The Rhapsody character from Elizabeth Haydon’s Symphony of Ages series definitely qualifies as a Mary Sue, down to the classic supposedly-plain-but-every-man-gets-an-erection-just-looking-at-her syndrome (described literally in multiple volumes).
I’m sure. I’ve read them all, and I don’t recall the double-standard you mention. Spenser hasn’t had sex with anyone except Susan since the 11th book in the series. The series is now up to book number 36. He is occasionally tempted, but has decided that true love must be monogamous. (Yes, the novels can be tiresome on several levels, but I can’t resist them.)
ETA: The kid in the novel you mention is not gay–he has had relationships with women in subsequent novels. He is based on one of Parker’s sons though, and interestingly enough both of Parker’s sons are gay.
He’s always making mistakes, which he beats himself up over, and Rowling sometimes bends over backward to portray him as a typical high-strung hot-tempered self-centered insecure teenage male asshole.
Harry Potter isn’t the Mary Sue - Hermione is. Super-intelligent, never wrong, apparently dowdy, gets the guy in the end.
I can’t take credit for the wording here, because I believe I picked it up from another Mary Sue thread here on the SDMB, but reading a Kay Scarpetta novel is the literary equivalent of watching Patricia Cornwell masturbate in front of a mirror.
Also the kid from Eragon. Everything that’s grating to me about Ender Wiggin, writ large.
I was going to argue that myself, although I wouldn’t want to insult Hermione with the term. She is smart, but not overly beautiful, and she ends up with Ron at the end. I don’t think any of the Harry Potter characters are one-dimensional…hell, even Voldemort had layers.
As annoying as Hermoine can be, she does get called out for being an insufferable know-it-all. (By Snape, but still. 
)
Also, Viktor Krum, the international Quidditch star, fell for her hard. That falls on the Mary Sue side.
But in the end, she “got” Ron, pretty regular nice guy. Not a Mary Suish thing.
Gotta dispute the idea that Death from Sandman is a Mary Sue - she may or may not wield great power, but she is pretty powerless plot-wise in the series, and the issue with Element Girl reveals some stark character flaws.
Of course, everyone still loves her, but you need more than that to be a Mary Sue.
Richard #$@!% Rahl from “The Sword of Truth” series. Even though he doesn’t even know how to use his powers he still out- everythings everyone else. Even after seeing several ‘prophecies’ fulfilled he still runs around spouting about you can’t trust prophecies. And then he’s made to be right. Terrible writing, terrible character (and Kahlan). I gave up on the series after book four and I hate not knowing how a story ends.
Exactly what I was going to say, I’m not sure snagging a gangly, slightly comic relief ginger really qualifies as Mary Sue wish fulfillment (unless Rowling has some very weird tastes in men…).
Anyway, I just wanted to throw HP out there and I think we can agree that whilst he skirts MS territory occasionally (particularly in the first book) he’s too complex a character, flaws and all, to be one.
I always thought anakin was a mary sue.
Or at least a self insert by Lucas.
Maybe thats why the little runt is so annoying.
I don’t operate on the ‘stand in for the author’ definition of Mary Sue, but there are Evil Sues. Mary Sue villains are attractive, witty, extremely powerful to the point of being more or less invincible, make life a living hell for the protagonist, and can generally only be defeated by either some plot quirk or loophole…or by finally seeing the light and joining the good guys. Some of them also have angsty pasts that explain their villainhood. I’m showing my geek side here but I think Shadow the Hedgehog from the Sonic Adventure series is one of these. (However, character depth is not one of my requirements for the enjoyment of Sonic the Hedgehog video games.)
Word.
For a while I kept up with the series just to see if it was possible for each succeeding book to actually be worse than its predecessor. Then it became Objectivist pr0n and I could bear no more.
Wow, we must have the same FOAF. ‘Mary Sue’ is the first thing I thought when I read Twilight. She’s perfect in almost every way. Light years ahead of the juvenile high-schoolers around her. Her only flaw (clumsiness) serves only to make her more endearing. vomit.
I’m gonna have to disagree on that one. She’s not the protagonist, and the guy she gets in the end isn’t the protagonist. She’s super-intelligent, but that generally doesn’t cause the other characters to like her - at best they tolerate that she’s a nerd. I’d say Harry is the author surrogate… very carefully concealed, but there nonetheless.
The only possible culprit I see in Harry Potter is Tonks. She’s flawless, and suddenly becomes very important despite being extremely underwritten.
The internship happened after you stopped reading, and it spanned more than one book, so this would be something you’d remember.
Also, Paul Giacomin, who debuts in Early Autumn and who becomes a recurring character, isn’t gay. The boy in God Save the Child, which is the second book in the series, may have been, and in fact was living with a gay bodybuilder. (That is also where Susan makes her debut; she was the boy’s guidance counselor.) I suspect you’re conflating the two. Of course, Paul is an unmarried dancer, so he fits the stereotype, but he’s straight.
I’ve belonged to several Spenser groups, and there has been some grousing about Susan. She’s effectively a one-dimensional character who doesn’t add that much to the story.
Robin
The quintessential example of this, the modern apotheosis of the phenomenon, is Shyamalan’s movie Lady in the Water. Shyamalan prominently features in the story a writer character who is a genius, and whose works will inspire leaders and bring peace to the world, which is why the evil forces (including a critic) want to block his influence and shut him down. And then Shyamalan casts himself in this role. It’s absolutely hilarious.
How about one from a screenwriter?
I admit that I haven’t seen the movie, but from what I’ve heard alone, M. Night Shyamalan’s character in Lady In The Water is a total Mary Sue/Gary Stu. Even worse, he not only wrote the story and directed the movie, he cast himself in the role! Here’s some comments culled from IMDB user reviews, screened for spoilers just in case someone gets irked:
Shyamalan plays the role of an author, misunderstood in his time, who will one day influence a boy destined to become the president of the United States. Self-fulfilling prophecies, anyone?
…
And then you have the complete audacity of the man in casting himself as the man who will (essentially) write the second bible.
…
Shyamalan casts HIMSELF as a John the Baptist character who will inspire “a great leader who will change everything” from a hastily constructed presumable political treatise entitled, of all things, The Cookbook.
I also understand that Shyamalan included in the movie a film critic who is wrong about everything and ends up getting horribly torn apart. Gee, I wonder if that’s supposed to mean anything.
On preview: damn you, Cervaise! You got in ahead of me while I was looking for juicy quotes!