There is a fascinating discussion right now on Quora on Mary Sue/Gary Stu characters. People argue in favor and against the possibility of writing a well-crafted, enjoyable character like that.
For anyone not familiar with the Mary Sue term (Gary Stu or Lary Stu are the male equivalents), Wikipedia explains what it is all about.
Who is Mary Sue?
The term “Mary Sue” comes from the name of a character created by Paula Smith in 1973 for her parody story “A Trekkie’s Tale.” The story starred Lieutenant Mary Sue (“the youngest Lieutenant in the fleet — only fifteen and a half years old”) and satirized unrealistic characters in Star Trek fan fiction. The complete story reads:
“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.
The Mary Sue test
So, does your novel have a Mary Sue in it? Here is a small test, courtesy of DailyWritingTips:
- Is your character an idealized version of you? (Be honest!)
- Are they popular with pretty much everyone?
- Are they a bit “too good to be true”?
- Do they have a surprising range of skills / expertise?
- Have they advanced a long way in their career despite being very young?
If you answered Yes to all of those, you likely have a Mary Sue, and should ask:
- Does the character have any real flaws? (“Clumsy” or “poor at math” are not flaws.)
- Do they ever fail at anything, in a significant way, in your story?
- Do they change in some way (for better or for worse) during the course of the story?
Now to the question at hand.
Is it possible to have a well crafted, enjoyable Mary Sue or Gary Stu?
Enter Westley
Chris O’Leary’s answer in Quora proved to me beyond doubt that yes, it is. But only under very specific circumstances, like children’s books. Or…
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you:
Westley, from the Princess Bride.
An idealized form of the author, living in the story, Westley is immediately popular with everyone he meets, is way too good to be true, has an inconceivable range of skills and expertise, is very young, but is the most famous and feared pirate in the world, has no flaws to speak of, never fails at anything, and does not change at all throughout the story.
BOOM. The Dread Pirate Gary Stu. AND a GREAT character whom everyone LOVES.
What do you think? Can we have a Mary Sue without ruining our entire novel?
Yes, we can have Mary Sues and Gary Stus, but they shouldn’t be the main character, and they need a reason to be that way, like a thorn in the side of the main character or comic relief or something.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They’re hard to write, aren’t they? And, at the same time, so easy to write…
LikeLike
I agree with Priscilla, they make wonderful side characters…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it depends on the type of novel. If it’s a story with humor as the primary tone or a lighter read, then maybe.
If you’re going for psychological realism or a more serious tone, probably not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Even with humor, they can get annoying rather fast. They need a certain tongue-in-cheek approach. As Priscilla said, they can be great for comic relief.
LikeLike
Westley? But he started as a farm boy and they explained how he became Dread Pirate Roberts. I always thought a Mary Sue is flawless and highly skilled without a rational explanation. At least he was trained and traveling o we the course of a few years, which can explain his abilities. Not to mention he was captured and tortured, which is why he needed help. Also, didn’t everyone hate him at first? I mean, Buttercup kicked him down a hill before she realized he was her true love. Guess I’m not seeing it. Characters need some flaws even if they aren’t on the extreme side of things. So, I guess I’m saying a well-written Mary Sue/Gary Stu isn’t really possible even in secondary cast. Once you put a perfect character in, the readers wonder why they don’t solve the whole plot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah, interesting points. But think about it. Westley is captured but Dread Pirate Roberts instantly likes him and not only keeps him alive but he passes on the mantle.
Buttercup only kicks him down the hill because she thinks he killed her loved one. She still falls for him.
And he was captured and killed but came back to life. How much more Mary Sue do you get than coming back from the dead? 😀
LikeLike
But many characters come back to life and aren’t Mary Sues. Spock is one example. He died and came back, but he’s still flawed. Also, Westley was only mostly dead.
As for the other two points, it’s hard to know how the off-camera thing went. I don’t even think Roberts took an instant liking until Westley mentioned true love. Sounds like that was more a curiosity than an instant. With Buttercup, it was said in the beginning that it took time for her to fall in love with him at first. ‘Princess Bride’ does a lot of time passing and speedy info dumps to clear things. So, it sounds instantaneous, but it’s really over the course of time.
I see Mary Sues as those that put no work in for anything and have no real flaws. They can do things with no training including actions that more experienced characters struggle with. Their decisions never backfire on them. Even mental and emotional tolls are avoided because they are ‘confident’ or immediately shrug things off. These characters also don’t really need the help of others. Supporting cast comes off as cheerleaders or eyewitnesses instead if participants. Westley needed Fezzik and Inigo to succeed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like how much thought you’ve put into this. I guess it depends on your understanding of the Mary Sue character. For me, it’s any character who can’t grow because they’re already pretty perfect by the time we introduce them to the story. Westley definitely fits the bill. He has no flaws from beginning to end.
If, however, you define it as someone who’s *born* perfect, or who needs no one to succeed, then yes, Westley is not a Mary Sue character, as he had to learn his skills growing up next to Roberts.
While I’m happy to accept that the original story reflects your definition of Mary Sue, I’d argue that the definition has now expanded to include the former.
LikeLike
I’m actually debating Westley on Facebook too. I do think he grows though. He started as a lone wolf with no interest in help. Then he was injured to the point where he needed allies. Honestly, he does very little in the final assault besides a well-executed bluff and planning. After he lost his strength, he was only the brains.
I’m finding that the Mary Sue definition has been getting changed to suit arguments lately. I see no reason why it should include fast learners who still have flaws. It isn’t like Westley telepathically stole his skills from someone and became a master that way. It’s made clear that he was trained, which would have been a boring sequence to watch. Many characters get trained off-camera to appear with a level of ability that allows them to not suck right away. They can still grow from that unlike Mary Sue’s who don’t grow at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Surely the purpose of this character trope is ironic? Westley is hilarious, precisely because he’s so lacking in self-awareness. Yet since he’s doing his best, we love him anyway, as we would a (handsome) child… 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
True. We can’t help but love Westley… which is kinda the point 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Kim's Musings.
LikeLiked by 1 person