Character Analysis » Mary – the subject of discussion » June 10, 2016 9:10 am |
I can imagine Mycroft overlooking Mary's true identity. In a way that he thinks maybe:
"So, now that Sherlock is gone, John settles down. How boring. But that's how they are in the end. He wasn't different in the end."
What contradicts this, is Mycroft's knowledge about how John misses the war. He should become suspicious of John's "mundane" life.
Mycroft could also think John just needs comfort, and that's what Mary is. In that scenario, I could also see him ignore Mary. Like "let the heartbroken guy be happy with that girl, whoever she is, he needs it".
Of course Mycroft could also know about Mary's background, maybe even her connection to CAM, and that's why he tries to keep Sherlock away from John in the beginning. But it doesn't fit with the proceedings, imo. Because then Mycroft would have surely warned Sherlock at some point. About Mary, not only CAM.
I cannot see Mycroft and Mary as a team without Sherlock knowing. I can imagine Mycroft, Mary and Sherlock (which again, and I don't like it, leaves a clueless John), or none of them plotting together.
Maybe I see Mycroft and Sherlock plotting against Magnusson in the end. But the way Sherlock says "tell Mary she's save now" makes me think she's not privy to the plan. Also, why drug a pregnant woman if she has all the facts anyway.
It's Canon » Johnlock: The Official Debate » June 10, 2016 8:57 am |
besleybean wrote:
The chemistry was as a result of a casting process.
But I doubt they were casting for a romantic couple.
I never thought of this. But doubt it, too.
At the very least, Benedict and Martin wouldn't have known about it, I suppose,
because the interviews and basically everything during the first series don't sound like it.
There seems to be nothing alike to a "Snape secret", you know what I mean - nothing like "I know sth about them that you fans don't know". It just doesn't feel like there is much thought about romance in the very beginning. It took off only later... or, well, that is how I perceived it.
I just think, if they had casted for romance, they would have told Benedict and Martin, and these two would have answered or spoken a bit differently in interviews.
I think it's a good point :-)
Character Analysis » Mary – the subject of discussion » June 10, 2016 8:32 am |
I'm trying to imagine the christmas dinner. Everybody sits round that table, that is, as far as we know, Sherlock's parents, Mary and John, Bill and Sherlock himself.
What would they talk about?
Mycroft and Sherlock would bicker, so maybe they wouldn't be the focus of the conversation for long. To prevent them from bickering, maybe Bill would tell some stories about his work... or he wouldn't because he knows noone and keeps back, only speaking up when it's about Sherlock and his work.
Mycroft, don't think he's one for idle conversation, at least not with family.
So I see Sherlock's Mum talking to John, to be honest, supported by her husband and Mary.
What would they talk about? Sherlock's shooting, not likely, too uncomfortable. I'd guess it would be about John and Mary "how is it going, how is the pregnancy, what plans do you have". And as Sherlock parents seem polite, they would probably ask Mary about her job, her earlier life... getting to know her. uhm.
And Mycroft? Will listen to it, thinking what? "who is she?" "boring girl" "takes away John from Sherlock" or, if they're aquainted "don't feck up girl, play nice, keep up the fassade, don't tell them you shot him or mum will turn monstrous and I hate family drama"... or "you bitch shot my little brother, going to make your life hell" etc etc
I also don't believe that Mycroft believes that sherlock invited Bill without a bigger motivation than company. So, Mycroft suspects things, I guess? What are Marys thoughts about Mycroft? If he doesn't know her yet, she must be shit scared he finds out about who shot Sherlock. If they work together, she must be under loads of pressure, too.
I'm not getting anywhere it's just, that christmas scene... it's where Mycroft and Mary must have met. And i cannot imagine how it went... either way... but, god, it must have been awkward...
If I think about it, I would love to see that scene someday!
It's Canon » Johnlock: The Official Debate » June 8, 2016 7:23 pm |
Some people enjoy eyesex but don't want to engage in the real thing.
Just a thought.
Fan Fic » Just stumbled upon this article » June 8, 2016 7:08 pm |
Apologies! I looked it up now - I wasn't aware they call it Conspiracy themselves...
Well, then I obviously get your point. I guess it's meant in a funny way though.
General Sherlock Discussion » Silly pictures of associations only Sherlockians can understand » June 8, 2016 11:54 am |
Nope. Brown-ish, the article said . But I'm sure there are plenty ladder-related crimes out there happening ...
Fan Fic » Just stumbled upon this article » June 8, 2016 10:52 am |
@beasleaybean
Not wanting to go very far offtopic, but I wouldn't call it conspiracy because that sounds jugding to me. I would say I'm no fan of such large groups pursuing a certain belief in (partly) aggressive ways.
Fan Fic » Just stumbled upon this article » June 8, 2016 10:39 am |
Concerning Johnlock, I couldn't agree more.
I enjoy Johnlock as a fun outlet. I love the fanfic. I love toying with the thought of Johnlock in the show - sometimes. I don't give a damn if it doesn't happen though. I'd like to run away when someone shouts "it's endgame because it's the onky way things make sense".
I don't know how to put this without offending, because choosing the right words is difficult for me in a non native language: I do feel like a minority when I'm not a Johnlock supporter. And I don't always feel it's a respected minority within fandom. Because Johnlock became so huge. I'm not speaking of this forum specifically, but I've had feelings like this here, too.
It's one of the reasons I toy with Johnlock - it's more fun to take part than to silently watch. I confess that.
But if left on my own, I'm not sure I'd go there, and if, not in such agressive ways.
Trying to make myself understood without offending...
And coming back to the article, I can understand why fandoms are critizised that harshly. And of course, if it comes to real life threats, it's even worse. But I find these things start small.
Fan Fic » Just stumbled upon this article » June 8, 2016 10:23 am |
I'm not very familiar with the fandoms mentioned in the original article, so I find it difficult to form an opinion. I'm also not sure which parts exactly caused the outcry - some parts ring true, at least to me.
Apparently, people felt very offended.
I can relate to some aspects. I also get the feeling fans (or so-called fans, but I don't feel confident to judge who is a fan or not) tend to request certain outcomes for a show. Maybe "request" is a strong word, but there is an expectation for sure, which sometimes - or so I feel - is put forward with strong words.
I also feel that way within the Sherlock fandom. (As somebody who isn't very active in fandom, so maybe the bigger picture is a different one.)
Also found some more responses here
General Sherlock Discussion » Silly pictures of associations only Sherlockians can understand » June 4, 2016 3:58 pm |
And today I found this in our local newspaper... nobody understood why I laughed out loud. But you do!
Headline says "Police are trying to find owner of a ladder"
Apparently somebody broke into a bank building using one.
Maybe Sherlock told them what to look for
General Sherlock Discussion » Silly pictures of associations only Sherlockians can understand » June 4, 2016 3:51 pm |
This circus show was heavily advertised in our town.
Sadly, I didn't have a date to go with
Other » 28 Stars you might not know are Bisexual. » June 2, 2016 7:59 am |
You make good points!
Also, as a teenager, being ambiguos is normal. I think if you got a partner and your social environment reacts to it, you are pulled very quickly into the siuation that you question yourself - and eventually out yourself because you realise your sexuality is an important part of selfperception.
I think, even if it can be tough, it's lucky to realise these things young and be able to get comfortable. Also, your friends and family maybe don't have a fixed image of you yet. If people have already put you into in a category in their mind, I think it's so much harder.
Online-offline is also interesting... I think it's a blessing to be able to be online and have support and communities on a wide range and not limited to your own real life bubble. I think for young people, the inernet is an experimental place. Throw things out there, see what happens. With occasional backlashes, but in general, I think it's more blessing than curse. (I did have internet as a teenager, but it was different back then - we actually used it for research a lot and not so much for social reasons. And internet was so tiny - many serious homepages, so much less nonsense and spam... good old times
)
Something else... I'm amazed how here in this forum, people are so open about their views and their own experiences
Other » 28 Stars you might not know are Bisexual. » June 1, 2016 5:05 pm |
I understand about visibility. But it would be much better if people stopped assuming.
Why put the task on the shoulders of bisexual people.
I'm not a fan of "in your face". It's like with the movies. I prefer them to be just movies with a love story. If it's a love story that is not actually about the love, but about telling the audience "look here, gay is okay" or whatever, I'm no fan of it - highlighting is the opposite of accepting something as natural.
Other » 28 Stars you might not know are Bisexual. » June 1, 2016 7:55 am |
Or unless somebody is touching your knee... *drunk night at 221b*
Other » Free Rants » June 1, 2016 1:14 am |
Got into a thunderstorm yesterday, on my bike. I had my Sherlock Cluedo game with me. Which, like me, got soaked. I'm sad . I had it in a plastic bag even! But the rain was so bad I had no chance to get somewhere dry in time. Poor Cluedo.
Other » 28 Stars you might not know are Bisexual. » June 1, 2016 12:40 am |
I don't like labels much. Dunno. I'd never say I'm bisexual... I mean, I would, if someone needed to hear the word. If clarification was badly needed. But no, generally, I think we should just be with who we want to be. Do we like men or women? I know I don't. There are so many men and women, who I don't find attractive at all. And there are persons I find attractive. Sometimes men, sometimes women. I find labels difficult.
Friend of mine is with someone. Maybe it's love, maybe affection, maybe just need? They get asked all the time if they are a couple. They keep saying: no idea, but we're both happy.
I find that inspiring. And yes, it works for them.
But all the time I see how it doesn't work for others around them. Because every second thing we do is build around categories. If he is the boyfriend, he could be invited to come along to the next party. If he is just an affair, no, probably he won't be asked to come. Boyfriend is a category we work with when planning social encounters. But what if there's no label to use?
I know, there is this theory we need names and categories to make sense of the world. I'd even agree on that. It's also comforting to belong to a group, to choose a place to belong, to have a name for your sexual identity. And it's easy to observe though how many people are unsettled by an undefined "in between" sexual identification, struggling to make sense of it.
But when it comes to love, do categories and labels make sense?
I have no idea, to be honest.
When I read fanfiction, I find there are two kinds when it comes to Johnlock.
The first: John discovers he's bisexual, Sherlock outs himself as gay, or clarifies/realises he's not asexual. Now we have them in fitting categories, they get together.
The second: sexuality isn't mentioned or clarified. John and Sherlock fall in love, have sex, just kiss, whatever, and that's that.
I find that difference interesting.
I'm also still struggling with Fox's quote. I don't think it's uncommon thou
General Sherlock Discussion » Sherlock dubbed versions » May 20, 2016 11:22 am |
That's a really interesting link.
Especially the finnish one made me laugh out loud. Isn't that what many of us think anyway?
But that means the three doesn't even refer to Mary's pregnancy in the finnish version...
I really would love to watch finnish Sherlock. But I guess it's not dubbed, just subtitled.
Also find the finnish title of Reichenbach Fall ep. quite interesting: loppunäytös
I tried to find out what it means, and translation tells me it means "epilogue"
Character Analysis » Sherlock and Stockholm Syndrome » May 5, 2016 11:33 am |
I don't think Sherlock loves Mary, and I don't think they have a strong emotional bond. All Sherlock does for Mary, he does for John, imo.
I would agree his relation to her could be described as unhealthy. But I still see a lot of Sherlock in his behaviour, and I think he has his reasons for his actions. He doesn't seem to suffer from traumatic experience, at least not linked to Mary. But that's only my impression of what we are shown.
Character Analysis » Mary – the subject of discussion » May 5, 2016 10:00 am |
I think to try to see why Sherlock forgives Mary is not the same as making excuses for Mary. I don't think Sherlock makes any excuses for Mary. He accepts what she has done and forgives her. On a personal level. He doesn't give her carte blanche saying: oh well you had to, it's fine you shot me, it's totally reasonable, nevermind. At least I don't read his actions and words that way.
The ambulance strenghtens my impression that she wanted to keep damage limited. Tbh, the phone call doesn't make sense if we assume Mary tried to kill Sherlock. In that case, she would have left calling to John, and made her way out of that office as quickly as possible, without a care in the world.
nakahara wrote:
what actual proof do we have that Mary didn´t aim to kill?
I think the only proof we have is what the show gives us... In the playback of the actions in Magnusson's office/ Sherlock's thoughts we are shown what the alternative could have been: a shot to the head, between the eyes. But Mary didn't choose to shoot that way. It's not really convincing though, because we are shown that the way she shot Sherlock wasn't in any way "safe", no matter what Sherlock thinks.
Another things that comes to mind: Mary's first words about Sherlock are "I like him". To John. And her first interaction with Sherlock is a promise she will bring John round, will try to convince him to forgive Sherlock. I can read this a) as sympathy for Sherlock and b) as true love towards John, because Mary sees how badly he is affected by Sherlock's actions and how desperately he needs the reconciliation. How does this fit in the dark picture we paint of her, I wonder. If she was selfish, she would keep John to herself, help him push Sherlock away, and not care about Sherlock's helplessness in terms of apology.
Same thing happens before the wedding: she tries to help both of them, accurately states how Sherlock is terrified of that wedding (and I think she's right there) and tries to help him
The p
Character Analysis » Mary – the subject of discussion » May 4, 2016 8:48 pm |
I think we have some information. That she wants to get rid of her past, that she loves John, that she did bad things, maybe CIA things... You are right though, but I wouldn't even know - what background are we waiting for? what do we want to know? What don't we understand without background?
I would like to know for whom she worked. But not sure that helps the story (except it was Mycroft).
I would like to know if she got family, or not. Maybe she just left them behind. But again, would it change things, knowing this?
Her true motivations, wishes, hopes, feelings... but what if what we are shown are already all these?