Especially on the first two points. I've never gotten why Tonks can be considered a Mary Sue just because she's got special powers and she's related to one of the main characters. I mean, for one thing, the story takes place in a magical world, so how on Earth can special powers be Mary Sue-ish? Secondly, if she didn't have any sort of connection to main characters, there wouldn't really be a reason for her to be there. She's got to be related to someone, whether as a colleague, lover, old friend, cousin, etc. to actually be a part of the story.
I think people really just throw out the term "Mary Sue" every time a female character comes along if the character challenges their beliefs about HP verse, particularly where ships are concerned. And, a lot of the time, it's almost as if readers feel challenged by these characters. Like, someone has developed such a strong attachment towards Remus that she can stand to think of him with a man, but not with a woman because it subconciously threatens her. Or, a reader likes Harry and identifies with Hermione, so when Ginny gets Harry she's "stealing" him from the reader. Seriously, I think fandom projects a lot of RL issues onto the HP characters.
Seriously, I think fandom projects a lot of RL issues onto the HP characters.
Oh, absolutely. And while that can produce good results (I read an amusing fic mocking the "PC mania"), it can also mean that people forget Tonks isn't necessarily the annoying Cheerleader that drove them nuts in tenth grade.
people forget Tonks isn't necessarily the annoying Cheerleader that drove them nuts in tenth grade
Absolutely. I don't really mind much if people say that they are annoyed by a character because the character reminds them of a person in real life, but I'm sick of said characters being turned into either evil traitors or Mary Sues. For example, personally I'm always a bit annoyed with Molly because I've had issues with over-protective parents in my life, but I'd never claim that she's a badly written character, a bad mother, evil, a Mary Sue, etc. It just isn't logical.
I've been annoyed by Molly because she's supposed to be "one of the good guys," but she constantly carped on Fleur. Glad she finally realized she was behaving badly.
Like, someone has developed such a strong attachment towards Remus that she can stand to think of him with a man, but not with a woman because it subconciously threatens her.
I don't know if I'd say that... I'd think the man would be more of a threat--another woman could always be displaced, but if he swings the other way, you're shut out forever. So I think it's just a question of liking the two pretty men at the same time. ;)
Actually, I think the slash and threats points holds up better under pop psych or even classical psych analysis.
It's weird, I know, but the idea is, even though liking man=no chance, it's not no chance cause he's rejecting a woman, it's no chance cause he's biologically/psychologically attracted towards men. Were he not predisposed towards men, he'd choose the author.
Once the guy is het however, he has choice, and another girl therefore becomes a threat. Make that girl Tonks, who fandom has decided was that mean popular girl in high school the one they were too chicken to talk to, and you get a lot of Freudian theory on projection and displacement. I.e. didn't get the guy in RL who is totally Remus (or the ideal guy) and he fell for a girl who now becomes Tonks, and since the person can't be horrid to the RL "Tonks" fandom Tonks is the "dummy"
Gay!Remus isn't rejecting whatever type of girl the author imagine herself to be for a "Tonks" The author's just never an option for him cause he's into boys. This also fits in with the weariness towards bi-Remus that is often seen.
Yes, I know it's silly and beyond cracked, but on a pure theory level, there is more to gay!Remus than pretty boys having sex. Not to mention all the sane fans who like it just cause they like the chars together.
But--and this is why it's easier to be rejected with "sorry, I'm gay" than "sorry, you're not my type"--when the guy you want is with another woman, it's more personal. You're playing on the same turf and, no matter how much you don't think of it as a competition, there's always a few questions: what does she have that I don't? Is it something I'd *want* to have? Is he with her because she's prettier or smarter or better in bed?
If he's gay, you know. He has a cock. You don't. And your average girl doesn't want to have a cock--for more than, y'know, fifteen minutes at a time--so it's much easier to live with that.
I've never found it easier to live with--rejecting my entire gender doesn't make me any more secure about being rejected. Maybe it's because my first two crushes turned out gay a few years later, but that's my biggest insecurity of all.
Huh. I suppose it depends on your attitude toward romance--I always have the easiest time dealing if I know there's nothing I could've reasonably done or been that would've made a difference. That and I don't feel terribly attached to my gender, I guess.
I always feel better if it's something I can fix--you know, if it's because I'm too withdrawn, I know that next time, I can try to be more outgoing, or whatever. If it's something I can't change at all, it just depresses me. Of course, I don't tend to like people who would dislike something fundamental about me... except for people who dislike my gender.
Interesting. I generally think that, unless it's something like poor hygiene or outright dysfunctionality, traits are subjective enough not to worry about. One guy's "too withdrawn" can be the next guy's "nice and calm, a good change from those irritating bubbly types."
Generally, though, I don't like people who dislike fundamental stuff about me--but gender isn't fundamental to me, just physical. And I've known enough perfectly nice, attractive guys who were just not my physical type that those things don't hit me too hard.
One guy's "too withdrawn" can be the next guy's "nice and calm, a good change from those irritating bubbly types."
At which point my own dysfunctionality surfaces, and I'll go back and try to fix the other way. The point, for me, is that it's something over which I can exert control--the guys themselves become secondary to the question of fixing whatever is wrong--which doesn't include my gender. (Of course, I wouldn't date someone who disliked brunettes or smart women, anyway so there's no chance of my playing dumb or bleaching my hair.)
(Hmm. That's not true. I don't actually fix those things, to tell the truth. It's the concept that they are fixable and changeable things, and therefore things which are under my control and things that I have actively chosen, so that keeping them becomes a positive value rather than just a happenstance thing, and that the judgment that has been passed has been based on some action of mine--I own it. It gives me the power in a way that "Well, you just don't work for me" doesn't.)
Especially on the first two points. I've never gotten why Tonks can be considered a Mary Sue just because she's got special powers and she's related to one of the main characters. I mean, for one thing, the story takes place in a magical world, so how on Earth can special powers be Mary Sue-ish? Secondly, if she didn't have any sort of connection to main characters, there wouldn't really be a reason for her to be there. She's got to be related to someone, whether as a colleague, lover, old friend, cousin, etc. to actually be a part of the story.
I think people really just throw out the term "Mary Sue" every time a female character comes along if the character challenges their beliefs about HP verse, particularly where ships are concerned. And, a lot of the time, it's almost as if readers feel challenged by these characters. Like, someone has developed such a strong attachment towards Remus that she can stand to think of him with a man, but not with a woman because it subconciously threatens her. Or, a reader likes Harry and identifies with Hermione, so when Ginny gets Harry she's "stealing" him from the reader. Seriously, I think fandom projects a lot of RL issues onto the HP characters.
Reply
Oh, absolutely. And while that can produce good results (I read an amusing fic mocking the "PC mania"), it can also mean that people forget Tonks isn't necessarily the annoying Cheerleader that drove them nuts in tenth grade.
Reply
Absolutely. I don't really mind much if people say that they are annoyed by a character because the character reminds them of a person in real life, but I'm sick of said characters being turned into either evil traitors or Mary Sues. For example, personally I'm always a bit annoyed with Molly because I've had issues with over-protective parents in my life, but I'd never claim that she's a badly written character, a bad mother, evil, a Mary Sue, etc. It just isn't logical.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I don't know if I'd say that... I'd think the man would be more of a threat--another woman could always be displaced, but if he swings the other way, you're shut out forever. So I think it's just a question of liking the two pretty men at the same time. ;)
Reply
It's weird, I know, but the idea is, even though liking man=no chance, it's not no chance cause he's rejecting a woman, it's no chance cause he's biologically/psychologically attracted towards men. Were he not predisposed towards men, he'd choose the author.
Once the guy is het however, he has choice, and another girl therefore becomes a threat. Make that girl Tonks, who fandom has decided was that mean popular girl in high school the one they were too chicken to talk to, and you get a lot of Freudian theory on projection and displacement. I.e. didn't get the guy in RL who is totally Remus (or the ideal guy) and he fell for a girl who now becomes Tonks, and since the person can't be horrid to the RL "Tonks" fandom Tonks is the "dummy"
Gay!Remus isn't rejecting whatever type of girl the author imagine herself to be for a "Tonks" The author's just never an option for him cause he's into boys. This also fits in with the weariness towards bi-Remus that is often seen.
Yes, I know it's silly and beyond cracked, but on a pure theory level, there is more to gay!Remus than pretty boys having sex. Not to mention all the sane fans who like it just cause they like the chars together.
Reply
If he's gay, you know. He has a cock. You don't. And your average girl doesn't want to have a cock--for more than, y'know, fifteen minutes at a time--so it's much easier to live with that.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Generally, though, I don't like people who dislike fundamental stuff about me--but gender isn't fundamental to me, just physical. And I've known enough perfectly nice, attractive guys who were just not my physical type that those things don't hit me too hard.
Different approaches and all, I think. ;)
Reply
At which point my own dysfunctionality surfaces, and I'll go back and try to fix the other way. The point, for me, is that it's something over which I can exert control--the guys themselves become secondary to the question of fixing whatever is wrong--which doesn't include my gender. (Of course, I wouldn't date someone who disliked brunettes or smart women, anyway so there's no chance of my playing dumb or bleaching my hair.)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment