I think one of the more dreaded accusations that can be leveled against a webcomic character is that of being a Mary Sue. For the minute portion of my readership who is unfamiliar with the term, Mary Sues are contrived characters borne of fanfiction that are better than the people around them, more beautiful than pretty much everyone else, and often wins the hearts of those around her, or at the very least grudging respect of antagonists*. While the term originated in Star Trek fanfiction, it has since crept through the literary genre until any character could find the label of Mary Sue turned against them.

This is perhaps a tad unfair, especially when Mary Sue accusations are leveled against non-fanfiction protagonists. Indeed, in some ways accusations of Mary Sueism smacks of sexism. One example lies in the Harry Potter character of Hermione Granger, who has been declared by some to be a Mary Sue due to her talents as an excellent student and general know-it-all (though it may be more accurate to portray Hermione as a literary device which allowed J.K. Rowling to present information dumps to both the reader and to Hermione’s friends). Think for a moment if Ron Weasley had been the “smart one” of the trio; would accusations of Mary Sue (or Marty Stu for the more rare male incarnation) have been put forward? Or would it be considered a literary tradition that comes close to cliché, but which is still long accepted?

This inversion is what leads me to believe Mary Sueism to be an inherently sexist belief. The characters most often accused of being Mary Sues are strong female protagonists; indeed, the mere fact that a female protagonist is as skilled as her male counterparts can result in a knee-jerk declaration that the character is a Mary Sue. If the female character ends up being better than her male counterparts, then accusations of Sueism climb exponentially, especially if this strong female character ends up being at all attractive or charismatic.

It’s easy in the webcomic field to find characters who, with a cursory glance, could be accused of being Mary Sues. These female protagonists often are the stars of their comics, are often drawn as attractive and talented, and even hold a number of qualities that the Mary Sue genre has come to embrace. The question of which accusations are legit and which are sexist in nature become more difficult until you apply a simple gender inversion test; often if the female protagonist was male, the former Mary Sue is transformed into a “traditional” male protagonist.

An excellent example of this lies with the character of Agatha Clay from Girl Genius. With a cursory glance she parallels the traditions of Mary Sueism: she is a powerful Spark (which is sort of a “technological wizard” and “mad scientist” combined), she’s unknowingly the daughter of a famous and powerful Spark, she wins the affection of her chief antagonist’s son, she has a number of tremendously colorful friends/allies, and naturally enough she’s a buxom blonde lady who is quite attractive. But what happens when you shift the genders?

If “Agatha” were “Arthur” Clay, then the fact that “he” is a powerful Spark (yet not the most powerful Spark) becomes merely a literary tradition, especially when you consider Arthur is untrained. His mysterious past becomes something he needs to learn about, and his parentage a possible burden because of the difficulty in living up to the legend of such heroic parents.

Let’s subvert the story a bit more and switch Gil Wulfenbach to Jillian Wulfenbach. Funny enough, Jillian may be accused of being a Mary Sue in this inversion of the genders (and why do I somehow see the Foglios laughing when they hear about this article and planning their next little “short” story along this theme? Nah… just my imagination), but in many ways Jillian would fit in the Evil Overlords list of things to avoid: the beautiful and talented daughter of the Overlord who switches sides. Arthur Clay would fit into literary traditions at this point rather than under the dark cloud of Mary Sueism.

So, why does Agatha get labeled as a Mary Sue when Arthur would not? I believe part of it lies with the fact that Agatha is better than most men in her ability as a Spark. What would, with a male character, be considered a natural part of storytelling tradition gets twisted through the inherent sexist nature of the Mary Sue label. A strong female character will end up getting the short end of the stick if they prove themselves to be better than most men, despite the fact that male protagonists get away with this all the time.

Other examples also exist. Anne Onymous from The Wotch is another favorite target of Mary Sue accusations. Part of this lies with the fact that the author chose Anne Onymous as her internet handle, and so enjoyed the play on words she used it as a character name as well. Add in the fact that author-Anne initially used the character avatar as her own visage (no doubt out of laziness of not wanting to create a whole new character to represent herself) and these accusations of authorial insertion and Mary Sueism seem justified. Again, an inversion of genders (perhaps ironic in this case considering how often genders get swapped in The Wotch) shows that the character is less Mary Sue and more a traditional protagonist.

Andrew Onymous would be a young inexperienced but powerful wizard with potent enemies lurking in the background and testing the young wizard. His beautiful comrades are often turned into guys because Andrew is a bit annoyed with them for some of their at-times catty comments about the male gender… so he switched them just to show them what it’s like to be a guy. While Robyn’s not too comfortable with being a guy, Jasmine has grown to enjoy being Sam. And we see another example of how looking at a character as a male turns a Mary Sue into just another literary tradition.

I’d be remiss in my critical duties if I failed to mention Chelsea Chattan of Clan of the Cats, especially in light of recent developments with the epic Dracula storyline. Chelsea is not only a powerful witch (if one suffering under a curse that will eventually result in her going mad and either killing herself or becoming a bloodthirsty killer) but according to recent events, she may also be the embodiment of an actual Goddess. Seeing that Chelsea learned this while in Hell due to Dracula’s manipulations… and also that the first vampire, Lilith, has been manipulating events to bring about Dracula’s final destruction, and I’m left to wonder of the validity of these revelations of godhood.

Switching genders again shows a powerful protagonist who is fighting hard against forces that are greater than himself. Much like Harry Potter, Charles Chattan is facing a foe that he cannot defeat alone. (Indeed, it seems very likely that it’s Chelsea’s brother-in-law Paul who will strike the final blow to cut down Dracula, having created a stake out of something he truly believes in. For that matter, as Chelsea’s under Dracula’s control at the moment, it’s likely that her family will help her remember who she is, and fight off Dracula’s control. Hmm, being reliant on others… is that a Mary Sue trait?)

This is not to say that there aren’t actual Mary Sue characters in webcomics. MMOB: Minding My Own Business had a character who (while male) quickly embraced the traits of Mary Sueism to a degree where even though male, the character moved beyond acceptable male protagonist traits and into the realm of Mary Sueism. I’m sorry, but anyone who kicks the ass of a kickboxer with no martial arts training at all (and not by ambushing the guy) and who has the affection of a half dozen female characters, (as well as for other reasons I commented on earlier) has moved past the line of a badass character and into full-blown Mary Sueism.

Indeed, ironically enough MMOB has a male protagonist who, upon being female, becomes even more of a Mary Sue than before… and this is another sign of the sexist nature of the Mary Sue label. Reidar is bad enough as is. So then, why does turning Reidar female make things worse?

Mary Sueism is a problem with character writing. It is a corruption of decent storytelling, and threatens to transform a character from something sympathetic into a mere caricature. A strong protagonist isn’t a Mary Sue, whether male or female. Rather, Mary Sues are characters who rely on specific character traits and cliché plot points to create a cheap sense of sympathy for the character, often to compensate for shoddy writing skills. In the hands of a skilled writer, these very traits that are the core of a Mary Sue can be utilized in creating a three-dimensional protagonist with a story that captivates and enthralls most readers. It doesn’t matter if the character is male or female.

For this is the problem with the Mary Sue label. Gender matters. The mere fact that you can change a character’s gender and have her seem acceptable shows the inherent sexism within this characterization type. Strong women are not Mary Sues. To accuse them of being so not only is a slight against women, but against good storytelling.

* Debate over the exact definition of “Mary Sue” differs from person to person. Some believe that Mary Sues need to be authorial insertions; while others feel the character type needs a far more precise definition. Still, for a quick and dirty definition of Mary Sue, mine will work. My thanks to the Wikipedia and TV Tropes definition of Mary Sue, which possess fairly concise definitions of Sueism.