[Rob B]

What I was getting at, from the link I provided was, that I didn't want my protagonist to be an super-idealized version of myself, whereby I was living out a fantasy of sorts.

From the Wikipedia article I linked (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue) above:
The definition today has widened considerably to encompass most clichés found in fiction — such as having a tragic past or being shown as instantly likable — and especially that the character in question acts as a wish-fulfillment fantasy for the author who created it.


As one can see from its usages noted above, the term carries the strong connotation of wish fulfillment. Because of this, it is commonly associated with self-insertion, the literal writing of oneself into a fictional story.

[James Carmack]

I'm operating under the same definition, Rob. Admittedly, I didn't address the perfection aspect, but I've always thought that the whole Mini-Me bit was the more fundamental part of the whole Mary Sue/Marty Stu construct.

Indeed, as Kat notes, we shouldn't let ourselves get pigeonholed by the so-called "rules". Still, I generally wouldn't recommend having a perfect lead as it wouldn't give the reader anything to relate to. Plus it's bound to get boring. Of course, even that can be played by someone with the skill. A perfect protagonist who simply can't comprehend all the imperfection around him. The true conflict wouldn't be whatever external threat out there but the trouble (if not impossibility) of a spot of perfection finding its place in a sea of imperfection. Then there's the matter of setting up a perfect protagonist but having us doubt that perfection.

All that being said, flaws are a big part of what makes characters compelling, how they deal with those flaws, how (if) they overcome them, and how their flaws clash with the flaws of others. We can have more fun with a broken toy, as it were. ^_^

[lin]

I thought Ginger was sexier anyway.

[Kreschyboy]

I'm operating under the same definition, Rob. Admittedly, I didn't address the perfection aspect, but I've always thought that the whole Mini-Me bit was the more fundamental part of the whole Mary Sue/Marty Stu construct.

Indeed, as Kat notes, we shouldn't let ourselves get pigeonholed by the so-called "rules". Still, I generally wouldn't recommend having a perfect lead as it wouldn't give the reader anything to relate to. Plus it's bound to get boring. Of course, even that can be played by someone with the skill. A perfect protagonist who simply can't comprehend all the imperfection around him. The true conflict wouldn't be whatever external threat out there but the trouble (if not impossibility) of a spot of perfection finding its place in a sea of imperfection. Then there's the matter of setting up a perfect protagonist but having us doubt that perfection.

All that being said, flaws are a big part of what makes characters compelling, how they deal with those flaws, how (if) they overcome them, and how their flaws clash with the flaws of others. We can have more fun with a broken toy, as it were. ^_^

but if he couldn't comprehend the imperfection around him, he wouldn't be perfect now would he?

[James Carmack]

A fine question and indeed the charge could be made as a plot device. Still, I suppose it would depend on your definition of perfection, the scope of it, as well as the nature of understanding. Is it possible to understand that which we are not (or even that which we are)? If, say, you must be something to understand it, then a perfect being could not understand imperfection without first becoming imperfect. Then we toss in the accusation that an inability to understand imperfection, this imperfection of understanding, nullifies the claim to perfection. It throws the whole possibility of perfection in doubt. Heavy material for some adventurous soul to explore.

[KatG]

What I was getting at, from the link I provided was, that I didn't want my protagonist to be an super-idealized version of myself, whereby I was living out a fantasy of sorts.

Then change him. If you're unhappy with him, change the bits round. If he's like you, only better, you can make him more like you and not so better. Or better and not so much like you. Or like you and better, but he makes a fatal mistake. Or....

Which specific aspects of the character do you find problematic? Also, how exactly are readers who don't know you going to know the main character is an idealized version of yourself? Do you feel that the character is unbelievable, does unbelievable things? What are the goals of the story and how does the character fit or not fit with them? What traits of the character ring flat? Are you unhappy with the action in the tale and feel it is too simplistic? Is the dialogue cartoonish and overheated and it's not that sort of story?

My advice, strongly, is to throw away the Mary-Sue's and the Tom Swift's and all the little catch-phrases that don't help you identify what real problems you may have. Instead, concentrate on what you are actually doing in the story, and in comparison to what you wanted to do in the story.

Because an idealized version of yourself is not necessarily a problem in a story, and will not automatically read as poor or cliched prose to readers -- unless you, the author, feel that it's not working. So what, specifically, are the parts that aren't working for you?

[Rob B]

I've already made a couple of changes to this particular protagonist. Slight, things I might only notice in the minor, but that I think will pave the way for a better character and story in the long run.

In re-reading this novel, I am finding myself compelled to turn the pages.

[James Carmack]

That's always a good sign, Rob. This way you know your book has at least one fan. ^_^

[Rocket Sheep]

I can see a character named James gets a cameo in Rob B's novel before meeting a sudden gruesome fate.

My characters are always massively flawed and a bit dirty... I'm wondering if that says something about me now that I find out you are all writing stories about yourselves.

[James Carmack]

I can see a character named James gets a cameo in Rob B's novel before meeting a sudden gruesome fate.

It's nothing less than I deserve.

Commentator: Who said we were talking about you?

Oh. *ahem*

Commentator: I'm just screwin' with you. We were talking about you. I hope you die screaming.

Oh, good. We're on the same page then. What a relief. For a moment there I thought we had a terrible misunderstanding. That would've been so embarrassing.