All of the elitists are against what they have emblazoned with the title, 'self-inserts'.
There is another thing called 'wish fulfillment,' which I can understand being wrong. I mean, you put yourself into the story, making yourself perfect, and beautiful, and powerful, and desirable, and enviable, and the focal point of everyone's attention, regardless of who else may be with you, and how intertwined this person may be in the life and plot of anyone else.
That is simply bad story writing, but kept to yourself, it can be a fun release. Shoot, according to my brother, it'd be awesome, anyway. He loves reading stuff like that.
Really, I often times would rather read about a character who is confident and under control, rather than a bumbling moron who stumbles his way through the story, winning only by luck and last-minute plans.
So like I was saying about-- what was I talking about? Oh, yeah; self-insertion.
So your character looks like you, and has your personality; how is that a problem? Somewhere in the world, a book has been written wherein the protagonist looks like you. Being against self-insertion is one of the most idiotic, ignorant, pontificating things I can think of. Which is saying a lot, considering how dumb everyone on earth is.
"Oh, look at me! I hate people who insert themselves into my story!"
Me: Why?
Him: . . . because, obviously, it's a poor writing technique.
Me: How?
Him: . Everyone knows you shouldn't insert yourself into your stor--
Me: Why not?
Him: BECAUSE! It's just not--
Me: If you base your main character off of yourself, then you are writing a personality that you know very well, thus making your writing even better. So how can it be poor technique to insert yourself into your story?
Him: . . . . WHAT'S THAT OVER THERE! *yoink!*
Me: What? Huh? HEY! Where'd you go!
Case closed.
I win.
You lose.
Because I'm awesome.
And great.
And excellent.
And extraordinary Okay I'm leaving now.
Atari Maxi Tariyama Community Member 
|
|
