Buffy ,'Get It Done'
A topic for the discussion of Doctor Who, Arrow, and The Flash. Beware possible invasions of iZombie, Sleepy Hollow, or pretty much any other "genre" (read: sci fi, superhero, or fantasy) show that captures our fancy. Expect adult content and discussion of the Big Gay Sex.
Marvel superheroes are discussed over at the MCU thread.
Whitefont all unaired in the U.S. ep discussion, identifying it as such, and including the show and ep title in blackfont.
Blackfont is allowed after the show has aired on the east coast.
This is NOT a general TV discussion thread.
To me, a Mary Sue is too good to be true. In this case, she's a Mary Sue Companion--brilliant, quirky, talking back to the doctor.
But that's Sarah Jane, or Romana, or Leela, or Jo, or Ace, or any of them in their own way. (Especially Romana. Damn, I love Romana.)
To me, a Mary Sue is too good to be true. In this case, she's a Mary Sue Companion--brilliant, quirky, talking back to the doctor.
That's not much like my interpretation: to me, a Mary Sue is a character who warps the narrative around her. She's just as good at hand-to-hand as Eliot and just as good at hacking as Hardison, and she might be prettier than Sophie and happen to be Nate's niece. And she becomes really important in the lives of the characters and influences the narrative out of proportion to her strength of character. And her flaws are only endearing ones, like she never gives up, and stubbornly refuses to let her friends die. She's a representation of the writer's desire to be part of the story, and her affection for the characters in the canon.
So I don't see Oswin as a MarySue because she didn't warp the narrative, she was merely part of it. The fact that she didn't know what she was went a long way to dilute her MarySue-ness.
I hear you. I just have a different view of it, I guess.
The Doctor's too good to be true--is it because his name is above the fold that it doesn't matter when he does it? Too good to be true is kinda everyone--it's Eliot or Parker or Hardison or Nate or Sophie. They're all tops of their respective games, smacking people down left right and centre, to randomly grab another franchise. The Winchesters are the only ones who can beat both heaven and hell in the same day, and Castiel is the only angel who really grasps the importance of free will and the value of humans. Chuck is the only one who can take the Intersect (until he's not), no one outfights Sarah, but no one is badder assed than Casey.
Basically, I don't understand where competence porn ends (because we mostly cheer that) and Mary Sue begins.
I'm more with Suela's definition--it's about two things for me--the author's apparent relationship to her (very unreliable to tease out), and the degree to which she's a black hole twisting the fabric around her.
Deleted because it makes no sense without the previous post for a straight line
Dan -- I deleted your post as it is a casting spoiler.
Said casting spoiler is addressed in spoilers lite.
I'm more with Suela's definition--it's about two things for me--the author's apparent relationship to her (very unreliable to tease out), and the degree to which she's a black hole twisting the fabric around her.
And not all Mary Sues are badly done, either. There's an old Star Trek novel, Uhura's Song, with a character who's a classic Mary Sue, and people love her. For me, the problem with Mary Sue is the way she personifies the author's emotional relationship with the text: I don't want to know that much about the writer's id.
And I say that as someone who has most certainly written a Mary Sue or two in my time. It's just that some of them are better camouflaged than others...
Most of what I've written has been Mary Sue of the most deliberate sleeps-with-the-dreamy-guy, fights-like-a-badass type.
And it was fun to write, but I don't expect anyone else to enjoy it.