Notes: Somewhat shorter than the last chapter, sorry. But unless I post semi-regularly, this is going to go into a decline again.

5a. The Good, The Bad and The Disturbing, Part 2

(ie; an attempt at defining what constitutes the Mary-Sue)

3. Defining the Personality

Your character's personality, needless to say, plays a large part in getting someone to decide if they are a Sue or not. The traits from the two previous sections can be tweaked into submission with some amount of effort to add to the overall story. Messing up your character's personality? Not so much.

He has all the virtues I hate and none of the vices I admire.

a. The Perfect Hero/Informed Flaws

One common denominator that's applicable to pretty much all incarnations of the Mary Sue is perfection. Personality-perfection is not as glaringly obvious as physical flawlessness or superpowered excellence, but it's a lot more damaging in the long run. Because if your character is sweet, nice, confident, intelligent, wise and smart at the same time, they're somewhat unrealistic and (more importantly) will make quite a lot of readers think longingly of chainsaws and torture chambers.

So how are you supposed to get out of that mess? Giving them flaws is one option.

Flaws are not the only method you can adopt to make a protagonist with many virtues palatable. However, they are somewhat simpler than the other methods, most of which involve creative writing. The downside to this is that giving an OC flaws is delicate work which can easily backfire.

Firstly, if you're giving your OC a flaw, it has to be a genuine liability. Common not-flaws like a short temper or stubbornness actually have the potential to be massively damaging. You get angry at people for little or no reason, most of them are going to get fed up with you in a while. Be stubborn at the wrong time for the wrong reason, and in a place like the PJOverse, your actions can have some pretty serious consequences. Use them. A flaw which only acts up where it can do little to no damage is not a flaw. It's a Sue trait, and not a particularly redeemable one.

Second. Be very, very careful if you plan to use 'short-tempered' and 'stubborn' as character flaws. They're the two most commonly used, as well as most commonly abused, of all flaws. They tend to be written in such a way that the flaws aren't really portrayed as flaws.

Third, physical flaws are not personality flaws. Clumsiness is very, very thoroughly not a flaw. It is a liability at a battle-themed Camp, but liabilities are quite different from flaws. If the clumsy person angsted and worried and sulked about it so much that she/he never really learned anything, that would be a flaw. In most cases, this also applies to the flaw of the Reluctant Hero/Heroine. Tread with caution.

Fourth. If your OC has a whole bunch of traits which mark him/her out as an extraordinary person, a single, occasionally seen flaw is not going to cut it. People are usually a mix of good traits and bad traits, and it helps if they have a collection of vices to balance out their collection of virtues.

And you need to use virtues and vices, because making your character completely unremarkable personality-wise is almost as damaging as making them perfect. The self-insert cardboard cutout character tends to bore people into a coma.

b. The Emotionally Static/Inexplicable Emotions

The two most important things that define a character are (a) the personality and (b) the relationships he/she has with other characters. When it comes to (b), it helps if the emotions behind the reactions your character goes through make sense from when reasoned through. This, of course, is sometimes not the case.

When a character remains in the exact same emotional state irrespective of external circumstances, they are emotionally static. Loving parents murdered in a monster attack? Shed a tear or two, and then forget all about them. Best friend betrayed you? Be saddened over her fate, then jump back into battle like you always did. Love interest gets turned to stone? Angst about it and find a replacement in the next chapter. Just been told you're a demigod? Blink once and ask where you can find your destined weapon.

Events have consequences. Big events have big consequences, especially for people most affected by them. Sometimes, it can take years for the consequences to wear off. Sometimes, it's possible that they never do. When putting in a tragedy or a major upheaval, make sure your character goes through the emotional trauma proportional to exactly that.

The other end of the spectrum is where great drama occurs over things which are largely pointless, or where disproportional drama occurs over things which are seriously not worthy of having that much of an impact on the OC. Suppose a guy your OC has a crush on dates a romantic rival her three weeks before the CHB prom (HA!). Following it up with a chapter or more about how depressed she is and how her life makes no sense anymore will get you eyerolls and a facepalm. Angst is fine. Getting upset is fine. But for the love of the gods don't treat romantic disasters with the kind of reactions you reserve for the end of the world/everyone you care about.

A special note connected to this; 'love' is not an easy emotion. It is far from a simple emotion. It is the easiest emotion to screw up. If you are planning to use the word in a romantic context even once in your entire fic, make sure the characters have sufficient buildup to get to 'love'. Instant true love is a recipe for disaster in almost all cases. Also try not to use it to justify actions which are a t the pinnacle of stupidity. Love does not excuse a sudden transformation into a blithering idiot.

c. Static Development

A story often involves character development. Which is to say, the events and actions of the story must have an impact on the OC, change her, refine her or make her go through hell, possibly all at the same time. A static character happens when there's no appreciable difference in the OC between the beginnings and ends of the story. And it's not the physical/plot-driven differences (say, Farm Boy to Once and Future King), but the emotional growth (for example, uncertain to confident) that is important here.

It is actually possible to write stories without considerable character development, especially for peripheral characters (on the other hand, don't ever think about trying to do it with the main character). And I'm going to go into series nobody has really heard about to illustrate this, so excuse me for that. It's even going to pop up again later on in the section, because the main character Tavi is a study in Gary-Stu traits if I ever saw one. But for the moment, let us focus on Ehren and Kitai.

Ehren starts off rule-bound, uncertain, and inclined to jawdrop at Tavi over his plans. He grows sneaky, clever and confident (but still inclined to jawdrop at Tavi over his plans, because some things are universal). The transition is smooth, gradual and happens over a span of years, chronologically. In contrast, Kitai is always confident, intelligent and competent (rather like Annabeth, when I think about it) and while there is a development in her between books one and two, she remains largely the same for the rest of the books. It's one of the reasons why despite being a lovely character in her own right, she falls very far below Ehren on my list of favourites.

Coming to PJO, it is also one of the reasons why Annabeth tends to do the same when compared to say, Clarisse. In spite of having little to no screentime , Clarisse grew a lot as a character; getting added dimensions, more flesh on her bones and at least one crowning moment of "holy shit, that girl is badass". Annabeth, by contrast, is established firmly by book one and remains largely the same till book five, and has most of her more impressive moments in the first three books. (This is a personal opinion, and of course, you may feel differently and are at complete liberty to tell me so; especially if you have reasons. I would love to hear them.)

Character development is a powerful tool, and serves to emphasis events in your story. Use it wisely and use it often.

4. Relationships with Other Characters

As might have been mentioned by me at least twice, your character is primarily defined by his/her interactions with other people. Yes, the OC has a personality and all that, but the most common way of actually showing said personality is through interactions with other people. And the reactions of other characters is a large section of why a Sue is called a Sue.

a. The Charmspeaker/Love at First Glance/Easily Forgiven

To summarize: unquestioning acceptance, inhumanly persuasive OCs and the ensuing special treatment may not be a good direction to take.

The worst offender of the type is the Love at First Glance subclass. And no, I'm not talking about how the OC meets Nico and there is instant mutual true love. I'm talking about how everyone, from Chiron to Lupa to the main PJO cast to the harpies instantly love them and feel they are special. The OC is instantly catapulted into a position of prominence regardless of origin or experience. Avoid unless you have justification (like, for instance, a child of Hades would be put under much more scrutiny than a new kid of Aphrodite or Hermes, but on the other hand, they would be by default treated as outcasts by most of Camp).

The second kind of offender is the Charmspeaker (yes, I'm making the classification names as I go along, and no, this is not an I-hate-Piper rant), whereby everyone around the OC turns into yes-men (or women). What the OC says is always right, and again, always put into prominence. Not to say the OC has to have wrong opinions/suggestions, but they must never ascend to a state of prominence so evident that her/his word is what everyone pays attention to in every discussion. Unless of course, there's buildup and justification, but seriously, just assume that applies to everything written here.

The third kind of offender is where and given faults, flaws and mistakes (assuming they have any in the first place, which might be a stretch) are handwaved away, effectively returning the OC into the same position she/he was in before. Or to put it another way, a disregard of consequences or actions, be they good or bad. Many Silena fanfics, for instance, really downplay the fact that when all was said and done, she was a traitor. Yes, she redeemed herself. No, it does not make her past sins just vanish; it only eclipses them. They are still there, and they were pretty bad. (Then again, this could just be my personal opinion, but the general idea still stands. Anti-hero OCsc should be written keeping this in mind.)

b. The Black Hole for Canon Characterization/Proximity Stereotyping

Wherein being near the OC causes unspeakable things to happen to the Canon cast of PJO. For example, suppose the OCs' principal love interest is Percy. There is a huge ensuing possibility that whenever Percy is around her/him, he turns into a romantic sap (which is not really a Percy trait, or at least it wasn't in PJO). It is possible that Annabeth, being the principal rival love interest, turns into a screeching harpie who tries (and repeatedly fails) to kill, maim and/or embarrass the OC. Alternately, it is possible that Rachel undergoes this treatment while Annabeth suddenly realizes that oh hell, no, she never liked Percy that way and the OC is so mindblowing that she should be given a chance at having him fro herself.

Make sure the canon characterizations don't change when near the OC. This is important. It's one of the most glaring, obvious and annoying indicators of Sueism. Bad enough if the OC him/herelf is a wreck. It's worse when they turn beloved characters into wrecks with them.

End Notes: Only one more chapter for MS traits, I promise. :)