Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Yeah, see that's how Mary Sue syndrome happens. Each main character needs to be fully realized in his own right. You shouldn't be thinking about how you'll react but how your character reacts based on his life experiences (not yours). His background and personality should be thought out first before anything else. Do not simply insert yourself.

What I mean by inserting myself is that I am nineteen, wear glasses, loves video games, average height, and not all that strong. In the Horror Story version, the main character would share those traits with me, but he would have things that are specific for his background. Including, but not limited to;

1) A love of Horror Movies/Books/Games. This would cause him to be all sorts of paranoid since the guy who knows alot is always amongst the first to die. This would also make him confident in what he is doing (as confident as you can be in this sort of situation), and it would lead to all sorts of Feth Ups that end up getting people killed, which would slowly drive him mad.

2) A smoking hot brunette bombshell he would never have had a chance with if he wasn't lucky enough to be the guy next door since their childhood.

Now, in the sci-fi version, "My" character would have my traits of: Short Sightedness, average height, and a tendancy to overthink things/let his imagination run wild, but would be different from me by;

1) He is a soldier, and as such would be much stronger than I am.

2) Unlike me, he is proficient with technology, and is capable of hacking and working with wires.

Those still in the "danger" zone of Mary Sue-dom?

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Yes it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue

Read:

A Mary Sue (sometimes just Sue), in fanfiction, is a fictional character with overly idealized and hackneyed mannerisms, lacking noteworthy flaws, and primarily functioning as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author or reader.

"or reader" is an important not there. No where in this 'definition' does the word self-insertion even appear, or any phrase that suggests that Mary Sue's are a self-insertion of the author. It even specifies that not all Mary Sue's are self-insertions:

True self-insertion is a literal and generally undisguised representation of the author; most characters described as "Mary Sues" are not, though they are often called "proxies" for the author.

Technically speaking, and author self-inserting themselves into a story suggests they have enough ego to think they're that important (or maybe they're just that lonely, who knows). Either suggests the author like most real people is flawed. Mary Sue's have no flaws.

So this is more to do with fanfic or amateur writing then (for want of a better term)? I guess this is where the value of having a proof-reader or editor comes in...

Would Kilgore Trout qualify? Because he's the opposite of a "can do no wrong" but
he's obviously "the author himself".

Then no. A Mary Sue definately is wish-fulfillment (yet still pitied for having the burden of being so special).

filbert wrote:So this is more to do with fanfic or amateur writing then (for want of a better term)? I guess this is where the value of having a proof-reader or editor comes in...

You can probably apply the term outside of fanfiction even if fanfiction is where the term originates. What a Mary Sue is, isn't limited to fan fiction and appears often enough in original works.

Then no. A Mary Sue definately is wish-fulfillment (yet still pitied for having the burden of being so special).

I actually think the Wiki's note of the character being a proxie is a much better means of explaining Mary Sue characters. I've never thought of it that way before.

For those who have ever wondered what started this Phenonmenom:

A TREKKIE'S TALE

By Paula Smith



"Gee, golly, gosh, gloriosky," thought Mary Sue as she stepped on the bridge of the Enterprise. "Here I am, the youngest lieutenant in the fleet - only fifteen and a half years old." Captain Kirk came up to her.
"Oh, Lieutenant, I love you madly. Will you come to bed with me?"
"Captain! I am not that kind of girl!"
"You're right, and I respect you for it. Here, take over the ship for a minute while I go get some coffee for us."
Mr. Spock came onto the bridge. "What are you doing in the command seat, Lieutenant?"
"The Captain told me to."
"Flawlessly logical. I admire your mind."

Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy and Mr. Scott beamed down with Lt. Mary Sue to Rigel XXXVII. They were attacked by green androids and thrown into prison. In a moment of weakness Lt. Mary Sue revealed to Mr. Spock that she too was half Vulcan. Recovering quickly, she sprung the lock with her hairpin and they all got away back to the ship.

But back on board, Dr. McCoy and Lt. Mary Sue found out that the men who had beamed down were seriously stricken by the jumping cold robbies , Mary Sue less so. While the four officers languished in Sick Bay, Lt. Mary Sue ran the ship, and ran it so well she received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Vulcan Order of Gallantry and the Tralfamadorian Order of Good Guyhood.

However the disease finally got to her and she fell fatally ill. In the Sick Bay as she breathed her last, she was surrounded by Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, and Mr. Scott, all weeping unashamedly at the loss of her beautiful youth and youthful beauty, intelligence, capability and all around niceness. Even to this day her birthday is a national holiday of the Enterprise.

Yes yes yes, that boring old thing. Be that as it may, the definition of a word does not depend on its original use, and never has.

When All Else Fails: Use TV Tropes!

TVTropes actually seems to give a pretty good history on the evolution of the term, determining that even they have no clue what it actually means

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Then no. A Mary Sue definately is wish-fulfillment (yet still pitied for having the burden of being so special).

This was directed at me, yes?

So I'm not a Mary Sue, that's good

Slarg232 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Then no. A Mary Sue definately is wish-fulfillment (yet still pitied for having the burden of being so special).

This was directed at me, yes?

So I'm not a Mary Sue, that's good

No, at Malfred.

Thanks for the clarification.

Hey, some people make a whole lot of money off of that, like Stephanie Meyer, as mentioned, or Stieg Larson (the girl with the dragon tattoo, and sequels).

I usually find it somewhat annoying, especially if it's written well enough that I only notice it 1/3 to 1/2 of the way through.

If something's well-written then it's well-written. Mary Sue is an interesting literary criticism because it's such a common mistake by new writers but if I never hear the again in my life that's fine by me too. It's constantly overused, misused and not the mortal sin it's made out to be.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:If something's well-written then it's well-written. Mary Sue is an interesting literary criticism because it's such a common mistake by new writers but if I never hear the again in my life that's fine by me too. It's constantly overused, misused and not the mortal sin it's made out to be.

Even some older and more experienced writers do it (I'm looking at you Mr. Crusher), but yeah, it's up there with the passive tense as far as common mistakes go though I've never minded the passive tense as much as other people. Story structure and character development matter more to me than the exact words used to portray either (within reason).

How does this look for an opening paragraph? Don't need to be gentle with it, best way to learn is getting ripped down (And for all you plagerists out there; remember that Dakka has a Time Stamp for every post).

Slarg232 wrote:How does this look for an opening paragraph? Don't need to be gentle with it, best way to learn is getting ripped down (And for all you plagerists out there; remember that Dakka has a Time Stamp for every post).

Spoiler:

Hello, dear Reader. These are the events that happened on Saturday, April Thirtieth, of the year Two Thousand Eleven. I am transcribing these words down, not to entertain those seeking to miss a few hours of sleep, but as a warning. A warning to all those whom beleive they know everything there is to know about the occult because they have watched movies, read books, and even played video games upon the subject. Everything you know is a lie, and I hope that my story can keep you from making the same mistakes I did.

Personally, I've never really be fond of this kind of opening, but that's just me. I think this sort of opening is better approached without the monologue, or maybe with a shorter monologue and then going right into it so as to keep the attention of the reader. Something along the lines of telling the story, while saying these things maybe as the characters internal thoughts? Such as maybe the character goes into his classroom for first period and sees a ghost/or something weird that fits wherever you're going, then talks about the above in a less imposing manner.

Of course, I don't know everything about what you plan to write, so my suggestion may not be workable.

If you're looking to be a better writer on the internet I actually suggest going to this forum: writingforums.org I haven't been there in years because I ended up making a huge fool of myself when I was younger (and if you think I've made a fool of myself here, you ain't seen nothing XD) but the board was very useful for new writers who want to learn more about writing when I was there back in 06-08 and they offer critiques and proof reading (of course you have to do the same if you expect to get your stuff reviewed by others, little give and take).

LordofHats wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:How does this look for an opening paragraph? Don't need to be gentle with it, best way to learn is getting ripped down (And for all you plagerists out there; remember that Dakka has a Time Stamp for every post).

Spoiler:

Hello, dear Reader. These are the events that happened on Saturday, April Thirtieth, of the year Two Thousand Eleven. I am transcribing these words down, not to entertain those seeking to miss a few hours of sleep, but as a warning. A warning to all those whom beleive they know everything there is to know about the occult because they have watched movies, read books, and even played video games upon the subject. Everything you know is a lie, and I hope that my story can keep you from making the same mistakes I did.

Personally, I've never really be fond of this kind of opening, but that's just me. I think this sort of opening is better approached without the monologue, or maybe with a shorter monologue and then going right into it so as to keep the attention of the reader. Something along the lines of telling the story, while saying these things maybe as the characters internal thoughts? Such as maybe the character goes into his classroom for first period and sees a ghost/or something weird that fits wherever you're going, then talks about the above in a less imposing manner.

Of course, I don't know everything about what you plan to write, so my suggestion may not be workable.

If you're looking to be a better writer on the internet I actually suggest going to this forum: writingforums.org I haven't been there in years because I ended up making a huge fool of myself when I was younger (and if you think I've made a fool of myself here, you ain't seen nothing XD) but the board was very useful for new writers who want to learn more about writing when I was there back in 06-08 and they offer critiques and proof reading (of course you have to do the same if you expect to get your stuff reviewed by others, little give and take).

Thanks, I'll visit those forums

As for the internal monologue, it will only be done at certain points; the beginning, the "Hot Coffee" part, and the very end, with a few, maybe one paragraph Monologue every so often.

And actually, what the storyline is, is that the main character, his girlfriend Selena, her friend Nikki, and Nikki's boyfriend, Robert (NOT Bob, as he says) are coming back from a Double Date concert, a Car Accident happens right outside of town (not them), and so instead of traveling the backways to avoid the accident, they just spend the night at this mansion this old couple left to the town (along with the very good, fully loaded wine cellar ). It's not haunted, but several other kids decide that they want to read from this mysterious book they found (probably NOT the Necronomicon) in the spookiest place they can, and they go to the Mansion and accidently unleash hell to those currently trapped inside of it.

The ultimate problem with author inserts is that they tend to be highly sensitive to the author's state of mind. No one is perfectly balanced all of the time, and most of them generally aren't for even most of it. As such you end with a character that feels forced , or unnatural, because it tends to overemphasize whatever particular state of mind the author is in while writing. This isn't necessarily a bad thing if the situation in the story is appropriate to the demeanor of the character, but since most authors don't react to the fictional world they're creating, it will generally feel off. This is why author inserts are often Mary Sues, or at least that perceived author inserts are often Mary Sues. When the author puts himself into the story the right way the reader won't even notice without a lot of info about the author as a person.

Now, sometimes you'll get authors, like Alan Moore, who can shove a caricature of themselves into a particular work in order to push the story forward, or bring it to a close. This is much easier as the author is consciously envisioning something like them within the bounds of the story, rather than trying to simply transcribe their personality, which is always fundamentally easier as they're forcing themselves into adopting a perspective like one the reader has.

I agree with the lord of hats, and know that, seeing as you're writing in a fictional-memoir style, it might seem a little author-insert-ish, but that's to be expected with the style.

Slarg232 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Yeah, see that's how Mary Sue syndrome happens. Each main character needs to be fully realized in his own right. You shouldn't be thinking about how you'll react but how your character reacts based on his life experiences (not yours). His background and personality should be thought out first before anything else. Do not simply insert yourself.

What I mean by inserting myself is that I am nineteen, wear glasses, loves video games, average height, and not all that strong. In the Horror Story version, the main character would share those traits with me, but he would have things that are specific for his background. Including, but not limited to;

1) A love of Horror Movies/Books/Games. This would cause him to be all sorts of paranoid since the guy who knows alot is always amongst the first to die. This would also make him confident in what he is doing (as confident as you can be in this sort of situation), and it would lead to all sorts of Feth Ups that end up getting people killed, which would slowly drive him mad.

2) A smoking hot brunette bombshell he would never have had a chance with if he wasn't lucky enough to be the guy next door since their childhood.

Now, in the sci-fi version, "My" character would have my traits of: Short Sightedness, average height, and a tendancy to overthink things/let his imagination run wild, but would be different from me by;

1) He is a soldier, and as such would be much stronger than I am.

2) Unlike me, he is proficient with technology, and is capable of hacking and working with wires.

Those still in the "danger" zone of Mary Sue-dom?

No offense or anything, but this sounds a lot like you are trying to create a character that is essentially a cooler you, which doesn't exactly make for the best writing. Just sayin'.

Slarg232 wrote:As for the internal monologue, it will only be done at certain points; the beginning, the "Hot Coffee" part, and the very end, with a few, maybe one paragraph Monologue every so often.

Just about anything can work if you write it properly. One of the key things is pacing (like in many other mediums). Don't do the same thing for too long structures wise or the reader becomes easily bored/side tracked. You need to keep the story going forward, space out the monologues, actions, conversations in a manner that they flow smoothly and timely (this is where outlining is very valuable, and I know a lot of new writers don't like to outline but trust me, it helps maintain pace and consistency).

Monologues are tricky business as they can come off as ranty. Just be careful with them and try not to sound like the character is being overly preachy (unless of course arrogance or preachiness is one of his flaws or something like that, I've written some characters like that before and it can be done well). EDIT: That works better for antagonists than protagonists. Readers tend not to like feeling like the hero they're supposed to be rooting for already has all the answers. It removes suspense and the moral of the story blah blah blah.

No offense or anything, but this sounds a lot like you are trying to create a character that is essentially a cooler you, which doesn't exactly make for the best writing. Just sayin'.

It'll only work out poorly if the character comes out as overly idealized. On one hand, the short-sightedness is something that doesn't appear in a lot of mainstream fiction, just have to play that properly without over emphasizing it or doing things that make it feel fake (like spotting a sniper a mile away or something). Most of my characters are written with a lot of power or talent, but I really focus on personality and character flaws. It just depends on how it's written. Some things are easier to do right than others.

LordofHats wrote:

No offense or anything, but this sounds a lot like you are trying to create a character that is essentially a cooler you, which doesn't exactly make for the best writing. Just sayin'.

It'll only work out poorly if the character comes out as overly idealized. On one hand, the short-sightedness is something that doesn't appear in a lot of mainstream fiction, just have to play that properly without over emphasizing it or doing things that make it feel fake (like spotting a sniper a mile away or something). Most of my characters are written with a lot of power or talent, but I really focus on personality and character flaws. It just depends on how it's written. Some things are easier to do right than others.

As you previously stated, and I agree, if written well you can make just about anything work. However, writing from the point of view of a character who is essentially an idealized version of yourself usually doesn't turn out so well. For instance, you could have the character do something, or make a decision that makes perfect sense to you, the author, but to the readers is completely wacked out. This is because, since you are basing the character off yourself, he might make decisions based on your own personal history that someone reading the story knows absolutely nothing about. You wouldn't notice anything weird, because the character is essentially you. But your readers don't have all the knowledge about you that you do. See what I'm saying? It's much easier, well not easier, but better, to create a new character with his/her own history/personality, etc.

rubiksnoob wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

No offense or anything, but this sounds a lot like you are trying to create a character that is essentially a cooler you, which doesn't exactly make for the best writing. Just sayin'.

It'll only work out poorly if the character comes out as overly idealized. On one hand, the short-sightedness is something that doesn't appear in a lot of mainstream fiction, just have to play that properly without over emphasizing it or doing things that make it feel fake (like spotting a sniper a mile away or something). Most of my characters are written with a lot of power or talent, but I really focus on personality and character flaws. It just depends on how it's written. Some things are easier to do right than others.

As you previously stated, and I agree, if written well you can make just about anything work. However, writing from the point of view of a character who is essentially an idealized version of yourself usually doesn't turn out so well. For instance, you could have the character do something, or make a decision that makes perfect sense to you, the author, but to the readers is completely wacked out. This is because, since you are basing the character off yourself, he might make decisions based on your own personal history that someone reading the story knows absolutely nothing about. You wouldn't notice anything weird, because the character is essentially you. But your readers don't have all the knowledge about you that you do. See what I'm saying? It's much easier, well not easier, but better, to create a new character with his/her own history/personality, etc.

Don't worry, I plan on being very careful with that, and besides, this is just the first of many, if I enjoy writing.

Truth is, I'm not actually trying to write... to write. I'm writing to tell these stories that I have had in my head forever, and writing would be the easiest way of doing it; I don't have to understand the arcane language of programming to make them into games, not to mention sound/graphic design, and I don't have to worry about actors for making a movie. If I find I don't like it, well, I suppose that's just one more thing on the list of "I don't actually care doing".

Of course, I think I am going to sideline this story and follow the advice of some people on that forum Hats pointed me to; Critique others work/see how they did it, and then write short stories, working your way up to a novel. I still have a fair few shorter stories I could make....

I mean, these shorter ones won't be near as good as The Etherium Dream or The Gods (God's? Gods'?) Plan, but hey, these things take time.

Check out Melissia's fiction, "Capt. Melissa, the Betrayer". Partially due to the name of the character, and partially due to how it's written, multiple people have expressed concern that she had a traumatic childhood, which she denies. That's a sign of believable writing.


http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/352558.page

Worst ever ... Lady in the Water.

Mannahnin wrote:There are a very large number of people who write posts.
There is a smaller number of people with good ideas.

Fix'd

Bromsy wrote:Worst ever ... Lady in the Water.

Worst movie ever!

It's not necessarily bad. Self insertion can be used as an interesting literary mechanism or to create an awesome self-referential cameo that breaks the fourth wall.

However, this generally means that the author is lazy or immature.