What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to Main/PuritySue

Ju
topic
06:18:00 PM Feb 17th 2011
edited by FreeRadical
One great way to fix a Purity Sue = make her a geek adorkable. Another way? Give her a Berserk Button.
Orihime
topic
05:25:04 AM Jan 17th 2011
The Natter. Oh GOD, the natter. And the pure hate for Lalah masked under all the Sue accusations. Can we re-write this into something more... reasonable and less "Boo hiss! Lalah Sue!"?

  • Lalah Sune from Mobile Suit Gundam 0079. Not only can she do no wrong, she's the ultimate love interest for the main protagonist and antagonist where after 14 years, it still boils down to her love. Every man that encounters her either becomes jealous of her position or gazes at her with awe. She has no flaws except for being too good. She even floats and glows. More than once. She had a Too Good For This Sinful World death...sorta.
    • Lalah's Expy Lacus Clyne from Gundam SEED and Gundam SEED Destiny can be considered this as well. Unlike the other main characters, she doesn't have any crippling character flaws, is always right in whatever she does and ends up as the hero's love interest at the end of the first series. She becomes the de facto ruler of the Earth Sphere at the end of the second.
    • As a side note/thought, it's pretty easy to be right when you're facing off against a pair of genocidal psychos and an Omnicidal Maniac. Lacus' clout comes only partially from her percieved rightness; a lot of it is due to having a vast amount of money and cashing in on her dad's political reputation. She's also quite likeable. Your Mileage May Vary vastly on her.
    • What makes Lacus different from Lalah is that she is able to fight and make decisions wisely in aiding the heroes while Lalah merely acts all innocent while aiding the antagonists only because of the Rescue Romance. To sum it up, Lalah is much more of a Mary Sue than Lacus.
    • Except you guys are forgetting about a lot of Lalah's characterization. Lalah used to be a child prostitute, so she's definitely not physically pure. If anything, it's supposed to be obvious from the get-go that something is very wrong with her mentally. And, unlike Lacus, Lalah has actually shown vulnerability and is capable of dying, while Lacus appears to just be too damn good to die (a God-Mode Sue??). To sum it up, Lacus is easily more of a purity sue than Lalah and quite possibly the most triumphant example for Gundam.
    • Being a virgin is not what makes a Purity Sue. As stated above in the trope description, a Purity Sue is defined by every character being fascinated with the Purity Sue to a ridiculous extent. Where her qualities become near perfect and are portrayed as ideal to follow. Every character that has interacted with Lalah Sune has gaped at her in awe and commented on how otherworldly she is. She is also praised for being the perfect Newtype, and despite Amuro's protests it is emphasized that Lalah is correct in her thinking. While Amuro is casted as fighting for no cause. And the fascination with her does not stop with Amuro and Char after fourteen years. And dying does not stop a character from qualifying for this trope. As it leads others to comment on how she was too good for this world. Thus she more than qualifies for this trope, at least in TV Series canon.
    • Nobody was arguing that Lalah didn't qualify(because she most certainly does), just that some might consider her to not be as much of one as Lacus. There's a fine line between someone who is allowed to basically rule the Earth unhindered (and this is considered to be a good thing) and someone who was well-liked by all and occasionally shown to sparkle...and melt. Let's just settle this by saying: Your Mileage May Vary . A lot.

fragmentaryblue
11:25:36 AM Feb 22nd 2011
The example of Lalah Sune has now been condensed into a more neat format. I would also like to add that it is possible to adore Lalah despite her qualifying as a Purity Sue. Since Purity Sues are rather useful in media aimed at children.
72.73.90.248
topic
08:49:52 PM Nov 14th 2010
I think Lyner from Ar Tonelico is more of a parody. I have heard rumors that the creators of AT made it as a joke about the entire dating sim genre and have Lyner be 'this' close to being a pervert if he had the brains to understand what everyone was talking about and taking advantage the entire 'Jam it in!' aspect of the game. The other characters (especialy the girls) are either trying to make Lyner understand that they want to jump his bones or mock him for being perverted. This all goes utterly over Lyner's head and he just wants to help people. The sad thing is, that this also went over the FAN'S heads and they took everything straight and missed the joke. So the creators gave up and are playing it straight in AT 2 and AT 3.
Orihime
05:24:25 AM Jan 17th 2011
edited by Orihime
I see. If she doesn't belong there, the example should be pulled out, or even put here as a whole for discussion...
Reflections
topic
04:19:10 AM Jul 30th 2010
I do not think that Fred (in the Angel example) qualifies. My memory here is a little fuzzy, but: She does have a flaw for the first cluster of episodes she appears in (she was insane), Cordelia seemed to dislike her, only Wes and Gunn have romantic tension with her, and if memory serves part of the sixth episode was about getting her to actually go outside (so it would make sense for the characters to be encouraging). I may be wrong; I just wanted to voice my concerns.
snapegirl
topic
11:45:34 AM Jul 27th 2010
edited by snapegirl
Need some help with the Sues. I had been erasing Bella Swan on the Anti-Sue page for a while because I don't think "a character I hate" is the definition of Anti-Sue. I think she can be considered a Purity Sue and/or a Mary Sue one. So the question is can a character be various types of Sues at the same time? Because I got the feeling we whether place her on all the Sues pages or create a brand new Sue term for her. Cleolinda called her a Naked Sue if you want to hear suggestions.
67.166.89.254
04:06:09 PM Oct 18th 2010
Yes... Bella should be on the Anti-Sue page though. She has all these faults, yet people in the books shovel praises on her. However, I haven't read the book to give even a small hint of what she should be.
Orihime
05:28:08 AM Nov 13th 2010
edited by Orihime
Misfire! Delete, delete delete!
Blunderbuss
topic
11:04:45 AM Jul 11th 2010
edited by Blunderbuss
Hey, Orihime. I thought I would remove your rebuttal and post it here so it can be, well, discussed. People have been cracking down on Natter on the main page, so it'd be better to do it here until we alter the Rx J example.

Okay, you're right in the fact that his father and the nobles look down on him for being so pure, but that just makes his pureness just all the more sueish. After being raised in that sort of environment, there is no reason why Romeo should be so kind and selfless when no one else around him is. He doesn't see his mother that much, so she can't be his sole influence. As for being exiled to the mines, it's even worse; he's given an even greater chance to shine by treating his wards with utmost respect, eating/working with them, crying over Petruccio's death, carrying on his siblings wishes, etc. Sues, especially purity sues, warp the story and narrative so they come out shining like roses. There is no in-story reason for Romeo to be so utterly shining white, and yet he just is. That is what a purity sue is, right?
brandygang
09:31:23 PM Jul 11th 2010
Azmaria needs to be addressed here, because I believe she qualifies for a mention on the trope page.

I'm not an Azmaria basher, and she's actually one of my favorite characters from CC. (2nd only to Joshua) But regardless, she fits the description of purity sue because the amount of screen time she received wasn't proportional to the plot. And the character development she received, wasn't consistent with the actually amount of character flaws she had. (To develop) Due to this, some would perceive her as purity sue material. Considering Mary Magdalene was on here, how much more of a sue does Azmaria need to be if your going to allow someone who was barely developed at all in one flashback episode/arc?

The same applies for Koko from Zatch Bell, a character I love to the point where I write fan-fiction about. Me adding her there wasn't an attack or insult on her character, it was just offering the viewpoint she had very little flaws. And has anyone else added her before I did, I wouldn't have been offended so long as she actually fit the trope. Perhaps I need to remind someone that Tropes Are Not Bad?
Blunderbuss
02:56:53 AM Jul 18th 2010
I agree about Azmaria. I like her, sure, but you can be a Purity Sue while still being likeable. Probably her biggest Sue quality is the fact that everyone suffers from being near her, it's so tragic, she's doomed to either push everyone away or see them suffer because of her! Woe! Not to mention her only 'flaws' are being adorably clumsy, timid, etc. Mary was at least deconstructed, but Azmaria was played totally straight. I'd say you should put her on there.
Iaculus
11:41:07 AM Jul 18th 2010
Sounds more like a Sympathetic Sue to me.
Orihime
05:29:33 AM Nov 13th 2010
edited by Orihime
Ouch, I never checked this part. Sorry about that!

The main reason why I'm not sure, though? It's because the whole settlement of the Romeo X Juliuet series is too different from the original play, thus Character Derailment goes for everyone. Romeo was Hot-Blooded and Ladykiller in Love in the original while he was made Thewhite Prince, yeah, but there's also Mercutio The Snark Knight Hot-Blooded who becomes a Smug Snake and goes mad from the revelation , Juliet goes from a Distressed Damsel who tries to be a Plucky Girl Rebellious Princess and pays dearly for it towards a Weak, but Skilled Lady of War. . . It's less about the Sueness and more about the context, in which 'everyone is changed.

So even when there is some basis for the "Romeo is a Purity Sue" case, IMHO it's simply not strong enough, and it may even have some inklings of "He's a Stu because I don't like him" - and while I may be wrong on YOUR case, many of the Mary Sue examples give me HUGE vibes of "character I HATE = instant Mary Sue".
Blunderbuss
09:55:03 AM Dec 6th 2010
While I agree that goddamn everyone from the play has been cast as an utterly different person, I disagree with your point for two reasons; one, all of the altered characters are still products of their environment, and two, they all still have their own flaws.

Take Juliet, for example. She's 180 degrees from who she was in the play, but she comes across as a real person. She doesn't react well to the news of her heritage, she makes bad choices, she has her moments of doubt/grief/stupidity/irresponsibility/etc and overall actually acts like a figure from a tragedy.

Romeo, like I've said, has no real flaws that punish him, is completely at odds with the people who raised him, and comes across as just the ideal boyfriend. If they made attempts to justify/explain his personality and let him suffer and screw up just as much as Juliet did, then there'd be no problem.

As for me calling him a Stu for not liking him, that's not true in my case. I feel nothing about him because he's utterly forgettable; if anything, I'm annoyed that they ruined the chance to make an actual romance by making one person so utterly flat. I agree that heaps of people make the 'character I hate' = Mary Sue mistake.
TheTamborineMan
topic
07:25:44 AM Apr 8th 2010
Cut a bullet from the Tokyo Mew Mew section, since it boiled down too, "how dare people disagree about this"
macroscopic
topic
03:31:02 AM Mar 4th 2010
edited by macroscopic
Removed the soft-split between canon and non-canon examples. We have more canon examples listed, and it reads easier with fanfiction in a folder with everything else. Just looked at the other -Sue tropes and I can see what this was going for. I'm leaving my change, but only because there aren't enough fanfic examples to split into categories.
back to Main/PuritySue

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy