The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

[Gradine]

Yes, the term Mary Sue originated in fanfiction, that doesn’t mean it’s limited to only ever applying to fanfiction characters. The author self-insert character who’s hyper-competent in corporate media is just as much a Mary Sue as any fanfiction character with the same traits. The definitional aspect is the traits themselves, not whether they appear in fanfiction.

The argument I would put forth is that the term should have remained in fan fiction, or, better still, left to rot in the dustbin of history where it belongs. Even in fan fiction communities it quickly devolved from "idealized self-insert" to "<almost exclusively female> character I dislike".

Considering Rey, Luke, and yes, even (if not especially) Anakin not only face failure but also demonstrate numerous flaws (one might argue that "Anakin Skywalker is deeply flawed" is the central thesis statement of the prequels), the idea that any of the three could be routinely described as "Mary Sue" means the term has grown so vague and broad that it has become functionally useless at best; a way to hide bias behind the veneer of "objective" literary analysis at the worst.

If you want to get clinical about it, you could easily make a strong argument that George’s Star Wars is Flash Gordon fanfiction and the Disney stuff is fanfiction of George’s Star Wars.

Sure, you could make those arguments. You'd be wrong, but you could certainly make them!

 

[overgeeked]

The argument I would put forth is that the term should have remained in fan fiction, or, better still, left to rot in the dustbin of history where it belongs. Even in fan fiction communities it quickly devolved from "idealized self-insert" to "<almost exclusively female> character I dislike".

Yeah, it’s absolutely misused. Like most terms it’s changed and evolved over the years.

Considering Rey, Luke, and yes, even (if not especially) Anakin not only face failure but also demonstrate numerous flaws (one might argue that "Anakin Skywalker is deeply flawed" is the central thesis statement of the prequels), the idea that any of the three could be routinely described as "Mary Sue" means the term has grown so vague and broad that it has become functionally useless at best; a way to hide bias behind the veneer of "objective" literary analysis at the worst.

I’m not arguing that any of them are Mary Sues. Only that it is a useful term. When used correctly.

Sure, you could make those arguments. You'd be wrong, but you could certainly make them!

I could agree with you but then we’d both be wrong.

 

[Gradine]

Yeah, it’s absolutely misused. Like most terms it’s changed and evolved over the years.

Curse you for appealing to my devout sense of anti-grammatical-prescriptivism

I’m not arguing that any of them are Mary Sues. Only that it is a useful term. When used correctly.

I would disagree. Even when used correctly. Any use the term has in describing characters that legitimately qualify as unrealistically perfect self-inserts fully lacking in flaws is completely dwarfed by not only the extent in which the term is misused and abused but also by its very nature as a gendered term to relate to a set of presumably gender-neutral character traits. A "useful term", such as it is, would have zero value as a targeted gendered attack. One absolutely cannot say that about the term "Mary Sue" in common usage.

I could agree with you but then we’d both be wrong.

Well, if we wanted to get clinical about it, fanfiction is a form of explicitly non-commercial fair use homage/parody of intellectual property owned by others and that any works produced and sold commercially by the IP's rights holders are therefore definitionally not fanfiction.

 

[Deset Gled]

(Unrelated to the above)

It's about darn time someone said that.

 

[Guest 85555]

My view of the term Mary Sue is it is like so many other things that have gained traction since the internet where they are often used to criticize perfectly entertaining or worthy content simply because people now have a word and can recognize that word in a work in some way. It also leads to lazy criticism where people don't take each individual work, on a case by case basis but kind of go down a checklist of "Don'ts"

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Look, I appreciate you didn't like how a past election went down, but probabilities aren't predictions and never have been.

 

[payn]

"Open Kimono" I always get a chuckle when I hear that particular law parlance.

 

[el-remmen]

Started a new post, wrote a few hundred words, and then realized "Who the F- - - cares? Not even me!"

 

[RealAlHazred]

Since the D&D movie threads are all about "is it true to D&D" or "will it be considered successful" (and I don't want to start either of those here), let me just say here that I really appreciate how they used the protagonist's exposition at the beginning to not only explain what had happened previously, but to also include a decently-considered escape attempt (one that I could see my tables coming up with), that actually succeeded, but not so well that it wasn't a problem later. The movie absolutely nailed the "consequences" portion of GMing. (From "escape from prison -> be pursued by bounty hunters throughout / leave your daughter with a rogue -> she'll get "stolen" / etc.) The party "fell together" just like most tables I've run. I can't speak to the accuracy to the lore of the Forgotten Realms (despite my FR-fanatic friends talking my ear off about how much of a travesty it was to this character or that location) but I've been really pleased. And I didn't even have any Fridge Moments! That's rare!

 

[MarkB]

Yeah, some of those threads intrigue me, but I've been avoiding them to evade spoilers as the D&D movie still isn't available for streaming over here - not for another month according to Amazon UK's release date. I'm looking forward to finally catching up on them all.