I view Lancelot as the tragic courtly love hero.
Lancelot is my favorite character in Arthurian Legend.
I have the 5 Volume English-translated Lancelot-Grail which include Vulgate and Post-Vulgate.
Lancelot's story was greatly expanded in Lancelot-Grail back in the 13th Century.
I created a thread about Dick Grayson/Nightwing and Koriand'r/Starfire. It is to acknowledge and honor their iconic and popular relationship.
I created a fan page about Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson. This page is for all the Spider-Marriage fans.
I created a thread about Dick Grayson/Nightwing and Koriand'r/Starfire. It is to acknowledge and honor their iconic and popular relationship.
I created a fan page about Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson. This page is for all the Spider-Marriage fans.
all that was originally from the Lancelot-Grail aka The Vulgate which was written in the 13th Century, and that had nothing to do with Chretien de Troyes
Lancelot actually died as a priest in a hermitage
His first cousin Bors and brother Hector were there
Hector died shortly before Lancelot did
I created a thread about Dick Grayson/Nightwing and Koriand'r/Starfire. It is to acknowledge and honor their iconic and popular relationship.
I created a fan page about Peter Parker/Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson. This page is for all the Spider-Marriage fans.
So to the question in the original post, under this definition the term has no meaning at all and is just used to describe a character I personally do not fancy.
Also, it's worth pointing out that neither of the citations in the paragraph attempt to source the first sentence, neither of the citations suggest the first sentence is true, and the second sentence explicitly contradicts the first one. Ah, Wikipedia.
This definition is bs. The entire point of being a Mary Sue is to upstage the protagonist, to heroically save the hero as it were. The idea that the main protagonist could be a Mary Sue in their own title is confusing at best, and laughably ignorant at worst. Under this definition, a main protagonist would actually need a Mary Sue to save/help them in order to not be a Mary Sue him or her self.
Last edited by AJBopp; 06-05-2018 at 03:59 PM.
"1) A character who is based, at least partly, on the author
2) A character whom has no significant flaws (except possibly ones the other characters find cute)
3) A character to whom everyone within the story reacts as if they were beautiful and wonderful except characters who are clearly evil and/or motivated by jealousy
4) A character with whom, during the course of the story, every available character of the opposite (and occasionally the same) sex will fall in love given any contact whatsoever
5) A character who undergoes no significant growth, change or development throughout the story "
Would you care to link the original definition?
The term began with the Star Trek fan-fiction, thus the relevant character had to be inserted into an already existing fanbase. So far, however, I've been unable to find anything that says a Mary Sue type character cannot be the protagonist.
Originally, the term "Mary Sue" was intended to make fun of characters in Star Trek fanfic who were author-insert characters designed to service the (usually female) author's fantasy of being with one of the male characters (usually Kirk). In order to impress Kirk, the character would be made to save his life, or otherwise save the day with her incredible skills and competence, thereby turning the tables on the fandom's protagonists by making them the "damsels in distress.
it's not an invalid concept for a story; the problem arose from the fact that since the story was being written solely to satisfy the author's own fantasy, it wouldn't have very much resonance with anyone else. In the hands of an unskilled writer, the agenda would be clear.
Yes, the definition has evolved over time. Language is a pure democracy, and changes to it happen whether we old timers like it or not... it's always been that way. (There are probably people still alive today who remember when kids were taught that using contractions in conversations was vulgar.)
Today the term is used to mean any author insert character, which is too bad because there has never been anything wrong with author insert characters, as long as they are well written. MOST writers imbue at least one of their characters with their own attributes or viewpoints. But now apparently any author who does it has to be shamed as conceited or narcissistic. Being caught writing a Mary Sue is like being caught masturbating. Everybody does it, but getting caught is humiliating anyway.
First: You are correct. Luke was shown the Jedi mind trick in A New Hope, and uses it against Bib Fortuna in Return of the Jedi.
I can see where some of her skills come from, but even then there are problems. She knows how to fly, but has never flown off planet and we don't know if she's ever flown anything besides her speeder. She knows how to fight and use a staff, but Lightsabers are supposed to be difficult to control and take years of training to master, and she goes up against Kylo Ren at the end of TFA, a man who had been trained in lightsaber combat by Luke Skywalker. And the mind trick even bugged me in the theaters. She got an inkling that she was Force sensitive about five minutes before she was captured, and then used the Force to not only look into Kylo's mind, but to influence her guard as well? That didn't sit well with me.
Second: You actually WATCHED that Adam Sandler movie?!
First: I admit that I stopped watching Agents of Shield in the first season, but I seem to remember when season 2 started that they said that Skye had been training with May? I know a few months of lessons doesn't make a person a bad-ass in real life, but it does in these shows. Just ask Roy Harper. Or Thea Queen. Or Laurel Lance. Or Evelyn Sharpe.... okay, maybe not her....
Second: You actually WATCHED that James Bond ripoff?!