![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
*grumble*
Okay, why is it that almost every member of the opposite sex that expresses interest in me lately is old enough to be my father? *bangs head on desk*
So, anyway. The experiment in constructive - or should I say diplomatic - criticism continues. Someone told me in chat that I was a lot kinder to a fic I was reviewing when I shared the link and my review than they would have been. Well, of course. Because that's my FIRST REVIEW.
I have a theory on constructive criticism - if you have a touchy author, keep it diplomatic at first. You start out not by just criticizing the fanfic, but by trying to get the point across that you are NOT bashing the work, that you are trying to be helpful. Then, if the author seems willing to listen and stop filtering out anything you say that seems remotely harsh, you can move on. They know you enough to understand your intent, and hopefully will take your advice into consideration.
Yes, I know how this sounds. But really, a lot of newer authors out there are extremely thin-skinned and tend to be defensive about their writing. Sometimes with good reason, sometimes without good reason. I myself still have to force myself not to get defensive when I get a negative but well-thought-out review.
It's occurred to me that identifying the Mary Sue phenomenon and spreading awareness about it through fandoms has a downside. Because the term "Mary Sue" is a label that's often misconstrued as meaning "this character sucks."
The second the term is mentioned in a review, no matter what you say to mitigate it, no matter how you point out that the Sue characteristics can easily be remedied, you might as well give up. Most authors take that to mean you hate their character and are attacking the OC. Never mind that there are many levels of Sue-ness, from the hopeless to the godplaying Dea Dubiosa to the borderline Sue whose only crime is upstaging the main characters. Nope, the character has been branded, and the author will hear no more.
If we take the narrow, extreme definition of Mary Sues that these authors have adopted, then I can say that I don't have any Mary Sues in my posted stories.
If we take a more accurate view, taking into account that there are so many levels of Sue-ness, some less extreme than others: I have two.
1) Dr. Lydia Ross, from "Murphy's Law." A toned-down Sue Ex Machina that was written in because... well, someone needed to talk Dr. Morris down from his anger, and because the only other candidate was Special Agent #1 (who wouldn't be likely to defend Michael at all). Weird hair (the white streak) was kept so she could be recognized from several stories up. I have been told by many that she's not a Sue, but that may be because she was actually useful to the plot and made the resolution and Morris' change of heart make sense. Borderline.
2) Sarah Adams, from the Gargoyles "Nameless Series." Classic example of the Clown Mary Sue. A skilled hacker who works for Xanatos and happens to be Dingo's sister who works for Fox Xanatos and goes around causing mayhem with Lex in her free time. Sue quotient mitigated by the amount of time she spent as the butt of the jokes and the fact that I didn't bother to pair her up with a "lust object" (the Lex thing ended up being a friendship that never went anywhere). Still, the fact that this series began to be taken over by OCs was part of the reason it died. (Yes, "Night Shift" was decent, but really, the only canon character who got to do much of anything was Matt Bluestone.) Borderline, but still over the line of plausibility.
Now I'm a fairly picky author, and actively try to kill off plotbunnies that threaten to spawn the sort of Sues that drive me up the wall. I'm not Pulitzer Prize material, but I've gotten better at identifying the Suvian warning signs in my stories over the years. These two have not been singled out as Sues (heck, I'm the only one who's ever pegged Lydia as one), nor have they ever been bashed by reviewers, and their stories are still up. Why?
Yes, they are Sues. But they are borderline. And they are still decent characters (well, I look back at Sarah lately and wonder, but you get the idea).
Mary Sue qualities do not always automatically write off an original character. But they're early warning signs. It is a hundred times harder to write a likable Mary Sue than it is to write a likable character that steers clear of the Mary Sue characteristics. Borderline Sues may be in danger of becoming ciphers, author avatars, targets of PPC agents - they're not there yet, but they've got more potential to be.
But now, with that label firmly entrenched in the fanfic consciousness, most writers forget about the shades of grey. Either the character is a horrible creature or a perfect OC, a Mary Sue or not a Sue at all. You so much as mention the term "Mary Sue" and many fanfic authors will translate that as a callous and extreme insult that shows no regard for a character they've attached themselves to, and will filter out any and all positive and helpful things to say.
Now I'm not blaming those who made up the term. The problem is that it's been twisted around, and not that many people really understand it. "My character's not a Sue, she's not perfect, just look at her angsty past!" You get the idea.
Mary Sues are characters that become central to a universe that is not their own, often without earning that distinction. They become central to the story, pushing the canon characters into the background. They are instantly pulled into the Scooby Gang, the Rangers, allowed into a close-knit group of canon characters in a second. (Or they're already there and the author pretends that they've been part of the gang since the beginning.) It's not about perfection, it's about focus; people read Buffy the Vampire Slayer fanfic to read stories about, well, the characters of Buffy - not to read about the stranger who blew into town and has suddenly become the focus of the Buffyverse.
A lot of writers tend to automatically gravitate towards writing Mary Sues - in a sense, they're the easy way to go when writing a character. The lazy way, as well. It's easier to write them, and I understand the temptation. But the easy way out is almost always the WRONG WAY in fanfiction writing. To say someone is a non-Sue writer doesn't mean they don't dream up Mary Sues on occasion - but they don't simply submit to the temptation of writing them.
Does this make any sense? I don't know, but I'm not bringing up the possibility of Sue-ness until I know an author wants help.
Wow, I need to go to bed.
So, anyway. The experiment in constructive - or should I say diplomatic - criticism continues. Someone told me in chat that I was a lot kinder to a fic I was reviewing when I shared the link and my review than they would have been. Well, of course. Because that's my FIRST REVIEW.
I have a theory on constructive criticism - if you have a touchy author, keep it diplomatic at first. You start out not by just criticizing the fanfic, but by trying to get the point across that you are NOT bashing the work, that you are trying to be helpful. Then, if the author seems willing to listen and stop filtering out anything you say that seems remotely harsh, you can move on. They know you enough to understand your intent, and hopefully will take your advice into consideration.
Yes, I know how this sounds. But really, a lot of newer authors out there are extremely thin-skinned and tend to be defensive about their writing. Sometimes with good reason, sometimes without good reason. I myself still have to force myself not to get defensive when I get a negative but well-thought-out review.
It's occurred to me that identifying the Mary Sue phenomenon and spreading awareness about it through fandoms has a downside. Because the term "Mary Sue" is a label that's often misconstrued as meaning "this character sucks."
The second the term is mentioned in a review, no matter what you say to mitigate it, no matter how you point out that the Sue characteristics can easily be remedied, you might as well give up. Most authors take that to mean you hate their character and are attacking the OC. Never mind that there are many levels of Sue-ness, from the hopeless to the godplaying Dea Dubiosa to the borderline Sue whose only crime is upstaging the main characters. Nope, the character has been branded, and the author will hear no more.
If we take the narrow, extreme definition of Mary Sues that these authors have adopted, then I can say that I don't have any Mary Sues in my posted stories.
If we take a more accurate view, taking into account that there are so many levels of Sue-ness, some less extreme than others: I have two.
1) Dr. Lydia Ross, from "Murphy's Law." A toned-down Sue Ex Machina that was written in because... well, someone needed to talk Dr. Morris down from his anger, and because the only other candidate was Special Agent #1 (who wouldn't be likely to defend Michael at all). Weird hair (the white streak) was kept so she could be recognized from several stories up. I have been told by many that she's not a Sue, but that may be because she was actually useful to the plot and made the resolution and Morris' change of heart make sense. Borderline.
2) Sarah Adams, from the Gargoyles "Nameless Series." Classic example of the Clown Mary Sue. A skilled hacker who works for Xanatos and happens to be Dingo's sister who works for Fox Xanatos and goes around causing mayhem with Lex in her free time. Sue quotient mitigated by the amount of time she spent as the butt of the jokes and the fact that I didn't bother to pair her up with a "lust object" (the Lex thing ended up being a friendship that never went anywhere). Still, the fact that this series began to be taken over by OCs was part of the reason it died. (Yes, "Night Shift" was decent, but really, the only canon character who got to do much of anything was Matt Bluestone.) Borderline, but still over the line of plausibility.
Now I'm a fairly picky author, and actively try to kill off plotbunnies that threaten to spawn the sort of Sues that drive me up the wall. I'm not Pulitzer Prize material, but I've gotten better at identifying the Suvian warning signs in my stories over the years. These two have not been singled out as Sues (heck, I'm the only one who's ever pegged Lydia as one), nor have they ever been bashed by reviewers, and their stories are still up. Why?
Yes, they are Sues. But they are borderline. And they are still decent characters (well, I look back at Sarah lately and wonder, but you get the idea).
Mary Sue qualities do not always automatically write off an original character. But they're early warning signs. It is a hundred times harder to write a likable Mary Sue than it is to write a likable character that steers clear of the Mary Sue characteristics. Borderline Sues may be in danger of becoming ciphers, author avatars, targets of PPC agents - they're not there yet, but they've got more potential to be.
But now, with that label firmly entrenched in the fanfic consciousness, most writers forget about the shades of grey. Either the character is a horrible creature or a perfect OC, a Mary Sue or not a Sue at all. You so much as mention the term "Mary Sue" and many fanfic authors will translate that as a callous and extreme insult that shows no regard for a character they've attached themselves to, and will filter out any and all positive and helpful things to say.
Now I'm not blaming those who made up the term. The problem is that it's been twisted around, and not that many people really understand it. "My character's not a Sue, she's not perfect, just look at her angsty past!" You get the idea.
Mary Sues are characters that become central to a universe that is not their own, often without earning that distinction. They become central to the story, pushing the canon characters into the background. They are instantly pulled into the Scooby Gang, the Rangers, allowed into a close-knit group of canon characters in a second. (Or they're already there and the author pretends that they've been part of the gang since the beginning.) It's not about perfection, it's about focus; people read Buffy the Vampire Slayer fanfic to read stories about, well, the characters of Buffy - not to read about the stranger who blew into town and has suddenly become the focus of the Buffyverse.
A lot of writers tend to automatically gravitate towards writing Mary Sues - in a sense, they're the easy way to go when writing a character. The lazy way, as well. It's easier to write them, and I understand the temptation. But the easy way out is almost always the WRONG WAY in fanfiction writing. To say someone is a non-Sue writer doesn't mean they don't dream up Mary Sues on occasion - but they don't simply submit to the temptation of writing them.
Does this make any sense? I don't know, but I'm not bringing up the possibility of Sue-ness until I know an author wants help.
Wow, I need to go to bed.
no subject
Because most men are leches, and, or, perhaps some older ones are looking for better monthly pension when they retire! LOL. (And maybe they just think you're cute too).
Having fun peeking in on your experiment. I need to take a little more time out and pay additional attention to it to really quell my curiosity though.
(Also, can't wait until I get started and have teachers picking me apart - it will be SO MUCH FUN!). (Hopefully the "thin skins", and, or younger writers can really enjoy your feedback).