Earlier we had talked about Author Intrusion, when an author inserts his opinions or beliefs into a story as part of narration…where they don’t belong. Now we’re going to cover what happens when the author literally inserts himself into a story. We use the term self-insertion to refer to this literary device. Not limited to literature, artists during the 16th century occasionally put a self-portrait into paintings they did.
These self-inserted characters (also called author surrogates) are usually blatant representations of the author…taken from the real world and put into the fictional world created by the author. They give authors an opportunity to reveal their philosophy or politics in the story world. When done openly, it gives the author permission to interact with his characters and express personal views…as long as it fits into the story. (Sometimes going so far as having the same name as the author!) Some authors write stories specifically to allow them to pontificate to the world or for humorous or sarcastic effect.
Sometimes an author surrogate exists as a veiled character, with a different name, description, personality…even gender…so the author can distance himself from the actions of the character but still express his stance on various topics. Some aspects of the author will always creep into every character he builds (everything is a little bit autobiographical). The problem is that some characters, intended to be just based on the author, drift into being the author. Unfortunately, when taken too far, the character becomes the author (or vice versa).
Source of the Term
The term Mary Sue (later re-gendered into Marty Stu) originated in the early days of fan fiction. (Fan-fiction is when young writers create stories that take place in existing universes.) Back then, the most common universe used was Star Trek, with Captain Kirk, Mr Spock, Dr McCoy, and Commander Scott. Fan Fiction authors wrote many stories involving those main characters, along with new characters…as it happened, most of the new characters they introduced were specifically intended to represent the writer themselves.
Those author-characters gave rise to the term Mary Sue after Paula Smith wrote a parody in “The Menagerie”, a fan-zine (fan magazine). The main character in the story was Lieutenant Mary Sue, the youngest lieutenant in the fleet. She not only out captained Kirk, and out logic’d Spock, but she also managed to single-handedly rescue all four of the main characters from imprisonment…regrettably (or not so) dying from a disease she caught whilst freeing them. The story ends with everyone on the Enterprise celebrating her birthday as “a national holiday”…”even to this day.”
Nothing is wrong with author surrogates in general, but it sometimes becomes obvious that the author has created a super-character, making him unreasonably skilled or flawless. He has made a self-idealisation of an outrageously gifted author substitute. When an author has created such a super-character so perfect that they never fail, it lacks credibility, and the rest of the story (created just to show off that character’s abilities) falls flat. That is when the term Mary Sue or Marty Stu is applicable to identify the clichéd work.
Spotting a Mary or Marty
If a character is vitally central to the story, always wins the day no matter the obstacles, is impossibly skilled in every task, happens to make all the right decisions, and has remarkable physical characteristics, you might have a Mary Sue.
In fan-fiction, anyone who upstages the pre-existing characters should be questioned. Yes, the author wants his characters to have their moment in the spotlight—but it can’t come at the expense of established characters.
There’s no problem if an author inserts himself into the fictional world. The problem is when he imbues that character with talents unfairly. Maybe the author would personally like to have those abilities…in real life, not just in this story—this is author wish fulfilment.
Caution
Because the term is a put-down, be careful pointing the finger at any character under discussion in your Critique Groups. Just because you don’t like a character doesn’t make them a Mary or Marty. The author may have intended to create an unlikable character. Remember, a true Mary or Marty is unflawed, missing any qualities that make them real, failing to appeal to the reader. Then again, if readers can relate, it can be an escapism for them—who doesn’t wish they were super?
Keep in mind, not every Mary Sue is a stand-in for the author, nor is every stand-in a Mary Sue. The problem arises when the character in question is so amazing that it kills the story…whether or not that character is a proxy for the author. Be careful to not haphazardly apply the label to any character who doesn’t fit into ‘normal’ society…some characters just don’t belong in our society but work well in their fictional world.
Marty Stu
Not to be outdone, many male characters also fit the description of a Mary Sue. We call them Marty Stu, Gary Stu, or Larry Stu (or Sue to keep the same name). As with Mary Sue, Marty is striking, misunderstood, has a heartrending history, and is so ideal as to be disgusting
Although obviously not author surrogates, there are some famous Marty Stu characters. Think about James Bond, Superman, and Wolverine. (Who else gets sliced to bits, shot a dozen times, then just gets up and keeps fighting?) There are arguments about Batman…in his fictional world, they explain how he became so proficient and how he maintains his physical prowess, so the label may not fit.
Amusingly, considering the origin of the name, another famous Marty Stu is Captain Kirk himself!