Forum: Author Hangout

As to awnlees comments that my stories are Mary Sue, I'm baffled as to how You could get there. All of my stories involve characters with intentional flaws. A Mary Sue is a perfect character who can speak seven languages, has several gold medals, is well-liked by all,idealized to the point of unrealistic. etc

I believe that was posted in sarcasm, and not to have been taken seriously.

As for me, I am largely neutral. Simply that when somebody posts stories of a more extreme content, described and named in the ways that yours are, that is simply to be expected. If every single story I posted had the Ma/ft code, then it would be expected that somebody would claim I supported and endorsed underage sex with adults.

We need some kind of tag or way to indicate sarcasm

/S

It's 2020 And it feels like constant stress. I write to escape it. Seeing things through the eyes of my characters allows me to get a visceral thrill from how things unfold. They are however pure fantasy and simply not something that I advocate happening in real life.

Stephen King write stories He doesn't necessarily want evil cars to come alive and cats to come out of graveyards and start killing us. These are stories to provide entertainment.

Reading that the characters are Mary Sue was definitely a strange comment. especially considering this is a collaboration story with Mike McGifford and not my own unique creation by myself. We both have been writing these characters. It would be reassuring to know that it was sarcasm.

It should go without saying mushroom That as an author You can tell a story without advocating it happening in real life. Stephen King would be in jail several times over if he advocated what happens in his stories. we are all adults here. We can play around with characters that don't exist in real life, in situations that don't exist in real life. I totally agree with you and sympathize. The Game of Thrones books have Sansa and her sister as much younger. Daenerys is much younger. They are fantasy stories. He isn't suggesting that it happen in real life.

I think one thing I've noticed is a commonality in this thread is that being submissive is seen as a weakness. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Writing a submissive character who wishes to submit, who has the strength to submit - to give pleasure to others without first the promise of reciprocation, to do for others, that takes strength. Some of the characters who submit my stories aren't motivated by those desires. But the one in this one is

Are there women that I hate? Yes. There are men I hate as well. But the comment that I must hate women because I write stories about submissive ones throws me for a loop. And I realize now that part of that is the impression that anyone who is submissive is weaker or unworthy.

Some of my stories have included revenge. Some of them have been dares or bets. Some have included mind control. I don't see any of these as being a statement about women. They are simply stories designed to entertain

Stephen King write stories He doesn't necessarily want evil cars to come alive and cats to come out of graveyards and start killing us.

Are you sure about that? 🤪

Are you sure about that?

Actually, he has often commented on how he is not even really a horror writer. He is a suspense writer. Everybody knows of his killer cars and prom queen killers. But many of his stories do not even feature any monsters at all.

Some have a complete human enemy, who is just doing evil things. Stand By Me has no real horror at all, just kids on a quest in rural Oregon (Maine in the original story). 11-22-63 has the "enemy" largely being fate, not any real entity. Cujo was just a rabid dog, Misery was a crazy lady, The Long Walk was 100 teen boys walking along the highway until only 1 was left, The Running Man was a dystopian future. Rage was just a kid that snapped and started shooting up his school.

Even The Stand was less horror, as it was a modernized retelling of Revelations.

I have always read him as suspense, not actual horror. More akin to Hitchcock than Romero. But that is what he became known for, because those were his earliest books that were made into movies.

Even The Stand was less horror, as it was a modernized retelling of Revelations.

The Stand is my favorite book my him, especially the re-released unabridged version.

A nit: It's not 'Revelations' it's 'Revelation' or more completely 'The Revelation of Jesus Christ to John'.

The Greek word translated as Revelation is ἀποκάλυψις (apokalypsis), which is obviously 'Apocalypse' but which means 'unveiling' or 'revelation.

I like interpretation of that book as contemporary (to John) political rant against Rome.

That is most likely what it is. The 'near/far' prophecy ideas of certain fundamentalist evangelicals to the contrary notwithstanding.

It's the one book in the Russian Orthodox canon which is never read in church, and is given wide berth by most Orthodox commentators.

It's a very interesting conversation.

I think aligning with your main character characters is not "Mary Sue" at all but a natural state of any author. You need to see out of their eyes and from their perspective if you are telling their story.

Mary Sue is defined as :Mary Sue is a term used to describe a fictional character, usually female, who is seen as too perfect and almost boring for lack of flaws, originally written as an idealized version of an author in fanfiction.

An author who writes Mary Sue (unless as parody) is typically a poor author - so you can understand why I would take offense?

The term as defined has nothing to do with whether you relate to them or not.

That definition seems fairly cut and dry. As to motivations for submissive desires - well that one could fill up three message boards. You can ask three submissives and have four answers - yours and each of theirs.

Awnlee says it is a desire to be responsibility free. That is true for some.

In other cases, in 24/7 submissive/dominant relations the submissive has many responsibilities. They have a job, take care of the house, do for others. That is true for some.

Another person wrote that submissives are selfish. That may be true for some. I know many submissives who live for their Master or Mistress and are the most altruistic giving people.

we can all agree that there is no one definition of submissive nor is there any single reason or motivation that makes anyone interested in submission.

The most important point that I want to make perfectly clear is desiring someone to be in submission should never be confused with hating them or wanting to harm them or hating them- not in a healthy relationship.

Not all of my stories have healthy relationships. Some of them are dysfunctional - especially at first. That does not mean I advocate or propose people live in dysfunctional relationships. It means that I wrote stories about real life where dysfunction exists.

I am a huge fan of turnabout is fair play stories. As an example, a sister who teased and humiliated her brother for weeks on end will usually get her cummupance at the end of the story (or as the premise of the story). These are just stories but to say that I would hate any of my characters is simply false.

My only point about Stephen King was simply that his stories are not his pulpit to preach how to live - Mine aren't either. My stories are mind-candy of a certain flavor. It may not be for everyone. I accept that - but I don't accept the comment that I hate women simply because I write about submissives or trashy women.

As to Mary Sue - Conrad Stargard (from Leo Frankowski) was frequently regarded as a Mary Sue (although Leo pointed out he'd made the character fundamentally different from himself on a number of aspects) even though he had a number of flaws and most of his success was due to a combination of future knowledge and 'luck' due to 'gifts' from someone further uptime.

In that I do agree. Poor Leo was often misunderstood in his writings. He often griped at the accusations of Conrad being a Mary Sue. Even pointing out that he was a strong "Conservative Capitalist", while Conrad was a huge believer in Communism and Socialism, and often griped he was the richest person in Europe, even as he tried to make his realm a ":workers paradise". A devout Marxist, living in an actual feudal kingdom.

Or the attacks of "sexism", even though it was set in the 13th century. I never considered his writings sexist, and in an authentic 13th century setting his area would have been amazingly progressive.

Of course, the entire series kind of died when he and Jim Baen had a major falling out. It was an ugly mess, involving mail order brides, and Leo's drinking getting out of control (along with what some believe were micro-strokes causing Jim Baen to grow increasingly paranoid). Baen dropped him, and threatened to sue anybody that published another of his books. Which is why his last 2 were pretty much published by his estate.

It was almost SO levels of drama there. And yes, a lot of their final split had to do with Leo talking Jim into taking on a Russian mail-order bride, just as he had done.

Mary Sue is defined as :Mary Sue is a term used to describe a fictional character, usually female, who is seen as too perfect and almost boring for lack of flaws, originally written as an idealized version of an author in fanfiction.

I think many of the stories on SOL show a preponderance of male 'Mary Sue' characters.

The meaning has moved on since the definition you quoted, although the main thrust is still the idea of an idealised version of the author.

It's quite a common male fantasy that an idealised version of themselves would be female, especially in an erotic setting - a pair of breasts to play with, multiple orgasms, no refractory period and a supposedly large amoral male population prepared to service you at the bat of an eyelid.

AJ

It's quite a common male fantasy that an idealised version of themselves would be female, especially in an erotic setting - a pair of breasts to play with, multiple orgasms, no refractory period and a supposedly large amoral male population prepared to service you at the bat of an eyelid.

This is seen in a lot of games, where male players pick female characters.

The main characters of my stories are always flawed and not great. They are often incredibly naive.

other than you, who decided that the definition changed and you are the one using it correctly and I am not? I wasn't at that meeting

characters of the last forty years was a Mary Sue - that being Dirk Pitt.

Or in the case of many stories in here, Dirk Diggler.

The only issue I had switch blayde was you posted your story here, with no codes.

It wasn't a story. Is was an excerpt of part of a scene to see if the battle made sense. And as I said, the finished story wouldn't have any of those tags. It's not a war story. It just happens to take place during WWII and the MC is in the war (in the beginning of the story, anyway).

And if I was glorifying anything, it wasn't war. It was the heroism of soldiers and their hardships. And in this case, the hardships of their wives.

As to awnlees comments that my stories are Mary Sue, I'm baffled as to how You could get there.

I used the term 'Mary Sue' in the broader sense of the author wishing they were like the character they were portraying, whether flawless and superhuman or not.

Despite its low score, one of my most-reads-per-chapter stories is about girls abusing a boy. The desire to be submissive and responsibility-free seems to be more prevalent than most men would admit.

AJ

Is it ever safe to conclude from the content of stories that the writing reflects the beliefs and opinions of a writer?

Not safe. But as novice writers tend to stick to what they know, it's probably not a bad first guess.

AJ