I’m not really writing much anymore, but I would like to get back to it.
The thing is that I don’t enjoy writing unless I’m writing about a character that’s standing in for myself in a story. In all my stories, the main character is myself.
Now, I don’t give myself superpowers or make myself so perfect that everyone falls instantly in love with me. That would make me barf. I might gift my character with a trait I would like to explore however. My favorite character was extremely selfish and smart-mouthed. Because I always wanted to try that out. I always wanted to be able to say exactly what I think to people who annoy me. I’d like to be able to snap out a funny insult instantly, instead of thinking of what I should have said hours later like it always happens.
I try to make my characters entertaining. I think in writing, that’s the most important thing, a rousing story.
I understand that an idealized self character does not make for good writing. But is an author’s wishful self-insertion into a story always make for bad writing? I think there are plenty of famous fictional characters based on their writers’ lives and personalities.
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.
IMO the things people tell you are “bad writing” are only bad when done badly. Maybe they’re things that nearly always come out wrong, but none of them are always wrong.
If you find that a self-insert character helps you write, then do that! Just be conscious of the pitfalls (making yourself disgustingly perfect and powerful, using your self insert to lecture the reader about what’s right or wrong–you can do either of those if you want to or mean to, but do it thoughtfully and intentionally), which it sounds like you are. So, my advice, don’t worry about advice saying Mary Sues are bad writing.
Don’t worry about rules, or things people say are wrong or bad writing. Anything can be done well or badly. Just aim to do whatever it is you do as well as you can.
In the end, are you writing for yourself or for your readers? If you’re writing for yourself, then write whatever you feel like writing. It’s that simple; art is for the sake of the artist.
If you’re writing for your readers, then you need to consider what your readers will want to read. And know that you’ll never please all of your readers. But the great thing about readers is that they are self selecting–at some point those don’t want to read your writing will stop being your readers and you’ll be left with only people who want to read your writing.
I guess I can see that (write what you know?), but all your stories? Sounds like that might get stale fast. What if you want to write about a private detective (and erstwhile successful actor) who is also a manic-depressive serial killer with an encyclopedic knowledge of goldfish?
My understanding of “Mary Sue” was that it was originally applied to fanfiction. Authors who wrote Star Trek episodes or Harry Potter episodes, that kind of thing. So there are all these familiar characters except for Oh, who do we have here? New ensign reporting for duty, sir. New student joining today at Hogwarts. And gee, Spock / Uhura / Hermione / Professor McGonnagall just find the new person so so fascinating, because they’re so witty and have these special talents and stuff…
Mary Sue is where the whole purpose of the tale is to let the author join the world they’ve admired for so long as a reader. And it shows. Oh how it shows.
But back to the original question, if authors could not insert themselves into a story, you’d have no memoirs by definition, and a hell of a lot of good fiction would go AWOL from the bookshelves. Some authors insert multiple copies of themselves as different characters within the same narrative. But the difference is, the purpose of the story is the story, and the purpose of themselves within the story is simply to have a realistically described character with consistent behaviors and attitudes (writing someone who is essentially you is far easier than writing someone whose personality characteristics and internal-thinking-to-self voice and habits are utterly different).
It might indeed, but I suspect there are successful professional authors who fall into this category (particularly those whose books are all about one series character)? Kind of like an actor who has a successful career essentially playing themselves in every role?
No hiding it. I’m editing a series of notebooks from my uncle, commenting on them, and even joining in the action as a deus ex machina. I’m trying to experiment with forms of fiction and the difference between fiction and real life.
I do note that John Barth literally put himself in Chimera and ended up with a National Book Award.
But the issue with a Mary Sue is when she becomes a wish fulfilment. Not that the author is in the book, but that the author analog is too much an ideal.