HP OC survey
May. 7th, 2005 07:44 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
author_by_night1. What age range are you in? (You may give your exact age).
A. 7-9
B. 10-12
C. 13-15
D. 16-18
E. 19-21
F. 22-24
G. 25-27
H. 28-32
I. 33-35
J. 36-38
K. 39-41
L. 42-44
M. 45 +
2. What do you think of original characters?
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
4. Do you write OC's?
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 01:15 pm (UTC)2. IMO they have great potential. In fact I prefer having pairings with OFC, as long as the OFC is convincing.
3. Haven't read any such story yeet, but IMO they're about the same as OFC.
4. I started, but didn't have time to continue. It's still a compilation of drabbles.
5. They are garbage. I either like the OFC or don't liek it. Depends on the attention the author has paid to it for instance. There's no recipe to identify a Mary Sue. Also, some of them can be quite charming.
6. Perhaps of the witch hunts and the flaming that are taking place.
7. I can't name any restrictions from the top of my head. I prefer het pairings, though.
8. I have too little information to answer this question. But I'd say if there isn't much information available, they still count as OFC.
9. You know, I don't really like that term. I simply avoid character that aren't convincing (i.e. too perfect, super powers with no end, behaving like a beloved cheerleader).
10. Ella by Rickfan37. Her stories are the only ones I've had time to read so far.
11. Sorry, can't answer this question.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 01:49 pm (UTC)2. As background characters, I think they're important and lots of fun. I like them.
3. Canon OC's are the best OCs. I love to see people's takes on the canon OCs.
4. Yes, yes I do. >.> I can let them get away from me, but I am proud of them.
5. They're bullcrap. A character being a Sue or not is entirely the reader's perception. I either like the character, or I don't.
6. No doubt because of all the silly Sues. That, and the level of competition in this fandom is astounding.
7. I don't like OC-centric stories, but I do like them if they have a healthy background part, or are even part of the main cast. They don't draw me into a fic, but they can make it that much better.
8. Is a rose by any other name still a rose? Yes, yes they are OCs, only you didn't make up the name or their basic description.
9. A Mary Sue is an extreme character who commands and takes over a story COMPLETELY, is a self-insert, has uber-powers, and generally steals the heart of a canon character. They are an extremem definition. Sue traits can exist even in canon characters, but ona whole, I think people cry "Sue" too easily. I think most OCs are either well or poorly written. You will either like them or not. The label of Sue is applied far too easily.
10.
11.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 04:18 pm (UTC)2. I really like them, especially if they are so well written that I forget that they aren't actually canon.
3. I actually prefer these to "regular" OC's, mainly because it's a way to develop a character that, although not particularly important to the plot of HP, could end up being very interesting.
4. I have written one, but, alas, she was what many consider to be a "Sue."
5. They are stupid. Either you like the OC or you don't. Yes, there tend to be Sue patterns, but setting standards for what and what doesn't make a Sue can severely hamper an aspiring author's confidence.
6. Probably because we've come across so many silly ones.
7. Not really, it just depends on how well written the OC is and if they are at all interesting to me.
8. I'd say so, as the character's personality and most or all of his or her personality is written by the fanfic author. Really, the only thing unorignal about the canon OC would be the name and some minor background.
9. An over-the-top, super-amazing, uber-powerful, usually female character who's greatness overcomes all. She's braver than Harry, funnier than Ron, smarter than Hermione, and wiser than Dumbledore. She is also the key to Voldemort's defeat.
10. Abby Loomis is my all time favorite, from Katinka's "Interwoven" at the Quill
11. Ted and Andromeda Tonks, as written by Fernwithy
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 04:26 pm (UTC)2. I was really tired of the way they were treated in the fandom, especially since I've read some really great ones.
3. I really like them--it saves you the trouble of thinking of a proper name, for one (;P), and it's nice to have canon, always. It's almost the same, except you have the teeniest bit of history about them. Writing them is like solving a mystery.
4. Yup!
5. I've never used one. I think that if you think you've written a Mary Sue, then it's probably a Mary Sue.
6. Because of ff.n.
7. No, not really. I'll tell you a secret... I've even read a good American one!
8. Hm... no. They just have a mystery about them, but they aren't original--after all, she knows her characters. She knew so much about Theodore Nott!
9. That is a difficult question, but mostly, I think it's a boring character. Binns--he's a boring teacher, but not a boring character. You always want to learn more about Binns. Why did he stay a ghost, anyway? What was his life like, now that he seems to never be happy?
10. Ooh, yay!
Max from Violet Azure's series (http://www.sugarquill.net/index.php?action=profile&id=524)
Need I mention the slew of OCs from AtE (http://www.sugarquill.net/read.php?storyid=619&chapno=1)?
Valeria Cruz from Points of No Return (http://www.sugarquill.net/read.php?storyid=496&chapno=1)
11. Sylvia Fawcett from Cheese (http://www.sugarquill.net/read.php?storyid=2454&chapno=1)
Rosmerta from Violet Azure's series (http://www.sugarquill.net/index.php?action=profile&id=524)
(and there are som many more!)
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 04:34 pm (UTC)2. Original characters can be great if written well.
3. Canon OCs are a big part of what I write. I think it's very interesting to take a character that you see or hear of only a little bit and put together context clues to build a picture of him or her. From your example of Andromeda Tonks, who we never actually see in canon, we know that she is one of three daughters of the old pure-blooded Black family, was Sirius's favorite cousin, married a Muggle-born wizard against her family's wishes, and has an outspoken Metamorphmagus daughter who is a member of the Order. You can infer a lot about her from these and other small details in the text, and it's interesting to see the different interpretations people come up with.
4. Yes--mostly canon OCs.
5. They have some small merit, but are largely useless. Litmus tests don't really address what truly makes a Sue noxious. See my answer to question 9.
6. The fandom is riddled with them and it is a pain to wade through 10,000 Mary Sues to get to a well-written story with good characterization.
7. I won't read an OC that I think is unrealistic or that the other characters behave towards unrealistically.
8. Yes and no. Going back to my answer to question 3, there are canon clues from which writers can infer character traits, personalities, and motivations to an extent, but sometimes there is very little to work with. You have some information (including the state of the canon universe itself--Hestia Jones is not likely to be a cat-woman from Mars from what we know of the HP-verse), but most of what you write is likely going to be original characterization.
9. A Mary Sue can be a lot of different things. Mostly, she (or he) is a character that shifts the focus of the story onto herself instead of on the main characters. Even before reaching the main plot, Sues can often be identified because they stick out like sore thumbs in the context of the canon universe and cause canon characters to behave in ways that they normally would not. She is stronger, smarter, faster, and all around better than all the other characters, can perform extraordinary feats with ease, and takes care of all the problems of the canon characters.
10. Remus Lupin's grandmother Sofia in The Secret Language of Cats (http://www.skyehawke.com/archive/story.php?no=5301) by Thistlerose
11. Can't think of one right off, though I'm sure I've read many.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 09:01 pm (UTC)2. I like them a lot, when they're done well. They can shed light on parts of the WW that a canon character might not see.
3. As long as the author doesn't directly contradict canon, I'm all for them.
4. Yup.
5. Cute, but not to be taken too seriously. Good writing can take a set of cliche'd characteristics and incorporate them into a well-rounded character.
6. I didn't know that the fandom was wary of them. Certainly not the circles I run in.
7. Not really.
8. Often they might as well be, but I don't think of them that way.
9. Ultimately, a Mary Sue is a character who makes canon's major story all about her. Violet eyes, cutesy nicknames, and godlike powers are warning signs, but they do not in and of themselves make or break a Mary Sue.
10. Here's a list of OCs in genfic who I like. (http://www.geocities.com/tapairuparauri/characters/ocgen.html) From that list, I'd point out Kit Ellsington (http://www.jcracek.com/fanfic/) as a character who has a lot of 'Suish' characteristics but who nevertheless isn't a Sue.
11. There are many, of course, but these are some of my favorites, in no particular order.
Andromeda Black from The Other Black Girl (http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Smelltastic/The_Other_Black_Girl/).
Auriga Sinistra from Lamentations of a Starry-Eyed Twit (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/1216603/1/).
Argus Filch from The Squib Series (http://www.fanfiction.net/~ozma), though his characterization there doesn't exactly line up with OotP.
And, of course, Uric Beaufolle from Uric the Oddball and the Wild Hunt (http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Ariana_Deralte/Uric_The_Oddball_And_The_Wild_Hunt/).
no subject
Date: 2005-05-07 11:07 pm (UTC)2) I like original characters. JKR has the monopoly on canon characters, and OCs are a way to extend her world. After all, there are only so many different versions of the Trio interacting to be written.
3) I think it's a great idea - again, there's so much potential, and they can be used to explain the actions of canon characters.
4) :P Lots.
5) They're funny, but the problem is that most of the characteristics on there taken singly are not indicative of Mary Sues. Even all together - one only has to look at someone like Abby Loomis, who would check off half the things on most litmus tests and is nicredibly non-Sueish.
6) Because there are just so many badly-done OCs that people get sick of them. Personally I feel canon Sues are a greater problem than OC Sues, since there are so many guidelines to canon characterisation.
7) Um...I don't tend to read stories where an OC is a main character so much. I prefer minor canon characters. But generally I'll read any OC as long as they are well-written.
8) It depends. Someone like Ernie Macmillan isn't, because we have a good grasp of his personality even though he doesn't appear often. Someone like Andromeda Tonks is, because we know almost nothing about her. There is scope for several different versions without contradicting canon.
9) A Mary Sue is a character who takes over the main storyline from the main characters - who contradicts canon, who is impossibly perfect, and who is always the center of attention. The golden rule of HP is that the main story is all about Harry. The major sign of Sueage is when this is no longer the case.
10) Abby Loomis from Interwoven, Bridget and her father from Moondance, Maud Moody from the Light and Darkness trilogy, Remus' colleagues in Shifts, all the AtE OCs...there are lots.
11) Eloise Midgen from AtE, everyone in Shifts, Filch from the Squib series (OOC now, but not then), Arabella Figg in Promises Unbroken (same caveat), Rosmerta in Violet Azure's stories, all the Hufflepuffs in Bones to Bones.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 01:43 am (UTC)2. What do you think of original characters? They are necessary to keep a story with plot real but if they are one of the more main characters they are only okay if they are done right and well.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? They are fine, but both the author and readers have to be willing to change their perception of these characters later if something more is mentioned about them.
4. Do you write OC's? Yes.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests? It's funny.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them? There are too many newer or less talented writers who don't write them well, and for the people who expect a real original character but instead discover that the character is an annoying "stealing the show" Mary Sue, they feel cheated and duped. Also, some writers, once discovering the horror of their own author self insertations, point and scream at anything that seems to be similar.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read? I don't like Mary Sues... I feel that Original characters should take a back seat to the canon characters, unless the story is solely about a lesser known charcter or an original character, but then it should work out realistically, the OC probably wouldn't meet up with Harry and become centered in Harry's adventures.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's? No.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"? Author Self Insertation. People live through characters to a certain extent, but with Mary Sues, the characters live out what the author wants to do, not the characters. It's difficult to point out to the authors, because they can live their fantasties without seeing that the person in the starring role is them, acting out what they want, acting they way they want to act, interacting the way they wish they could.
The best way to tell if something is a Mary Sue is if there is too much attention in the story being given to the character, the character possess a uniqueness more than would be realistic or even acceptible for a "minor" character in the HP world... just if the story centers too much on the character's past, thoughts, wants, what they do, just THEM. It's bad when no one cares about the character, but the story keeps centering on them, them, them.
A Good writer can actually do this, focus on a specific character and make it interesting. But when they do that, they make the Character a Character, with faults and problems to further the plot and the character's development, and focus on the character's wants and fears. People CARE about the character and want to learn more, knowing that anything could happen and tragedy could fall. Mary Sues defy the usual... paths; they make things boring because the character defies the reality of the rules of that fandom universe.
Even canon characters can turn into Mary Sues if the characters start acting differently, wanting things that the author actually wants. You catch it when the characters start falling out of character, moving outside of the fandom brackets.
10. and 11. Sorry, I can't give much here. I've read a lot of minor characters that did their job, but didn't really add anything to the story besides background and plot, and I have read a lot of original main characters who get slightly... into that realm of Mary Sue "focusing on the character's wants". For the most part, I think that people generally do Neville, McGonagall, Bellatrix and other canon characters like them well. I liked Velvet Ghost's Kalinda Blaise from "Harry Potter and the Phoenix's Flight".
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 02:04 am (UTC)H
2. What do you think of original characters? I think they're necessary in a lot of, but not all, cases. I willingly read them.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? I like reading people's different takes on the characters. It will be interesting to see if JKR fleshes them out at all, and see who is closest in their view, or who gets it "closest".
4. Do you write OC's? Yup
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests? It sucks. You can have the most beautiful character in the world with all the powers under the sun and not make her a MS. People use this test as a crutch.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom has become wary of them? Too many people writing poorly developed OCs has kind of spoiled it for those who write decent ones.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read? No.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's? If we've not seen them other than a name, then yeah, they are.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"? Any character in a fic that is not well-rounded, with a sense of purpose in being in the story for a reason other than authorial self-gratification.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written. LLa Guera's Rebecca Stanhope. Love it.
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written. Wolf Cat's professor Vector.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 02:29 am (UTC)2. I like them if the story isn't about them. I'm reading fanfic for the canon characters, not an OC. Sorry.
3. I think you can extrapolate, and if not, oh well. Until the next piece of canon comes out, you could be right.
4. Sometimes.
5. I have my own internal test. The story cannot be about my OC, my OC cannot do things I could get canon characters to do, and in a conflict with the canon characters, the canon character must win unless there is an overwhelming plot reason for the OC to win. In short, OCs require discipline, and must serve the story, not vice versa.
6. Beats me, man. I'm new here.
7. Only limits of quality, although I'd look at canon/OC romance with some suspicion. That would be a judgement call based on the author's other work, whether the plot sounds interesting, etc.
8. Not technically. I mean, sure, if you write an Andromeda Black fic you have to develop her, but you do have canon to go on--she's a Black, she's Sirius' favorite, she was disowned...
9. A Mary Sue is an authorial surrogate who bends the plot to suit her needs. It's not the fact that she's an OC that's bad, or even the fact that she looks and sounds like the author. I don't really think of a character as a Mary Sue unless a story's inductive logic breaks down around her--other characters act OOC around her, she's praised for doing stupid things, the story is about how smart and clever she is and how much the canon character(s) love her...
10. I'm sure there are more, but... Connor, the "alleged waiter" in Biblio's "Slow Burn," over in Stargate.
11. Any time anyone writes Kingsley Shacklebolt. Josan did a nice job with him in her Snape/Shacklebolt story that I've brainfarted on the title of. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 03:30 am (UTC)2. OCs make the world go round. They're completely necessary for writing thing that do not focus on Gryffindors in Harry's year besides, especially when it comes to period fic. They make me happy.
3. They're fun. They have the capability to really come to life on you, if you're lucky.
4. Yup. All the time. And I'm fond of them too.
5. Good for a laugh, but I don't know how far I'd trust it.
6. *shrugs* I think it had to do with the fandom moving onto LJ. FF.net is great for OCs. On LJ... LJ is where you go for smut, especially slashy smut. And people here are trying to be as unlike ff.net as we can, so thus we are wary of OCs.
7. Mmm, I take them on individual cases.
8. Yup. Doesn't mean anything bad, though. I like OCs.
9. An OC's evil twin.
10. Juliana Malfoy, Severine Snape, Dracaena Malfoy, Ercole Zabini (all by
11. Dylan Mulciber, Blaise Zabini, Theodore Nott (
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 03:31 am (UTC)I. 33-35
2. What do you think of original characters?
I think they can be very well done, though I prefer altering canon characters to suit my purposes.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
I love this.
4. Do you write OC's?
Occasionally. When it suits my purposes.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
I think they make writers insecure.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
Because there are too many OCs out there who jump into bed with the chars. There are too many exchange students from America and too many self-insertions.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
I will read believable ones.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
Yes.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
Any self-insertion that paints them as a hero. (In the Monkees fandom I write, I put myself in a story but they had to save me after I was crippled. I was not the hero. I also put myself in cameos occasionally, but other than tht one, never the main focus of the story.) Also any character that's unbelievable. Perfect characters with too many coincedences.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
Jamie in "Hogwarts Uncovered". The Wizard Family Services watchdogs in "A YEar like no Other". Others.
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
Petunia in "The Boy" and "The Nephew". Others in that vein.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 03:43 am (UTC)K. 39-41
(*is amused that over 45 is its own category but everything from 7 up was carefully broken down*)
2. What do you think of original characters?
Sometimes they're good and sometimes they suck, but if you want to write fic that isn't just about the place and time and side of things your canon covers, they're absolutely necessary.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
It's often necessary and can be done either well or badly.
4. Do you write OC's?
As I am not a Gryffindor fan and prefer to write historical fic generally...yes, of course.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
They're funny, but of limited usefulness when writing outside of the areas canon covers.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
Why does every fandom become wary of them? There are a lot of them that suck.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
I won't read OCs written by people who clearly don't understand the era they're writing in. As someone who lived through the MWPP era and is around the age that they would be if they had lived, I find fics in this era that assume people got on the same way they do now to be really annoying.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
If you have to make up everything about the character but the name, then it's your character, not JKR's, isn't it?
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
A really, really obnoxious OC who is anachronistic, out of place, clearly an idealised self-insert, and warps the canonical universe around herself or himself, usually but not always the love interest or child of a canon character.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
I think
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 04:30 am (UTC)D. 17
2. What do you think of original characters?
Like them, sometimes love em, and they can be used to explore some really intersting aspects of the Wizarding World and canon.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written?
Go for it, just do it well.
4. Do you write OC's?
Don't write at all.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
They don't work that well, miss the fundemental characterisitic of a Mary Sue, that she serves no purpose, twists canon for no reason, and
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
Sues.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
Not really.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
Yes, cause the author is filling in blanks.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
See answer to litmus test question.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
AtE's Mike, Rose and Adam, Gwen from HQoW, Diane from Perfect World, Bludger from Test of Time, other's I can't remember at the moment
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
Nick in a Fair Fellowship of Squires
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 09:11 am (UTC)1. What age range are you in? (You may give your exact age).
K. 39-41
2. What do you think of original characters?
When they are done well, they add to the story. When they are done poorly, they detract. It all depends on the writing. But then the best canon characters can suffer in a poorly construed, grammatically challenged work.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
Same as with any characters. The writing has to be tight, concise and just plain good.
4. Do you write OC's?
Yes.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
I'm not even sure what they are.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
I see a lot of shippers who are intolerant of anything but their particular ship. OCs are easy targets.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
I don't like perfect characters, OCs or canon. I'll start anything, I'll finish the good stuff.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
I think the term itself is an oxymoron. If a person is mentioned in canon, they cannot be in OC.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
A Mary Sue is a self-insertion of the writer into the actual plot. Usually it is applied to OCs, but in dealing with the Harry Potter genre, I seen such an influx of Hermione!Sue, Harry!Stu, and whenever canon characters you want to name. Or as I like to think of it, "Mary Sues... not just for breakfast or OCs anymore." They're the sign of a new writer or a lazy writer regardless of what name they carry.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
Go to Occlumency at www.sycophanthex.com. Almost everything there is well-written. Check my username and then click on favorite stories and you'll find my complete list. Well, my complete list of that site.
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
N/A to me.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 05:20 pm (UTC)C, getting near D
2. What do you think of original characters?
It depends on how they're written. Some people can write OCs, and not have them become Mary Sues. Others...just can't. If they're not Mary Sues, then I don't have a problem with them.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written?
I think the same thing for them as for normal OCs: they're fine as long as they don't become Mary Sues.
4.Do you write OC's?
I usually try not to; It takes me too long to come up with a character XD
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
I'm not quite sure what they are =]
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
Probably because a lot of ones that were really badly written. We're back to the Mary Sues again.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
If the story is completely about an OC, I probably wouldn't read it. I'm sort of wary of canon characters paired with OCs as well.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
They aren't 'original' to you, but you fill in all of the blanks about their life, personality, ect. So my answer is both yes and no.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
A badly written OC. They usually have no flaws and have more talents than is realistic. In most stories they are some kind of love interest to one of the main character.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
At the Sugarquill (sugarquill.net), Ainsley in ivy & Gracie's "Where the Light is)
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
N/A
no subject
Date: 2005-05-08 05:26 pm (UTC)H. 28-32
2. What do you think of original characters?
Love them. I prefer them, in fact. Endless trio-fics can get to be a bit dull.
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
Perfectly OK. Often essential, in fact.
4. Do you write OC's?
I've written several fics in which the main character is an OC.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
The points made in the tests seem to be just common sense.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
They have reason to be wary. Though I think the general standard has improved. It's ages since I've seen a really stinking MS.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
Not really.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
Yes and no. And OC is entirely the invention of the author. But even the faintest wisp of information about a CC tells you something about the person and provides a framework one should stick to in order to stay in canon. For example, I've done quite a bit with Miss S Fawcett and her Hufflepuff friends, Stebbins and Summers. It's probably fair to say she's smart (Ravenclaw) but tends to be impulsive and have little respect for rules (hence the beard in GOF.)
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
Shall I be cynical and say "an OC you don't like?" :-)
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
The unamed narrator in "So you want to go to Hogwarts."
Most of the characters in "Love on a Quidditch Pitch"
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
no subject
Date: 2005-05-09 04:33 pm (UTC)H. 28-32
2. What do you think of original characters?
I like them if they´re well-written, although it can be confusing if writers introduce too many at once (I have a bad habit of skim-reading fic.)
3. What do you think of "canon oc's" being written? (Hestia Jones, Dorcas Meadowes, Andromeda Tonks... anyone who has been mentioned in the books, but has not appeared often enough to get a good sense of the character - or has not appeared at all).
Good stuff. I love stories that flesh out minor characters.
4. Do you write OC's?
Yes.
5. What do you think of Mary Sue Litmus Tests?
Ugh, ugh, ugh. Most useless "writing tools" ever. They give the impression that the character is a static collection of traits, rather than a dynamic whole, and moreover, they seem geared to eliminate any trait that might make the character remotely interesting.
6. Why do you think the HP fandom (which actually used to be quite open to OC's) has become wary of them?
I don´t know, not having been involved with the HP fandom long enough.
7. Do you have any limits as to what sort of OC you'll read?
Well, I usually won´t read ones that are badly written, but otherwise, not really.
8. Are "canon oc's" really OC's?
Yes. You have to do the same amount of character-building work in either case.
9. What is a "Mary Sue"?
Any female OC or characterization of a female canon character that a reviewer happens to dislike. If there is a more objective definition, I haven´t worked out what it is.
10. If applicable, list some OC's you have found well written.
Hmm ... Jess Pallas´ Reynard Lupin, in "Oblivious," comes to mind.
11. If applicable, list some "canon OC's" you felt were well written.
Cassius Scrimgeour, in SnorkackCatcher´s "Nymphadora Tonks and the Liquor of Jacmel"; La Reine Noire´s Dorcas Meadowes in "Be All My Secrets Remembered."