That's its fucking meaning to the vast majority of people in the English-speaking world, I suspect; it is certainly the meaning of the word to most people I've spoken to. Its Latin meaning and its English meaning have diverged, fucking deal with it. It's god damned infuriating because no one fucking uses it in the Latin sense anymore but you fuckers insist that because oo hoo hoo the Latin root and the historical context and therefore it MUST mean that - NO. Fuck that and fuck you, that's not how language works, go to hell. We understand it to mean destroy, that's what it means, eat shit if you have a problem with that.

Sorry that kind of went to an angry place.

>> No.2009629

>>2009618
>decimated...hundreds of years...
Could you source that please? My teachers taught me that deca/deci/deka meant "ten" in the second grade. I can't recall ever remembering a time when I was confused about what decimated meant. The handful of times I have heard someone use it in the "new" (incorrect) way, it has always been corrected immediately, often-times by teachers, professors, and writers I knew.

(Side note: I realize you're getting your "Roman punishment" information from wikipedia in live-time. It's not a commonly known factoid, and it has nothing to do with this discussion. I had occasion to see the wikipedia page on decimated a few months back... So you can leave that aside.)

>Mary Sue...hinders discussion
I think I probably agree with your general point there, to the extent that it's a phrase that is used in essentially a meaningless way. It sounds as if we disagree on why. My argument is that the reason why is because people are using the term without really knowing what it means. Your argument seems to be that it means nothing?

Nevertheless I think your overall point is a valid one.

>> No.2009641

>>2009625
I think my history with the word must be quite different from yours. I've never understood "destroyed" to be the commonly used definition. That's not what I was taught. That's not how it's been used by "common people" wherever I've lived (except on rare occasions in error), and it has always been corrected by teachers when used in that fashion.

I doubt that the vast majority of people understand that to be it's meaning, but I mean -- neither of us have seen any data on that.

Of course the meanings of words change. I'm not sure where the exact watermark for that is, or how it could be precisely measured.

In the case of decimated though, it has such a specific, exact meaning, when you simply break it down to its roots (which is how we were all taught to understand the meanings of words, yes?) that I struggle to understand how a person with a basic command of the English language could argue that it means "destroyed."

In some parts of the country, people commonly say, "Who dat is." "Where I is." "Dat ain't me." "We president now." That doesn't mean it's grammatically correct, nahmean?

>> No.2009644

>>2009629
>Source?
OED. History classes. English classes. Multiple history books, I don't remember which.

>means nothing?
Less that it means nothing and more that it's overly broad and vague. I feel like if you have a legitimate complaint about the nature of the character you should take the time to express it. I can say that I thought a character was fucktarded and you'll get the general idea of why I didn't like him, but it's really not a good way to explain my thoughts.

>> No.2009650

>>2009644
What the fuck... forgive me. English classes? We must have had very, very different kinds of English classes. I suppose I shouldn't find it shocking.

>> No.2009661

>>2009641

>I doubt that the vast majority of people understand that to be it's meaning, but I mean -- neither of us have seen any data on that.
Neither of us can prove that we're right, I'll give you that. My experience and your experience clearly differ, but the English language varies from one location to the next.

>Of course the meanings of words change. I'm not sure where the exact watermark for that is, or how it could be precisely measured.
I don't have a clue either. No one really does. We, as a society, eventually say "okay, this means this now". There's no real test.

>In the case of decimated though, it has such a specific, exact meaning, when you simply break it down to its roots (which is how we were all taught to understand the meanings of words, yes?) that I struggle to understand how a person with a basic command of the English language could argue that it means "destroyed."

Words don't always mean what they originally meant or what they literally mean when broken down into their constituent parts. English would be a much easier language to learn if this were the case. You're correct that using it to mean "destroyed" is an error, though.

>In some parts of the country, people commonly say, "Who dat is." "Where I is." "Dat ain't me." "We president now." That doesn't mean it's grammatically correct, nahmean?
That's more an issue of dialect than definition...

this is off topic, though.

>> No.2009664

>>2009641
I'm honestly kind of surprised here, because I really only see it used in the general sense, and very rarely in the specific, reduce-by-one-tenth way. And when it was corrected, which it rarely was, it was usually in a manner that seemed extremely pedantic. And you're apparently American, so it's not even a national difference thing.

>In the case of decimated though, it has such a specific, exact meaning, when you simply break it down to its roots (which is how we were all taught to understand the meanings of words, yes?) that I struggle to understand how a person with a basic command of the English language could argue that it means "destroyed."

This is honestly the argument that annoys me most, because there's no reason that the root SHOULD determine what the word means. If society as a whole uses it in a way that doesn't accord with its root, then its meaning won't be the same as its root, and that's fine, that's not the end of the world. Shit, were we taught to break a word down to its roots? I don't think we were. I don't comprehend the meaning of 'shit' because I know that it comes from the same root as the German Scheiße. I don't comprehend the meaning of 'vagina' because I know that it comes from the Latin word for sheath, and I don't comprehend the meaning of 'placenta' because I know that it comes from the Latin word for cake. I can't see as to how roots matter at all in determining what a word ought to mean, frankly. I find that irritating and strange.

>> No.2009667

>>2009650
I meant the history of the word was discussed there. It is commonly misused, and as I said above I agree that using it to mean "destroyed" is incorrect.

>> No.2009670

>>2009667
wow. there's two "above" posts now. I meant >>2009661 this one. I'm not posting a million times, I promise. Not that it really matters who is who here...

>> No.2009688

>>2009664
Yes. We had very different experiences. We were *drilled* on common root words in grade school.
>vagina...sheath
Yes, I see where you're coming from here, but it's the root, not the origin, of the word in question. For example, because you knew the word vagina, you understood what "vaginal" meant the first time you heard it, without anyone having to explain it to you. You could guess quite accurately what "vaginoplasty" meant. That's how it was for us, at my school, when we learned deca/deka, and from there we understood decimal, decade, decimeter, etc.

Hell, we were warned against the misuse of decimated in our SAT prep materials.

>> No.2009694

>>2006956
A Mary-sue is someone who succeeds for no reason, especially if they succeed contrary to their attributes.

>> No.2009697

>>2009694
So... Deep&Edgy is a mary sue?

>> No.2009710

>>2009697
I don't really know anything about him.

>> No.2010379

>ITT:
> Mary Sue is a valid term so there
>Mary Sue is a shitty term and here's why
This thread has been fun

>> No.2010619

>>2009694
So the term itself is a Mary Sue?

Thats so meta, dude.

>> No.2011298

I'm so glad we finally had this thread.

>> No.2012820

BUMP for an actual discussion for once

>> No.2013232

>>2012820
bumpfail