Writerly Ways
Feb. 19th, 2017 11:54 pmI forgot to mention in the other whiny post that Mom took a bad fall today. She's all bruised up but naturally refuses to go to urgent care and prefers to be under 101 ice packs. (It's another reason I'm unsure about buying a house. I have no idea how I'm going to handle elder care from a distance so I truly hate my job too because it's not one where I can easily transfer to a new location).
I was wondering what a Mary Sue/Larry Stu means to everyone. To me it means Mr/Ms Perfect who is always the best at everything and nothing really goes wrong for them. Lately I've been seeing that term slammed onto any character who happens to be brilliant at what they do. By that definition Sheldon Cooper is a Larry Stu (and I'm sure some would argue he is in spite of his many failings).
If being brilliant automatically makes you a Stu/Sue then I guess we can't tell stories about child prodigies. How about a character going for three degrees at once while keeping a 3.5 gpa while working and being in band and theater? Too unbelievable? What about the three year old who begins to master violin or piano? Do you stop reading immediately.
I can understand where some of it is coming from. If you're already perfect where is the conflict? Too many stories you get the chosen one who's never wielded magic/sword/gun and suddenly they're better than everyone around them. That bugs me too but even brilliant characters have their flaws and challenges. So long as we see them as part of the story are they then truly Stus/Sues?
And have a few links inner conflict
making the reader a participator
love is a disease
I just don't have it in me to chase down my weekly stats, maybe tomorrow but before I go happy birthday to
seta_suzume and
apgeeksout I think I'm within a day of being on time for that...
I was wondering what a Mary Sue/Larry Stu means to everyone. To me it means Mr/Ms Perfect who is always the best at everything and nothing really goes wrong for them. Lately I've been seeing that term slammed onto any character who happens to be brilliant at what they do. By that definition Sheldon Cooper is a Larry Stu (and I'm sure some would argue he is in spite of his many failings).
If being brilliant automatically makes you a Stu/Sue then I guess we can't tell stories about child prodigies. How about a character going for three degrees at once while keeping a 3.5 gpa while working and being in band and theater? Too unbelievable? What about the three year old who begins to master violin or piano? Do you stop reading immediately.
I can understand where some of it is coming from. If you're already perfect where is the conflict? Too many stories you get the chosen one who's never wielded magic/sword/gun and suddenly they're better than everyone around them. That bugs me too but even brilliant characters have their flaws and challenges. So long as we see them as part of the story are they then truly Stus/Sues?
And have a few links inner conflict
making the reader a participator
love is a disease
I just don't have it in me to chase down my weekly stats, maybe tomorrow but before I go happy birthday to
