The most overpowered, overrated, insufferable Mary Sue in all of "Star Trek" is...

[Qonundrum]

...All female characters who display technical competence at something!

Not quite.

Competence is one thing, anyone can be written competently and not be guilty of any cheats or tricks or doing a "Mary Sue"/"Gary Stu" (MS/GS),

Little or no explanation or reasoning for doing whatever the plot or other characters need at that moment, especially when pertinent to the story of the character involved - like you or me flying a spacecraft without as much a moment of turbulence or instability despite having absolutely zero experience.

Too perfect, too quickly, no adventure, just magical "Here I am, aren't I perfect?" That's part of the classic definition of MS/GS, such ideal conditions because the writer is bored, lazy, in contempt of, and/or wants to sell a narrative to an audience that said writer might believe lacks a sufficient quantity of brain cells.

If we're going to play gender bashing, then the following quickly quashes that nonsense here and now: Wesley Crusher. Not a female, but - especially early in TNG - was the most convenient, perfect when plot needed it, and every other cliche accorded MS/GS. So it happens to both genders, therefore what organs one has is utterly irrelevant.

Wesley Crusher from TNG and - yep - Rey from Star Wars both blatant examples of the trope. The actors have to do what's on the script and improve upon it, which Wheaton and Ridley had done, neither of them came across as wooden or grossly inexperienced in their respective shows. There's a huge difference between both roles.

Kids can be smart, but without experience they're not going to nail it in half a minute... that doesn't win over viewers and has nothing to do with like or dislike based on gender. The media's had proper heroes of both genders for decades, why are modern movies acting as if 2005 is identical to 1931 with nothing in society changing since then or something?? Not many are buying the toys but that's not the reason. It boils down to what the writers are doing, or not doing.

 

[Willsky7]

Not quite.

Competence is one thing, anyone can be written competently and not be guilty of any cheats or tricks or doing a "Mary Sue"/"Gary Stu" (MS/GS),

Little or no explanation or reasoning for doing whatever the plot or other characters need at that moment, especially when pertinent to the story of the character involved - like you or me flying a spacecraft without as much a moment of turbulence or instability despite having absolutely zero experience.

Too perfect, too quickly, no adventure, just magical "Here I am, aren't I perfect?" That's part of the classic definition of MS/GS, such ideal conditions because the writer is bored, lazy, in contempt of, and/or wants to sell a narrative to an audience that said writer might believe lacks a sufficient quantity of brain cells.

If we're going to play gender bashing, then the following quickly quashes that nonsense here and now: Wesley Crusher. Not a female, but - especially early in TNG - was the most convenient, perfect when plot needed it, and every other cliche accorded MS/GS. So it happens to both genders, therefore what organs one has is utterly irrelevant.

Wesley Crusher from TNG and - yep - Rey from Star Wars both blatant examples of the trope. The actors have to do what's on the script and improve upon it, which Wheaton and Ridley had done, neither of them came across as wooden or grossly inexperienced in their respective shows. There's a huge difference between both roles.

Kids can be smart, but without experience they're not going to nail it in half a minute... that doesn't win over viewers and has nothing to do with like or dislike based on gender. The media's had proper heroes of both genders for decades, why are modern movies acting as if 2005 is identical to 1931 with nothing in society changing since then or something?? Not many are buying the toys but that's not the reason. It boils down to what the writers are doing, or not doing.

The term Mary Sue is a sexist term. Back in the early days of cinema women held many screenwriter roles, they were rarely behind the camera but were still a part of the creative process. However in the late 50s or early 60s these roles were replaced by mostly men. So what about these women writers? They were forced to find other careers and some started to write fan fiction. It wasn't until fan fiction came about that the term Mary Sue came around. There were plenty of underwritten characters, before and after, who were men or women written by men or women, but not until women write fan fic did we have a word for it. I also hate the use use of "Gary stu" or "Marty Sue". These words distract from the issue around the use of Mary Sue, also mary Sue is the common word to describe these kinds of character (everyone uses it, but only a few use "Gary stu"). I have no doubt that someone invented "Gary stu" to avoid being called sexist. All that said I don't think that people who use Mary Sue are sexist, just unaware of the history.

And rey is a bit unerwritten as a character. But so is Luke and Leia in the original Star Wars movie. Or what about Indiana jones, he has no faults. Going back further, what abou mifune in "the hidden fortress". None of these characters are very complex, yet when they came out the movie were praised (for good reason), yet now there is backlash over rey even though Luke was no more complex. Now "the force awakens" has some problems (mainly retreading its plot) but it is still a well made and enjoyable film. I'm getting sick of people slamming rey because she's a woman.

 

[GNDN18]

The term Mary Sue is a sexist term. Back in the early days of cinema women held many screenwriter roles, they were rarely behind the camera but were still a part of the creative process. However in the late 50s or early 60s these roles were replaced by mostly men. So what about these women writers? They were forced to find other careers and some started to write fan fiction. It wasn't until fan fiction came about that the term Mary Sue came around. There were plenty of underwritten characters, before and after, who were men or women written by men or women, but not until women write fan fic did we have a word for it. I also hate the use use of "Gary stu" or "Marty Sue". These words distract from the issue around the use of Mary Sue, also mary Sue is the common word to describe these kinds of character (everyone uses it, but only a few use "Gary stu"). I have no doubt that someone invented "Gary stu" to avoid being called sexist. All that said I don't think that people who use Mary Sue are sexist, just unaware of the history.

And rey is a bit unerwritten as a character. But so is Luke and Leia in the original Star Wars movie. Or what about Indiana jones, he has no faults. Going back further, what abou mifune in "the hidden fortress". None of these characters are very complex, yet when they came out the movie were praised (for good reason), yet now there is backlash over rey even though Luke was no more complex. Now "the force awakens" has some problems (mainly retreading its plot) but it is still a well made and enjoyable film. I'm getting sick of people slamming rey because she's a woman.

It’s been alluded to up threats, but this covers the genesis of Lieutenant Mary Sue, created by Paula Smith:

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"[5]:15 published in her fanzine Menagerie #2.[6] 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.[7]

The trope first and foremost involves precocity and ingratiation; the fact that the first Mary Sue was female is incidental.

As for Rey getting slammed, I think that says more about the critic than the character.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Or what about Indiana jones, he has no faults.

Indiana Jones, a grown man, made love to a teenager, Marion, when he knew it was wrong. He can't land an airplane, he loses in fights, he rarely gets the artifacts, and he doesn't seem to profile people for good character like Elsa Schneider and George McHale. Also Jones is naive to drinking beverage--which had poison in it--from mobsters in The Temple Of Doom. Yeah, I see your point.

 

[Willsky7]

Indiana Jones, a grown man, made love to a teenager, Marion, when he knew it was wrong. He can't land an airplane, he loses in fights, he rarely gets the artifacts, and he doesn't seem to profile people for good character like Elsa Schneider and George McHale. Also Jones is naive to drinking beverage--which had poison in it--from mobsters in The Temple Of Doom. Yeah, I see your point.

Something happening TO a character isnt a character flaw. Someone deceiving him is not his fault, it is the fault of the character doing the deceiving. Also he rarely gets the artifact? In raiders he gets the artifact but it is stolen. In crusade he is used to find the grail because he is one of the only people who can find it (same with raiders). He also spent almost his whole life tracking down a gold cross so he could put it in a museum. And when has he lost a fight? In every movie he has to fight the muscle bound henchman, but he outsmarts them and uses the environment to murder them. He has never landed an airplane before, but manages to land it well enough for both of them to survive (despite almost no crash safety equipment in an old biplane). But I was unaware that he slept with an underage girl.

Indiana jones is smart, brave, tough, every girl wants to be with him, he doesn't seek glory (risks everything for the Indian children and seeks for all the artifacts he finds to be placed in a museum for everyone), fights and murders nazi's, all as a humble college professor. His one flaw, taking advantage of an underage girl, is not something we see (cause Marion i doubt that Marion is supposed to be underage when we see her in raiders).

 

[Willsky7]

It’s been alluded to up threats, but this covers the genesis of Lieutenant Mary Sue, created by Paula Smith:

The trope first and foremost involves precocity and ingratiation; the fact that the first Mary Sue was female is incidental.

As for Rey getting slammed, I think that says more about the critic than the character.

The meaning of Mary Sue, that is agreed upon by everyone, is a character with no faults and is great at everything. The fact that the character used to name the trope is a woman, and was written by a woman, cannot be ignored. Plenty of characters that were great at everything came out long before this story, but we use this story to name the trope. Characters like superman and batman have like no flaws. Hell many characters in Star Trek could be considered Mary sue's, Spock and Kirk were represented without flaws in many (not all, but many) episodes. Yet for some reason we don't call this trope Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent or James t Kirk.

Also it seems strange to use the word female when talking about women. Like do you say that when talking to someone in public? Do you say male when talking about men?

 

[GNDN18]

we use this story to name the trope

The trope was created by Paula Smith’s parody of a particular kind of fanfic that hadn’t been classified. The story was about Lieutenant Mary Sue. That character exhibited certain characteristics fundamental to the parody, hence the term “Mary Sue.” That’s the nature of a trope: it is a conceptual figure of speech, a storytelling shorthand for a concept that the audience—in this case, genre fans—will recognize and understand instantly.

Yet for some reason we don't call this trope Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent or James t Kirk.

The reason is that a hallmark of a Mary Sue/Gary Stu is that they impress the lead character—such as those you named—from an established franchise.

it seems strange to use the word female when talking about women.

I wasn’t talking about women. I was talking about a fictional character that was a teenager. In an effort to be sensitive to persons of that age, I chose to use the gender instead of fraught terms such as “girl” or “young woman.”

Like do you say that when talking tosomeone in public? Do you say male when talking about men?

In the appropriate context, yes, I do. Like, you know.

 

[Willsky7]

The trope was created by Paula Smith’s parody of a particular kind of fanfic that hadn’t been classified. The story was about Lieutenant Mary Sue. That character exhibited certain characteristics fundamental to the parody, hence the term “Mary Sue.” That’s the nature of a trope: it is a conceptual figure of speech, a storytelling shorthand for a concept that the audience—in this case, genre fans—will recognize and understand instantly.

The reason is that a hallmark of a Mary Sue/Gary Stu is that they impress the lead character—such as those you named—from an established franchise.

I wasn’t talking about women. I was talking about a fictional character that was a teenager. In an effort to be sensitive to persons of that age, I chose to use the gender instead of fraught terms such as “girl” or “young woman.”
In the appropriate context, yes, I do. Like, you know.

I will say it again. I am talking about the way people use the term "Mary Sue" now, which is to refer to a character who has no flaws. Just because technically in the story it was parodying self inserts doesn't mean squat, because now it is used to colloquially refer to something different. Referring to a flawless character people use the term "Mary Sue", that is problematic because many flawless characters, men and women, existed long before the term. Just because technically it meant something else a few decades ago doesn't matter.

 

[Donker]

existed long before the term. Just because technically it meant something else a few decades ago doesn't matter.

It's not just a flawless character, it's a character archetype you get specifically a lot of in fanfiction, it's a whole bunch of tropes and cliches that form a specific type of character.

For example, I find Burnham very mary-sueish in Discovery.

Spoiler: Discovery

She's the secret sister of Spock, she was the bestest of best Vulcans ever despite being a Human, she's a renegade outcast that everyone is scared of, but also loves. She was punished for doing the right thing but everyone just misunderstood her, but she failed upwards and became the science officer of a super dooper top secret ship, also she was the princess in the Mirror Universe.

Burnham honestly comes off like she's written by a 14 year old, and I think that is what truly makes a Mary Sue character, something that feels like it was written as the angsty self insert of a teenager.

 

[GNDN18]

Referring to a flawless character people use the term "Mary Sue", that is problematic….

In that regard we are in complete accord. As you say, characters in genre fiction are typically a collection of tropes and to simply assign one label is imprecise and often misleading.

 

[Tim Thomason]

If a "Mary Sue" is a creation of a writer to put himself or herself into the story, then the answer has to be Wesley. He clearly represents Roddenberry himself, even down to having Gene's middle name as his first name.

Also James T. Kirk, Christopher Pike, Jean-Luc Picard, Will Riker, Will Decker, Gary Mitchell, John Christopher, Gary Seven, Mark Jameson, Bob Wesley, Robert April...

 

[Nyotarules]

The Starship Enterprise, so Mary Sue Kirk's life revolved around it. He gave up his own son for it..deadbeat father.

 

[tharpdevenport]

Hey, wouldn't it be nice if "The Orville" had a female ensign named Mary Sue, who was just annoying as fuck?

 

[The Old Mixer]

^ That actually sounds like a funny idea, so I won't break out the jar on this occasion.

 

[MAGolding]

The meaning of Mary Sue, that is agreed upon by everyone, is a character with no faults and is great at everything. The fact that the character used to name the trope is a woman, and was written by a woman, cannot be ignored. Plenty of characters that were great at everything came out long before this story, but we use this story to name the trope. Characters like superman and batman have like no flaws. Hell many characters in Star Trek could be considered Mary sue's, Spock and Kirk were represented without flaws in many (not all, but many) episodes. Yet for some reason we don't call this trope Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent or James t Kirk.

Also it seems strange to use the word female when talking about women. Like do you say that when talking to someone in public? Do you say male when talking about men?

Bruce Wayne?

A story I have brewing in the back of my head has a protagonist who looks like an adorable 12-year-old boy but is actually much older. As a professional actor he is always typecast as an adorable little boy instead of a snarky know it all, brat, or bully, and he and his friends like to think he is as sweet and innocent as his characters. He gets involved in an effort to bring down a major criminal organization, though being highly intelligent he tries to do so in the safest way possible like Nadrek of Palain Seven would. I never intended him to be any sort of commentary on Batman or an anti-Batman, but if anyone ever compares him to Batman he will be annoyed and horrified because his self image is all sweetness and light instead of dark, brooding, obsessive, unable to find happiness, life-wasting, vengeance-crazed vigilante like Batman. So not everyone considers Bruce Wayne totally admirable.

Bruce Wayne is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Clark Kent?

Superman/Clark Kent has very high ethical standards in most incarnations. But I am not so sure about his common sense or intelligence. Getting a full time job at a major newspaper so he can hear about crimes and disasters is foolish. It is better to go without a full time job and tap into police and news radios and phone lines to know when he should spring into action to save the day.

I find it really annoying in the new Supergirl TV series that she has a full time job at Catco and a job with a government agency fighting criminal aliens. It is physically impossible for her to be in two places at once and logically necessary for her to be in two places at once to do her duties in both jobs. Therefore it is unethical for her to have those two jobs at the same time.

And therefore Clark Kent's job at the Daily Planet is also unethical. He can't do his duties in a full time job while also sneaking out to save people's lives whenever necessary. It is impossible for him to find time to do both. Therefore Clark Kent's double life is both sort of stupid and rather unethical.

Clark Kent is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

James T. Kirk?

I believe a main topic in each of the six TOS movies is Kirk struggling with his character flaws like obsessive desire for the Enterprise, fear of growing old, anti-Klingon hatred, being unable to settle down and have a family, etc.

James T. Kirk is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Tim Thomason said:

Also James T. Kirk, Christopher Pike, Jean-Luc Picard, Will Riker, Will Decker, Gary Mitchell, John Christopher, Gary Seven, Mark Jameson, Bob Wesley, Robert April...

James T. Kirk?

See above.

Jean-Luc Picard?

Many people accuse Picard of being something of a pompous ass when talking about the superiority of Humans in his age to 20th century Humans. It seems to me that Picard is only right in statements that 24th century Humans are good and 20th century Humans are bad.

In "Tapestry" Q teaches Picard a lesson that Picard's daring and risk taking is what he needs to succeed as a captain. Even if a lesson taught by Q can be correct, that lesson is only valid about Picard's personal risk taking, not the risks he takes with the lives of those it is his duty to protect. In several episodes Picard neglects to separate the saucer section and leave it behind while investigating possibly dangerous situations, thus recklessly endangering the lives of civilians, including children.

Sometimes Picard's obedience to the Prime Directive seems evil.

Picard is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Will Riker?

Riker and Pulaski murder unauthorized clones of themselves in "Up The Long Ladder". One murder is enough to make some less than a perfect Mary Sue character.

Riker is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Gary Mitchell?

Gary didn't ask to be zapped by the galactic barrier. But if his normal human personality caused him to commit murder and attempted murder with his new superpowers, his normal human personality was evil.

I have always thought that I could have handled the superpowers of Charlie Evans and Gary Mitchell without going off the deep end and becoming a menace to society. And I'm certain that there must be some Humans, however few, that could have used those powers for good and not evil. Therefore Gary was not a perfect enough Human when it counted to be a Mary Sue.

Maybe the galactic barrier damaged Gary's brain and removed his ethical inhibitions. How did he behave before he was zapped by the barrier? He seemed to have good qualities and bad qualities. He was a little arrogant and contemptuous of his associates and was a skirt chaser like some proto-Kirk.

Gary Mitchell was not a perfect Mary Sue character.

As for the others, we don't know enough about them.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Guinan.
- Met at least four Captains Enterprise: Harriman, Kirk, Garrett (in an alternate timeline), Picard

I just have to say how much I love this turn of phrase. 'Captains Enterprise'. Like 'Courts Martial'. It sounds absolutely wonderful.

 

[Willsky7]

Bruce Wayne?

A story I have brewing in the back of my head has a protagonist who looks like an adorable 12-year-old boy but is actually much older. As a professional actor he is always typecast as an adorable little boy instead of a snarky know it all, brat, or bully, and he and his friends like to think he is as sweet and innocent as his characters. He gets involved in an effort to bring down a major criminal organization, though being highly intelligent he tries to do so in the safest way possible like Nadrek of Palain Seven would. I never intended him to be any sort of commentary on Batman or an anti-Batman, but if anyone ever compares him to Batman he will be annoyed and horrified because his self image is all sweetness and light instead of dark, brooding, obsessive, unable to find happiness, life-wasting, vengeance-crazed vigilante like Batman. So not everyone considers Bruce Wayne totally admirable.

Bruce Wayne is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Clark Kent?

Superman/Clark Kent has very high ethical standards in most incarnations. But I am not so sure about his common sense or intelligence. Getting a full time job at a major newspaper so he can hear about crimes and disasters is foolish. It is better to go without a full time job and tap into police and news radios and phone lines to know when he should spring into action to save the day.

I find it really annoying in the new Supergirl TV series that she has a full time job at Catco and a job with a government agency fighting criminal aliens. It is physically impossible for her to be in two places at once and logically necessary for her to be in two places at once to do her duties in both jobs. Therefore it is unethical for her to have those two jobs at the same time.

And therefore Clark Kent's job at the Daily Planet is also unethical. He can't do his duties in a full time job while also sneaking out to save people's lives whenever necessary. It is impossible for him to find time to do both. Therefore Clark Kent's double life is both sort of stupid and rather unethical.

Clark Kent is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

James T. Kirk?

I believe a main topic in each of the six TOS movies is Kirk struggling with his character flaws like obsessive desire for the Enterprise, fear of growing old, anti-Klingon hatred, being unable to settle down and have a family, etc.

James T. Kirk is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Tim Thomason said:



James T. Kirk?

See above.

Jean-Luc Picard?

Many people accuse Picard of being something of a pompous ass when talking about the superiority of Humans in his age to 20th century Humans. It seems to me that Picard is only right in statements that 24th century Humans are good and 20th century Humans are bad.

In "Tapestry" Q teaches Picard a lesson that Picard's daring and risk taking is what he needs to succeed as a captain. Even if a lesson taught by Q can be correct, that lesson is only valid about Picard's personal risk taking, not the risks he takes with the lives of those it is his duty to protect. In several episodes Picard neglects to separate the saucer section and leave it behind while investigating possibly dangerous situations, thus recklessly endangering the lives of civilians, including children.

Sometimes Picard's obedience to the Prime Directive seems evil.

Picard is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Will Riker?

Riker and Pulaski murder unauthorized clones of themselves in "Up The Long Ladder". One murder is enough to make some less than a perfect Mary Sue character.

Riker is not a perfect Mary Sue character.

Gary Mitchell?

Gary didn't ask to be zapped by the galactic barrier. But if his normal human personality caused him to commit murder and attempted murder with his new superpowers, his normal human personality was evil.

I have always thought that I could have handled the superpowers of Charlie Evans and Gary Mitchell without going off the deep end and becoming a menace to society. And I'm certain that there must be some Humans, however few, that could have used those powers for good and not evil. Therefore Gary was not a perfect enough Human when it counted to be a Mary Sue.

Maybe the galactic barrier damaged Gary's brain and removed his ethical inhibitions. How did he behave before he was zapped by the barrier? He seemed to have good qualities and bad qualities. He was a little arrogant and contemptuous of his associates and was a skirt chaser like some proto-Kirk.

Gary Mitchell was not a perfect Mary Sue character.

As for the others, we don't know enough about them.

You seem to completely miss my point. Thought these characters history we see that a vast majority of the time we see them they are represented as superior to the average person in some way (strength, intellect, leadership, etc.) and posses no shortcoming. Your post sounds like defensive, but I was not trying to attack these characters (i love Kirk, and especially love superman) my point is that when you look at it objectively most of the time we see these characters they fit the description of what we call a "Mary Sue". My point is that characters like this have existed since the beginning of story telling and the fact that we now call it a "Mary Sue" and the public gets outraged when a woman portrays these character traits is sexist. We should not have a gendered term to describe a character that we think might be underwritten, hell why do we even need a term for it period.

 

[Verteron]

I just have to say how much I love this turn of phrase. 'Captains Enterprise'. Like 'Courts Martial'. It sounds absolutely wonderful.

No idea if it's actually correct usage or not, but it felt right, god damnit.

 

[GNDN18]

No idea if it's actually correct usage or not, but it felt right, god damnit.

Officers and gentlemen—captains all!—except for Finney, and his one mistake. But they won’t forget!

 

[STR]

It's not just a flawless character, it's a character archetype you get specifically a lot of in fanfiction, it's a whole bunch of tropes and cliches that form a specific type of character.

For example, I find Burnham very mary-sueish in Discovery.

Spoiler: Discovery

She's the secret sister of Spock, she was the bestest of best Vulcans ever despite being a Human, she's a renegade outcast that everyone is scared of, but also loves. She was punished for doing the right thing but everyone just misunderstood her, but she failed upwards and became the science officer of a super dooper top secret ship, also she was the princess in the Mirror Universe.

Burnham honestly comes off like she's written by a 14 year old, and I think that is what truly makes a Mary Sue character, something that feels like it was written as the angsty self insert of a teenager.

What show have you been watching? Burnham isn't even a particularly good human, nevermind a superior Vulcan. Stamets and Lorca rate higher on the Sue Factor scale. Neither hold a candle to polymath athlete Jean Luc Picard whose 5.0 Sues pales to Wesley's chart topping 13.5 Sues.

About the only thing Burnham got right was the tardigrade. She's kind of screwed up everything else. She can't even find a stable boyfriend, in either universe.