• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

anyone else bored/frustrated by all the "Mary Sue" debates?

Michael is not a Mary Sue by any stretch of the imagination. She's educated and talented, but flawed.

If she is, then basically any sci-fi protagonist would be one.

You could probably make a better case for Seven of Nine, but overall I don't like the whole concept.
 
Isn't the Mary Sue term, basically being used as code for a character being used to prop up a feminist message above just being their to serve the story. When people use this term in a negative way these days as opposed to how it might be used in a negative way in the past is that it's usually politically based more than just a creative complaint. Not always but many times. Especially when you see it from those Youtube video sites where they seem to complain about every new female character that comes out.

Jason
 
Makarov said:
I mean Luke had his own issues with his uncle being killed and his father helping to blow up planets... Either way I'd take the journey where I'm awesome at everything.
Click to expand...
I would too. Too bad that neither character can claim they were awesome at everything.
CommanderRaytas said:
They are protagonists, super competent, sympathetic, but not perfect. That's the entire point, and I'm just so tired of this happening all the time. People can like a character or not, but they should reflect on their reasons for doing so. In the end, they may not like what they find.
Click to expand...
Pretty much sums up my feelings.
Jayson1 said:
Isn't the Mary Sue term, basically being used as code for a character being used to prop up a feminist message above just being their to serve the story. When people use this term in a negative way these days as opposed to how it might be used in a negative way in the past is that it's usually politically based more than just a creative complaint. Not always but many times. Especially when you see it from those Youtube video sites where they seem to complain about every new female character that comes out.

Jason
Click to expand...
That what it comes across as. "Mary Sue" feels like a code word for "female character I do not like." As others have pointed out the issues with characters being apparently perfect extends across the genre, regardless of gender. What the "Mary Sue" term does is work as a discussion killer. Michael Burnham=Mary Sue and therefore she is bad. What debate can actually come out of that?
 
Mary Sue, Shamary Sue. I think this thread is code for is Michael Burnham a good or bad character and should either be moved to the Discovery forum or just closed.
 
CorporalCaptain said:
That is totally the impression I get from it, though it's generally only used regarding female characters who are heroic and skillful.
Click to expand...

YES. This is hardly ever about character criticism but instead about dismissal. These are the same people who happily explain to you how James Bond and Kirk and Luke and Ethan Hunt and whoever aren't perfect because...(insert variety of reasons).

And they would be right.

I just want the same treatment given to female characters in a calm, collected, and fair manner. Otherwise, this is about shutting down conversation, not encouraging it.
 
One other reason I distrust the Mary Sue label is I actually think their is legit arguments about a show being to political if you just want escapism or a show not being subtle enough. People have always had issues with shows and movies if they feel to preachy. How a story is told and how one delivers a message can impact the quality of a show or movie. Mary Sue though is basically just a one note argument that is only applied to one aspect of a show and that is a female character and usually one that is a lead. Like mentioned before it's never applied to male characters or delves into the idea that most characters are often written in part to appeal to certain demographics.

One other issue that comes up besides the political angle that I have noticed in these debates is the realism angle. Which might have some value if your talking about a serious drama. Of course a female character kicking some big guys ass isn't realistic. But neither is some guy going all John Wick either or John McClain. All action movies are always unrealistic. People can't kick ass like that stuff you see in the movies in the real life. Yet somehow many people somehow buy into it more if's a male character doing it than a female. Also male characters doing it with ease which is a Mary Sue complaint happens as well. Luke goes from farmboy to a pilot capable of destroying the Death Star within a single movie. Even if was a pilot I doubt he much training avoiding been shot at in a war scenario. John McClain is cop but take in single real life cop and put him in that situation the terrorist will kill him during the first combat situation because they outnumber him and why is it just assumed a cop would know how to handle military style guns like a pro with things like machine guns. Cops are not military soldiers.

Jason
 
I wonder if there's ever been a character actually called Mary Sue, I'm half tempted to name a character that as a joke....okay maybe not.

On a serious note, I wrote an Enterprise fic years ago and it was so bad, I mean really bad, and I'm freely admitting that now. I'm mildly dyslexic so that didn't help, but I probably had a character in there that was a Mary Sue. I've improved, or as much as I can, as writing/grammar/spelling and all of that is where I have problems. But hopefully anything I write in the present or future will be a big improvement.

I have seen Mary Sue banded about though on some characters even when they actually aren't. But there's that test you can do to see if your character is a Mary Sue or not, which I'll definitely be using.

I don't know why people call Burnham a Mary Sue because she definitely isn't. As far as I can see she's a well written character.
 
I don't think Burnham is a Mary Sue, she strays close to it early on but she is the star of the show and she has shown weakness a ton of times. I just think she is a boring character, maybe the "mary sue" aspect of it makes her boring. Wesley Crusher was a perfect example of a Gary Stu though, he felt like a Roddenberry self insert. Rey from Star Wars is probably the biggest example recently in sci-fi to be honest and Burnham isn't even close to that level. The dude from Jurassic World as well, could be a Gary Stu.
 
Disco!Disco! said:
Kirk is a Gary Stu, but he caters to dudes' power fantasies, so you don't hear them complain.

However they get all bent out of shape when Burnham is the hero of her own show.
Click to expand...

Nope. No where have I've heard that Michael was a "Mary Sue", other than her being a terrible character. That's an assumption usually pressed by defenders of Rey (STAR WARS), who IS a "Mary Sue". The usual tactics is to cloud the issue with blurred definitions, while calling the critics sexists. Silly nonsense like that is a waste of time.
 
Tired of the debates? No, because I tend to steer clear of them. Burnham may be really dull, but I don't think she qualifies as a Mary Sue any more than Spock or Data or, really, most other Trek characters. She's written to do exactly what the script needs her to do.
 
JirinPanthosa said:
That's nonsense flippancy. All arguments are not created equal. You're basically playing the 'Snowflake card', anyone who disagrees with YOU just has a hair trigger on race and sex issues.

Over half the time people use the phrase Mary Sue it's from people with notable patterns of hating competent female characters, and people who would never accuse an equally competent male of being a Marty Stu.
Click to expand...

Kind of like how you are playing the "sexist card" as a counter-argument?

And btw, the actual definition of a "Mary Sue" is a character who is competent over everyone, and who is "flawless" while loved by all, and serves as a vehicle for the writer or audience. That isn't Michael Burnham, and there have certainly been a female lead in a Star Trek series before: Kate Mulgrew's Katherine Janeway from STAR TREK VOYAGER.

And btw? This whole "Mary Sue is an insult, and therefore is sexist" started out as a counter-criticism against Rey (STAR WARS) critics, before blossoming into a trope itself for everything critic of female leads. That, in and of itself, is sexist because it ignores the actual arguments as to why such characters are criticized to begin with. And Rey is an "Mary Sue", but being labeled as such isn't a bad thing. Why? It is because of Daisy RIdley's performance as Rey that made me like the character. I just felt that the character's growth would be limited if Rey's growth at the start plateaued.
 
I will say that one issue that still comes with women characters is you do still see a reluctance to go to dark with a female character at times. Some of the best characters are people who are morally bankrupt and filled with all sorts insecurities and petty hangups. They still to often get stuck with having to be a role model.

This is actually one complaint I have with tv in recent years. You do sort of see tv reverting back a little bit more to the pre "Soprano's" age were characters had to be "likeable." Even stuff with some edge still feels little dulled down from where it would have been in 2000 to 2010 or so. Granted that might be partly do to the fact everything seems to have to be a comic book show or movie now. I say give me a female serial killer, drug dealer who tortures puppies and s the series lead that would be a character that is compelling. More "Killing Eve" and little less Burnham who is okay but not really the type of character that is really super interesting because we have seen this character before over and over with both men and now women. Also not yet another noble action hero dealing with the angst of moral responsibility that comes with super powers. Give me some weird and unique and twisted stuff to go with the more safe stuff.

Jason
 
dswynne1 said:
Nope. No where have I've heard that Michael was a "Mary Sue"
Click to expand...

"I haven't seen it, therefore everyone is lying." LOL, K. I've seen it plenty.

dswynne1 said:
And btw? This whole "Mary Sue is an insult, and therefore is sexist" started out as a counter-criticism against Rey
Click to expand...

Where do you get these notions?

I've seen "Mary Sue is a sexist meaningless term" for well over fifteen years--and that's just my experience. Who knows how long it's been debated. Your internet experience =/= reality.
 
dswynne1 said:
"Mary Sue is an insult, and therefore is sexist" started out as a counter-criticism against Rey
Click to expand...
That's not at all the general nature of objections to calling Rey a Mary Sue.

It's the other way around actually, viz.: "The criticisms of Rey are sexist, therefore it's insulting."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top