My problem with most Mary Sues is one of characterization. I do not like wholly perfect characters. I do not like wholly *imperfect* characters either, but wholly perfect characters drive me completely nuts. I cannot relate to such stories because no one is that perfect in real life; I cannot empathize with one-dimensional characters.
This is not to say that my own characterization is perfect, of course :) But I would list characterization as the number one thing that draws me into and makes me love a story. My opinion, of course!
My understanding of a "Mary Sue" is a character who is one-dimensional in the sense that she is absolutely and impeccably perfect. Perhaps I am incorrect in this perception; I am new to the Tolkien writing community, after all, and there are not a lot of Mary Sues in Silmarillion fiction. I have no problem with girls falling into Middle-earth or falling in love with Legolas--I only ask that they be *real* characters and not someone opening a Perfect Princess in a Can and plopping her into their story.
This to me is lazy writing, akin to the "deep blue sky" we were discussing the other day and other forms of "cliche" type writing. Again, my opinion, of course.
However, that reminds me it's high time for a parody about canatics rehashing for the 1,000th time what Tolkien already wrote and wrote so much better than those canon-obsessed twits...
Hehe. I tend to agree with you on this point. I like to expand the story in new directions; if I simply wanted to rewrite The Silmarillion, then I would save myself a lot of time and headache and simply reread The Silmarillion.
I admit to having a poor knowledge of canon, compared to most in the Sil community. I am lucky to have folks on my Friends' list with a better knowledge than me and the gumption to tell me when I make mistakes. Some of these things (mostly tiny facts and language-related boo-boos), I will change. Many are my own personal interpretations and twists, and I will think hard about what those people say but probably not be convinced in the end.
What's an unhinged reply or two between friends? :D
Seriously, I don't mind. I will discuss anything, with anyone. Well...almost.... (I'd better qualify before I get pervs worse than Arandil in my journal!)
And you can use whatever tone you want with me. I told you I'd wear my chainmail, didn't I? :D
I've probably told you about the time I submitted a story for workshop in college. It was set in the future. I got reemed out in workshop for writing a "sci-fi" complete with genre conventions and formulae, which I must have known through some odd intuition, seeing as I had never even *read* a sci-fi story before, much less studied the formulae and conventions.
Silly me for trying to create a story with *characters* and *conflicts* that took place outside the sphere of college ;D
I got not a single helpful comment from that workshop because the class drifted off to talking about the FotR movie and the "fanstasy genre" conventions in *that.*
I was bewildered and--to be honest--more than a little hurt. I'd spent time on the story; it was deeply personal to me (as most of my writing is).
I fought with the professor and won, though :D
But that aside, I find it interesting to encounter a story whose summary makes my inner-snob roll its eyes, only to read it and be absolutely delighted with how the author took a beaten and bludgeoned, overdone convention and worked it in interesting ways. (Because I will read *anything* with my favorite characters in it! And I do mean *anything!*)
And I didn't mean to implicate that your tone was amiss, only that I don't mind being called out on a thought or opinion by a friend. I tend to be opinionated and not shy about sharing them...so I expect my just retribution :D
I sympathize too with the utter exhaustion that comes from writing a tough chapter or passage. Here's to restful writing and happy Muses! Dawn Felagund, who dreads writing Thangorodrim...and will probably lose all her friends when she does.... :(
Most "Mary Sues" are not written with the intention to write a good story. They are only written as an indulgence, as a sweet dream, and mostly by young authors.
I have no problem with this! I went through such phases myself when I was younger, when every story I wrote had the rebellious young man and the suppressed (usually by uber-conservative/religious guardians of some sort) female who eventually fell in love. Characters in a Can? I had a whole pantry full! :) I agree that all writers need to start somewhere and that no one should be discouraged to write.
I, however, do not want one-dimensional characters in my stories. I do not think it out of line to hope to grow as a writer and to ask those who are willing to provide me with critical comments to be frank and honest in my effectiveness in doing this.
I beta-read for a few younger writers. I find them exceptionally talented for their age. I would never--and have never--called another person's story a "Mary Sue" unless they wrote it as such and obviously do not mind the label. If I had a problem with their characterization, I would suggest that they flesh out and expand the characters and probably give some ideas as to how. But people who write simply to have a good time, in my experience, don't often seek beta-readers or constructive criticism. Again, I do not have a problem with that.
These are not the kinds of stories I usually enjoy, but if I encounter one that was obviously written with this intent, then I either forgo reading it or decline to make constructive comments. If I choose to leave a review at all, it will usually be to point out what the writer did well.
There was recently an instance on ff.net (in the Sil section) where a young and very enthuastic writer submitted what is typically called a "Mary Sue." Like I said, these are uncommon in Sil writing, in my experience, and so perhaps that explains why the label does not resound with me the way it does with you. But anyway, this poor girl was flamed by canatics and told to read the book again before posting in the Sil section. I left her a review with an equal balance of praise and suggestions, but I think it was too late by then, and she removed the story.
I felt bad for the girl because she was obviously proud of this story, and I could only imagine her growing dismay as her inbox filled with flame after flame after flame....
I'm really rambling! Sorry! :D
I read a story that was full to the brim with purple prose and the attempt at unusual descriptions.
It was probably mine.... :/
clichés are not overused, they are just as neutral as words such as "say", "reply" or "look".
I would disagree with this point, but I think we've established that :)
If it was, then it would be under my alias Dawn Felagund. It's the only one I use; I have managed to get *everything* on the Internet under that one name.
And we have indeed established that clichés will be hunted down by you and roasted as smores.
Hehe. I giggled at this, so you know :)
When a comparison that is intended to be highly original and un-clichéd goes wrong, it jerks the reader out of the story completely.
I think the secret of a good style is the right balance of neutral expressions or even "clichés"
Ah, yes. The happy medium :)
btw did you know that we have the same expression in German? "Schmetterlinge im Bauch haben"
That's pretty cool. And German looks so neat written...although I have *no* idea how to say that! :D
Only if the style is round and balanced, it is a pleasure to read. Which is probably why I enjoy your story so much. And that is nothing but the truth. :-)
Oh...::blushes:: Thank you! :D
To add onto the earlier rambling: I felt absolutely awful about that poor girl in the Sil section. I even left my email and told her to contact me if she wanted to talk about writing. I *really* hoped to hear from her but, alas, did not.... :(
I think I may have said something about Sil writers being snobs too! ;D Sometimes, they are!
Hi, this is a really interesting discussion, so I hope you don't mind if I add my tuppence?
I guess I'm something of a 'canatic' (I assume it means canon-fanatic?) but I quite agree that making someone who is writing a Legomance, or any other kind of story, feel bad about their work just because their heroine is a self-insert is horrible and mean.
Just to play 'devil's advocate' for a moment (no offence intended), if a writer doesn't want to use the details from LoTR (Tolkien's version or Peter Jackson's) in their LoTR fic, then they'd probably be better off writing something original. Of course, there's AU, but that's a whole different kettle of fish!
if someone has fun using some details of movies or books
Then I'd call it an AU and read it as such - and I'll probably enjoy it if it's well-written and/or a good tale.
Who in h*** are we to make rules about what may or may not be done in fandom and try to impose them on others
Ouch! Erm, I don't think I have.
some people have become so canon-obsessed that they cannot accept any deviation from what *they* deem canon anymore
It can jar slightly for me - for instance, I read one story that had the second age as 1000 years long. It made me stop and think for a moment, but it was a great story and that one thing didn't stop me from telling the author that I enjoyed her work.
And it is not that easy to determine what exactly canon is in the Tolkien-verse
It's simple enough for me: LoTR and 'The Hobbit' are canon, and that's all. For my personal canon I tend to go with what we're told is JRR's last view on a topic by Christopher in HoME, not necessarily what's in 'The Silmarilion'. I wouldn't try to impose that view on anyone else and I certainly don't expect it when I'm reading silm-fics.
I keep saying that I'm not going to write anymore and keep bugging you folks, then I read a comment and say, "I have to respond to that!"
I find the notion of interpreting a book interesting. There is a lot of interpreting going on these days. In my part of the world, a person's "interpretation" of a book (that being the Bible) is too often being *strongly considered* in affording a person his or her rights. (Yes! In the Land of the Free!)
I once engaged in a debate (and won, as much as one can win these kinds of things) with a girl about what the Bible says about homosexuality. It all came down to interpretation--and my skills at twisting words into an interpretation proved superior, and so I "won." Facing a greater opponent, one who was better versed than I, I would have "lost."
Just as easily, a debate about Legolas' hair color or whether Balrogs have wings often ends on the side of the person who is the better wordsmith.
The simple fact remains: The (actual human) authors of the Bible are dead. Tolkien, sadly, is dead. We can never ask what they meant.
And so comes the fun of interpretation! :D
It is a challenge, and it sparks discussions, which is why I fell so quickly in love with this community. I love those crazy AU notions that their creators can actually defend for a moment, even if under the scrutiny of the severest canatic, they would fail :)
It's so much more fun than if we knew everything. Where's the room for creativity in that?
a jumble of lower case and upper case letters at the beginnings of those words
Guilty as charged. Luckily my beta usually spots it!
A completely ridiculous plot and one-dimensional characterizations, grammar & spelling that really *makes* me scream (forget about "want to")...
LOL - but those are the stories that tend to get the most reviews!
I've always thought of LaCE as being an ideal - like the Roman Catholic thing of no divorce etc., because enough of Tolkien's elves met with 'ill chance or strange fate'.
the prologue and the appendices lead to the problem of Tolkien's strange pseudo-historical approach of writing LOTR
And he even changed some of those details later; Celebrimbor's origins, for one.
I've always thought of LaCE as being an ideal - like the Roman Catholic thing of no divorce etc., because enough of Tolkien's elves met with 'ill chance or strange fate'.
Yes, I've always thought of it from the perspective of being appointed to write about my society/culture in such a way that it looks favorable.
I wouldn't write about all the crime. I wouldn't write about discrimation and persecution. I wouldn't write about AIDS and cancer and the (health insurance and tobacco) companies that don't mind if people die if they make a profit, nor would I write about poverty and the people it disproportionately affects.
I'd write about "liberty and justice for all" and "all [people] created equal." I'd write about a society that provides peaceful outlets for conflict resolution that used to be taken out in the street, in duels.
(I certainly wouldn't write about the bureaucratic red tape that prevents such "outlets" from being fully used!)
This is my take on LaCe :) I'm glad to have a self-titled canatic backing it! ;D
This is not to say that my own characterization is perfect, of course :) But I would list characterization as the number one thing that draws me into and makes me love a story. My opinion, of course!
My understanding of a "Mary Sue" is a character who is one-dimensional in the sense that she is absolutely and impeccably perfect. Perhaps I am incorrect in this perception; I am new to the Tolkien writing community, after all, and there are not a lot of Mary Sues in Silmarillion fiction. I have no problem with girls falling into Middle-earth or falling in love with Legolas--I only ask that they be *real* characters and not someone opening a Perfect Princess in a Can and plopping her into their story.
This to me is lazy writing, akin to the "deep blue sky" we were discussing the other day and other forms of "cliche" type writing. Again, my opinion, of course.
However, that reminds me it's high time for a parody about canatics rehashing for the 1,000th time what Tolkien already wrote and wrote so much better than those canon-obsessed twits...
Hehe. I tend to agree with you on this point. I like to expand the story in new directions; if I simply wanted to rewrite The Silmarillion, then I would save myself a lot of time and headache and simply reread The Silmarillion.
I admit to having a poor knowledge of canon, compared to most in the Sil community. I am lucky to have folks on my Friends' list with a better knowledge than me and the gumption to tell me when I make mistakes. Some of these things (mostly tiny facts and language-related boo-boos), I will change. Many are my own personal interpretations and twists, and I will think hard about what those people say but probably not be convinced in the end.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
Seriously, I don't mind. I will discuss anything, with anyone. Well...almost.... (I'd better qualify before I get pervs worse than Arandil in my journal!)
And you can use whatever tone you want with me. I told you I'd wear my chainmail, didn't I? :D
Recover? From writing or posting?
::offers hug::
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I've probably told you about the time I submitted a story for workshop in college. It was set in the future. I got reemed out in workshop for writing a "sci-fi" complete with genre conventions and formulae, which I must have known through some odd intuition, seeing as I had never even *read* a sci-fi story before, much less studied the formulae and conventions.
Silly me for trying to create a story with *characters* and *conflicts* that took place outside the sphere of college ;D
I got not a single helpful comment from that workshop because the class drifted off to talking about the FotR movie and the "fanstasy genre" conventions in *that.*
I was bewildered and--to be honest--more than a little hurt. I'd spent time on the story; it was deeply personal to me (as most of my writing is).
I fought with the professor and won, though :D
But that aside, I find it interesting to encounter a story whose summary makes my inner-snob roll its eyes, only to read it and be absolutely delighted with how the author took a beaten and bludgeoned, overdone convention and worked it in interesting ways. (Because I will read *anything* with my favorite characters in it! And I do mean *anything!*)
And I didn't mean to implicate that your tone was amiss, only that I don't mind being called out on a thought or opinion by a friend. I tend to be opinionated and not shy about sharing them...so I expect my just retribution :D
I sympathize too with the utter exhaustion that comes from writing a tough chapter or passage. Here's to restful writing and happy Muses!
Dawn Felagund, who dreads writing Thangorodrim...and will probably lose all her friends when she does.... :(
Reply
I have no problem with this! I went through such phases myself when I was younger, when every story I wrote had the rebellious young man and the suppressed (usually by uber-conservative/religious guardians of some sort) female who eventually fell in love. Characters in a Can? I had a whole pantry full! :) I agree that all writers need to start somewhere and that no one should be discouraged to write.
I, however, do not want one-dimensional characters in my stories. I do not think it out of line to hope to grow as a writer and to ask those who are willing to provide me with critical comments to be frank and honest in my effectiveness in doing this.
I beta-read for a few younger writers. I find them exceptionally talented for their age. I would never--and have never--called another person's story a "Mary Sue" unless they wrote it as such and obviously do not mind the label. If I had a problem with their characterization, I would suggest that they flesh out and expand the characters and probably give some ideas as to how. But people who write simply to have a good time, in my experience, don't often seek beta-readers or constructive criticism. Again, I do not have a problem with that.
These are not the kinds of stories I usually enjoy, but if I encounter one that was obviously written with this intent, then I either forgo reading it or decline to make constructive comments. If I choose to leave a review at all, it will usually be to point out what the writer did well.
There was recently an instance on ff.net (in the Sil section) where a young and very enthuastic writer submitted what is typically called a "Mary Sue." Like I said, these are uncommon in Sil writing, in my experience, and so perhaps that explains why the label does not resound with me the way it does with you. But anyway, this poor girl was flamed by canatics and told to read the book again before posting in the Sil section. I left her a review with an equal balance of praise and suggestions, but I think it was too late by then, and she removed the story.
I felt bad for the girl because she was obviously proud of this story, and I could only imagine her growing dismay as her inbox filled with flame after flame after flame....
I'm really rambling! Sorry! :D
I read a story that was full to the brim with purple prose and the attempt at unusual descriptions.
It was probably mine.... :/
clichés are not overused, they are just as neutral as words such as "say", "reply" or "look".
I would disagree with this point, but I think we've established that :)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
If it was, then it would be under my alias Dawn Felagund. It's the only one I use; I have managed to get *everything* on the Internet under that one name.
And we have indeed established that clichés will be hunted down by you and roasted as smores.
Hehe. I giggled at this, so you know :)
When a comparison that is intended to be highly original and un-clichéd goes wrong, it jerks the reader out of the story completely.
I think the secret of a good style is the right balance of neutral expressions or even "clichés"
Ah, yes. The happy medium :)
btw did you know that we have the same expression in German? "Schmetterlinge im Bauch haben"
That's pretty cool. And German looks so neat written...although I have *no* idea how to say that! :D
Only if the style is round and balanced, it is a pleasure to read. Which is probably why I enjoy your story so much. And that is nothing but the truth. :-)
Oh...::blushes:: Thank you! :D
To add onto the earlier rambling: I felt absolutely awful about that poor girl in the Sil section. I even left my email and told her to contact me if she wanted to talk about writing. I *really* hoped to hear from her but, alas, did not.... :(
I think I may have said something about Sil writers being snobs too! ;D Sometimes, they are!
::hides from Sil writers::
Reply
I guess I'm something of a 'canatic' (I assume it means canon-fanatic?) but I quite agree that making someone who is writing a Legomance, or any other kind of story, feel bad about their work just because their heroine is a self-insert is horrible and mean.
Just to play 'devil's advocate' for a moment (no offence intended), if a writer doesn't want to use the details from LoTR (Tolkien's version or Peter Jackson's) in their LoTR fic, then they'd probably be better off writing something original. Of course, there's AU, but that's a whole different kettle of fish!
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Then I'd call it an AU and read it as such - and I'll probably enjoy it if it's well-written and/or a good tale.
Who in h*** are we to make rules about what may or may not be done in fandom and try to impose them on others
Ouch! Erm, I don't think I have.
some people have become so canon-obsessed that they cannot accept any deviation from what *they* deem canon anymore
It can jar slightly for me - for instance, I read one story that had the second age as 1000 years long. It made me stop and think for a moment, but it was a great story and that one thing didn't stop me from telling the author that I enjoyed her work.
And it is not that easy to determine what exactly canon is in the Tolkien-verse
It's simple enough for me: LoTR and 'The Hobbit' are canon, and that's all. For my personal canon I tend to go with what we're told is JRR's last view on a topic by Christopher in HoME, not necessarily what's in 'The Silmarilion'. I wouldn't try to impose that view on anyone else and I certainly don't expect it when I'm reading silm-fics.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I find the notion of interpreting a book interesting. There is a lot of interpreting going on these days. In my part of the world, a person's "interpretation" of a book (that being the Bible) is too often being *strongly considered* in affording a person his or her rights. (Yes! In the Land of the Free!)
I once engaged in a debate (and won, as much as one can win these kinds of things) with a girl about what the Bible says about homosexuality. It all came down to interpretation--and my skills at twisting words into an interpretation proved superior, and so I "won." Facing a greater opponent, one who was better versed than I, I would have "lost."
Just as easily, a debate about Legolas' hair color or whether Balrogs have wings often ends on the side of the person who is the better wordsmith.
The simple fact remains: The (actual human) authors of the Bible are dead. Tolkien, sadly, is dead. We can never ask what they meant.
And so comes the fun of interpretation! :D
It is a challenge, and it sparks discussions, which is why I fell so quickly in love with this community. I love those crazy AU notions that their creators can actually defend for a moment, even if under the scrutiny of the severest canatic, they would fail :)
It's so much more fun than if we knew everything. Where's the room for creativity in that?
Reply
Guilty as charged. Luckily my beta usually spots it!
A completely ridiculous plot and one-dimensional characterizations, grammar & spelling that really *makes* me scream (forget about "want to")...
LOL - but those are the stories that tend to get the most reviews!
I've always thought of LaCE as being an ideal - like the Roman Catholic thing of no divorce etc., because enough of Tolkien's elves met with 'ill chance or strange fate'.
the prologue and the appendices lead to the problem of Tolkien's strange pseudo-historical approach of writing LOTR
And he even changed some of those details later; Celebrimbor's origins, for one.
Reply
Yes, I've always thought of it from the perspective of being appointed to write about my society/culture in such a way that it looks favorable.
I wouldn't write about all the crime. I wouldn't write about discrimation and persecution. I wouldn't write about AIDS and cancer and the (health insurance and tobacco) companies that don't mind if people die if they make a profit, nor would I write about poverty and the people it disproportionately affects.
I'd write about "liberty and justice for all" and "all [people] created equal." I'd write about a society that provides peaceful outlets for conflict resolution that used to be taken out in the street, in duels.
(I certainly wouldn't write about the bureaucratic red tape that prevents such "outlets" from being fully used!)
This is my take on LaCe :) I'm glad to have a self-titled canatic backing it! ;D
Reply
Leave a comment