In your opinion: Are self insert characters poor writing?

My personal issue with self-insert characters is when they are written to be flawless Mary Sue types. There is also the issue that if you dislike the character, the author takes it as a personal attack.

I also find it far more interesting when authors write and humanize characters who are nothing like them.

Used to do that but not anymore. Because I get accused of things my characters say that I actually believe in it.

AngHell Dela Blackpill has no self insert characters. But with that said, I already got accused by two separate people if one of the incels is my self insert.

Yes and no. In fan fiction, those characters are generally considered bad because they read like they were written by thirteen year old girls and aren't really enjoyable to adult audiences. If they don't read as young, they're Mary Sue's.

But if the character is written like a person with room to grow, it doesn't matter if there are elements of yourself in it. A lot of actors in Hollywood write roles for themselves all the time.

honestly i think its kind of impossible to not accidentally slip traits related to yourself, people you know or those who you've observed or interacted with because life influences your writing and its undeniable fact. But i dont see anything wrong with it either bacause to me it simply means that the writer and their writing has human elements and is able to take them and use them in a way their readers may be able to relate to. Like its not some great evil its just consequential to life and the creayive process (at least imo)

As for 'self insert' characters being poorly revieved and it upsetting an author, I've watched that happen simply with characters an author/writer/etc is just strongly attached to whether its their 'darling' or just an oc they've had for a long time. In those cases I think its more on the writer to kind of separate themselves or how their perceived from the work they make or just observe why it may cut deep.

With 'mary sues' (which im suprised the term still continues to live on) i dont really mind if the overall piece is equally exaggerated and grandiose or the character themself is played as a gag. Like maybe its coz i kind feel like theres already a lot of mainstream characters who could be labeled as such so its hard for me to take it seriously but if a work is fun to read then thats kinda all that matters to me ¯⁠\⁠⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠⁠/⁠¯

i think i could safely say that theres a handful of personal traits or quirks from myself or others that have fallen into my characters as I've been writing them but so long as theyre "good" in the sense of well written or portrayed in a way i can be satisfied with and the readers like them or feel anything towards them and their stories thats all i can hope for

For Wild Nights, Hot and Crazy Days it's all about self-insertion because of the true nature of the story, and I can assure you, the MC (me) is flawed and portrayed as such, including a suicide attempt. Every character in the story is a real person, and every event happened.

For Finding Daecon's Way, about the only things my MC Daecon shares with me are his love of vehicles and his love of drawing. Other than that, he's into dancing, modern pop music, wearing bright colours, and has a disdain for things like hiking, hunting, fishing, etc. This is all pretty much the exact opposite of me. Heck, even the vehicles Daecon likes (modern European cars) are different from the ones I like (vintage American cars)

This is a tough one. To echo @NickRowler 's comment, I used to lean on self-insert characters, but they ended up being idealized, "Mary Sue" creatures that everyone was in love with, friends with, and had no discernible flaws. Nowadays, I much prefer making every character a little bit like me, and a little bit not like me, flaws and all. For Apparent Secrets, the roommates all have traits I have (personality-wise), and some that I lack.

It might just be "writing characters", but I'm big on sprinkling in personal likes/dislikes, traits, mannerisms, and values to each of my characters. Even the villains have a little hint of "Skidiggy-ness" to them, but not so much as to make any one character a "self insert." As an author, I feel like it's my job to give each character a voice, and it's no coincidence that each voice might sound a little bit like me.

If it's interesting, I don't really mind one way or another, as an audience in ways.

OSP's video on Mary Sues goes over the several iteration of 'archetype'. And there's been stories that's solely to have fun with that trope making it forefront.

In the end though, idk. I mean, if someone else is writing, and they are writing a story I don't like. Like Sword Art Online, or Twilight. If they're having fun with it, for the most part, let them have fun. Let's not get into the age gap, dubious consent and all that mess of debates.

Like, if a person is writing 'cringy' stories where their OC is getting a ton of affection and feel very loved. I'm just glad and happy for them they are enjoying their writing. I can't really blame them in ways, as we all wants to be love. And writing such things to feel such things, I think is quite natural as 'writers' are in their most natural form. Writing to write artistically, I think is a bit different and not as raw. Though ofc, most professional writings, aren't raw in this mannerism.

My problem with stories like Sword Art Online is mostly, I don't understand why everyone falls in love with Kirito or Bella. He's a blank slate for the audience to project themselves through, this is very very obvious in the light novel which I had the joy of reading a bit to see what it's actually like before criticising without reading. When you get older, love is a 'real thing'. So seeing characters fall in love so forcefully, easily, and remains in love, is too cringy to me.

But, to be fair. That is the 'fairytale' to younger audiences. They don't understand what 'love' is in that mannerism, they are in love with the idea of love. And just want someone to love them and to be able to love someone else, rather than loving the actual person and having genuine connections.

And I've read some critique about Naruto and Hinata love story being too forceful. So it's quite subjective in the end. Though I think in least, most can say, Naruto and Hinata, in least their story had development of friendships with eventually turned to a romantic relationship. That's nice to see.

My same issue is with Twilight, Bella is a blank slate of a character with little personality, obviously for the audience to project themselves through. Rarely are guys reading Twilight for the plot, ('cause it's in first person), it's audience is designated for YA females. Though, Meyer didn't set out to do that specifically, she just earnestly believes in her writing and wrote that story. And perceived through her eyes, the whole imprinting on a literal baby as Jacob falls on his knees is, not as 'cringy'.

Respect to Meyer though since she, really really believes in her art, she doesn't back down on it at all. She's a 'good' writer, she just chooses to write things that I'm not the audience it's for.

Twilight and SAO, to me, aren't really. Entertaining, or enjoying to go through. I'm still mostly glad for people whom do enjoy it or written it though.

These stories are very off putting to me since it feels like, the characters have little autonomy or 'soul'. It's just the writer puppeteer them through strings. Which I mean, it's one way to write things. And people do truly enjoy such works unironically.

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

I just use myself in my internet persona for annoucement reasons and intermissions and special chapters.
besides that I do not post myself interacting in the main story or any canon episode.

Edit: Also I agree that every character we create will have a personal trait of ours, I think that the best way to make a character is to make them with, something you know about yourself, something you like about yourself, something you hate, what you'd like to be like, and how you'd like a friend to be like

I was literally just thinking about this today: I was watching an old review video where the reviewer was chastising fans of the author's work who call one of their characters a "self-insert", saying it was, and I quote, an "asshole-y" thing to say. ^^;

And I get what they meant, but on the other hand...there's nothing inherently wrong with a character being a self-insert. In and of itself it's not an insult and shouldn't be treated as one. =/
It's like using the word "fanfiction" as an insult (which is so normalized, even fanfic writers themselves say it)-- you're essentially just declaring that the "cringe" habits of amateur writers are naturally inferior, and couldn't possibly be used skillfully in any context.

But no one would have an issue with a self-insert who was, for example, a narrator speaking harshly but lovingly about the main characters as they journey through the story. Or a side character who gives the characters advice about a topic the author is familiar with. Or the main character themselves, embodying the author at an earlier point in their life, that they can use to reflect on their past actions and how they've grown and changed since they were younger.
In any of ^those cases, the author could hop on social media and outright admit "yeah, that character is totally me" and fans would probably just find it cute and endearing. There's nothing wrong with putting yourself in a fictional story, and when it's done well, no one thinks twice about it.

The problem arises when you twist the story around that fictional version of yourself, flattening it into an angsty edge-fest that punishes you indefinitely to force the audience to feel bad for you, or a power fantasy that rewards you indefinitely to force the audience to admire you.
But...a character doesn't have to resemble the author for that to happen. ^^; Pet characters exist, and there are entire genres (* cough* harem anime *cough *) where it's common practice to spotlight main characters in this way-- not necessarily because the author is trying to live vicariously through them, but because that's what viewers expect.

Any writer who's immature enough to think "this character HAS to get special treatment because they're ME" would probably end up treating their favorite non-self-insert character the same way, and probably already is, if you look closely at their writing.
The true pitfall isn't the desire to represent oneself in a story, it's the desire to "protect" characters that one is personally invested in, or otherwise prohibit them from growing to the point of damaging the story.

...In conclusion, my answer is "no." ^^

Self inserted characters are great writing for me.
I want to read stories which feel real and I want to have the
feeling that the writer shares something intimate with me and
I feel that the most when it´s a self inserted character.

My favourite writer when I was growing up was Charles Bukowski.
You either knew that the stories are autobiographic or he used his
character which he called Henry Chinaski which was a self inserted
character. All other main characters were self inserted too. I felt
real, ugly and highly entertaining in comparison to everything that
I read before and after

The point of calling it poor writing is you are just writing how you would act. You aren't putting your story into the skin of people not like you, making you think different. I don't find it bad when you are first starting out, as it gives you a way to practice your craft and still tell stories. Truthfully, when you first start you don't really know how to write others much less yourself. So why try to make it hard on yourself with the extra burden of writing story and personalities/characters. You can just work on one. As you become a professional writer (whether paid or not), you should have grown out of that by then. The characters should be what makes the story interesting, which isn't most likely you. You are a artist/writer, not a space ranger or spy.