I see what you did there.
Or at least I would if it weren't for all the lens flare.
Or at least I would if it weren't for all the lens flare.
Spoilers Johnathan Frakes is spoiling stuff again (Season 2)
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Janeway was usually closer to a Mary Sue type than Burnham ever was. Episodes like "Alliances" and "Coda" reeked of it.
People have been claiming that Janeway is a mary-sue for years purely because they didn't like her. I find it somewhat ironic that a fan of Janeway is now criticising another female character that they don't like for being a mary-sue
You know one can be a discerning fan of a female character and not automatically be required to like every other female character available. Not all women are the same just because they are women. It isn't even a matter of liking. People are allowed to interpret a character the way they do. There are several people in this thread who think Burnham is a Mary Sue...
As I've said before, I think the accusations of Mary Sue wouldn't be as common for Burnham if it wasn't for how other members of the cast talk about her. In virtually every episode you have someone - be it Lorca, Sarek (in both MU and PU form) Georgiou (in both MU and PU form) and Ash tell her how awesomesauce and amazeballs she is. The bottom of the barrel was definately MU Sarek's:
This never happened with hyper-competent leads in Trek in the past. No one told Kirk, Picard, Sisko, etc how great they were. Even in the bona-fide relationships in Trek - both familial and romantic - compliments were used very sparingly, and sniping was often just as common. You understood the feelings the characters had for one another through their actions, not weird monologues.
The one exception which I think which was okay in Discovery was Lorca, since he was supposed to be an obsessive creep, and paying someone excessive compliment in that case is somewhat understandable.
This never happened with hyper-competent leads in Trek in the past. No one told Kirk, Picard, Sisko, etc how great they were. Even in the bona-fide relationships in Trek - both familial and romantic - compliments were used very sparingly, and sniping was often just as common. You understood the feelings the characters had for one another through their actions, not weird monologues.
The one exception which I think which was okay in Discovery was Lorca, since he was supposed to be an obsessive creep, and paying someone excessive compliment in that case is somewhat understandable.
Sarek's quote about the "seemingly impossible depth of human compassion" is about the world that shaped Burnham, not about Burnham herself.
The fact that a character's parental figures and boyfriend pay her compliments is... Good lord.
There are literally whole movies dedicated to telling us how great Kirk is. How great Spock is.
The fact that a character's parental figures and boyfriend pay her compliments is... Good lord.
There are literally whole movies dedicated to telling us how great Kirk is. How great Spock is.
Kirk, while being sentenced for a crime, "the duties for which you have demonstrated unswerving ability, the command of a starship."
Sisko, again, part God.
Again, show, don't tell. It's fine to have a character be basically a James Bond expy, as long as it's not heavily remarked upon by the other characters.
In real life, and in fiction, compliment mean more the less frequently they are used.
Admiral J. P. Hanson: Lieutenant, a few years ago, I watched a freshman cadet pass four upperclassmen on the last hill of the 40km-run on Danula II - the damnedest thing I ever saw. The only freshman to ever win the Academy marathon. I made it my business to get to know that young fellow, and I got to know him very, very well. And I'll tell you something: I never met anyone with more drive, determination or more courage than Jean-Luc Picard; and there is no way in hell that he would assist the Borg. I want that clear.
A minute later...
Admiral J. P. Hanson: As for Picard - a great man has been lost. Your Captain. My friend.
Nero: James T. Kirk was considered to be a great man. He went on to captain the USS Enterprise... but that was another life.
Did I miss a page that mentions Wesley Crusher?
If you want a text book definition of a Mary Sue, Wesley totally fit that, particularly for most of the first season before they somewhat grounded his character to reality in later episodes.
If you want a text book definition of a Mary Sue, Wesley totally fit that, particularly for most of the first season before they somewhat grounded his character to reality in later episodes.
Kirk gets to have Spock as his first officer, who is often said to be the best in Starfleet.
Kirk = Mary Sue
Kirk = Mary Sue
To be fair, Wesley actually got a ton of flack for that back in the old days.
Deservedly, as he genuinely was the "Mary Sue" archetype.
Janeway tends to get away with it, because Mulgrew was actually charming, likeable and convincing in the role.
The opposite of Sonequa.
Depends on the episode.
SMG haters perplex me.
Except you're not being discerning you're being biased. You're doing what you always do which is make allowances for characters you like who have similar if not the same faults as the character you don't like. Personally, I don't think either Janeway or Burnham classify as a Mary-Sue. I don't see the appeal in labeling either character as one.
Last edited:
I like Sonequa. The problems with Burnham aren't related to Sonequa, they're related to the writing.
Similar threads
