The Collected Works of Liza the Procrastonator

[lizamanynames]

Well, my paid account for lady_smith is dead, and I never got around to making that moodtheme. Ugh, I'm such a procrastinator. Also, I occasionally get blocked in the worst way. And distracted

Comments

[mike_mccall]

Regarding the question of Jeanie and the Sue-ishness of her: granted in fanfic it's a question, I can't help but reflect that I spent the night reading an omnibus edition of three books whose central character is the biggest Gary Stu in the universe, using most definitions.

And I dare someone to walk up to Spider Robinson and point this out to him. You will be laughed at, and you will feel very foolish.

[lizamanynames]

...now there is a whole can of worms I'm not sure I want to open. I've frequently talked in great length about what makes a Sue, and how the short and easy definitions have to be thrown out so's not to paint unfairly characters with the dreaded "Sue" label... but even by my nice, big, intricate definition, Jake is frequently pushing it.

Sometime, I think, Spider is a man who writes amazing books in spite of himself - he breaks all kinds of rules, does things I'd shoot myself in the face before doing, things I'd slap someone six ways from sunday in a beta for doing - but his books work. And I don't have the first fucking clue how.

[mike_mccall]

Simple. He has good stories, a tale to tell about the human condition, and interesting characters, and he just does it.

In my opinion, most of crying "Sue!" is an inarticulate and annoying way of expressing an instinct that nobody but the author is interested in this character.

[lizamanynames]

What exactly is wrong with that if it's true? If nobody cares about a character except the Author - it's a badly written character.

[mike_mccall]

The problem with that is that because it's inarticulate and annoying, it makes a reasoned defense of the character impossible. It brings a valid criticism down to the level of poo-throwing.

[lizamanynames]

Well, certainly, if that's all you say. That's true of any pat, one-term criticism. That's why you have to back up the statement with reasoned arguments.

[mike_mccall]

Exactly. I can deal with the term if it's used as part of a reasoned criticism. All too often, however, it is treated as reason unto itself, and one punishable by ostracism (which is far too harsh a punishment for writing a hackneyed character, IMO).

[lizamanynames]

I will concede that slapping the abl "Sue" on a fic and shunning the author in question happens far too often - but more and more altely there's been an undertaking to understand why sues get written, and that they're necessary steps in an author's devellopment. I myself only use the word if I can back it up...

[mike_mccall]

Fair cop. My objection is primarily to how I've seen it used, which is more an accusation than a tool for discussion.

Also, as for it being a development step, I will say this: I see nothing wrong with a mature developed author writing a Sue character. I just see a problem with them expecting other people to read it. Though one would hope a mature, developed author would be beyond that. Anne Rice belies this hope, of course.