BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » My thoughts about Mary (all episodes)

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 12:59 am

I agree with you that the episode left me feeling abit conflicted. But from what I just read your reasoning does, for me, not quite add up. Would you care to elaborate a bit? Where was Mary going to go and why had she not left yet when Sherlock woke up again? I can get behind the idea of her wanting to escape, but why stay in London until she knows if Sherlock is going to live or not? She could have left the country in the meantime, find safety elsewhere and start to build a new life. Or do you mean with “safe” hoping Sherlock dies and then trying again to take Magnussen out, thereby eliminating everyone who had come to know about her past? Would in itself also make sense, but why not kill Sherlock instantly? I do not doubt she knew how to do it. Why run the risk of him surviving and talking? Why would she change her mind later and decide to kill him at Leinster Gardens? Especially after talking to Billy she could have suspected that Sherlock had indeed talked. If she went there with the intent to kill Sherlock, why let Billy live, who might know too?

It’s not about right or wrong btw, it’s all speculation as of yet. As tonnaree pointed out, we don’t have a whole lot of facts to go on. For all we know, we might never get a definitive answer we all can wholeheartedly believe in (I am myself still not convinced by Lazarus, for example). It’s just a game really. To me, every theory that fits the facts and is in itself sound is equally valid until we are given new facts and are forced to reconsider. That’s the fun in it

Liberty · January 31, 2015 7:34 am

Well, I was absolutely convinced that Mary really intended to kill Sherlock and that it would be revealed in the next series.   It all seemed to fit - the fact that Sherlock virtually died, the fact that he was so scared of her, the fact that he risked his life to (apparently) try to take away her reason for killing him, the complicated set up of a "safe" place to confront her, etc.    But some of the things said in the commentary (things like the "Callan" comment) makes me thing that this isn't what was intended. I do feel a bit cheated, BUT I have to say that I can look at it and see other clues that Mary DIDN'T want to kill Sherlock.

For me, the big mistake in the writing - not saying it's bad writing, because I know it works for some, but the bit that really, really doesn't work for me personally, is that Sherlock only survived by the slimmest chance. I still feel that if they'd wanted to show us that Mary wanted him to live, it would have been SO much better to not have his heart stop.    The whole "she tried to aim so that she wouldn't kill him, but because she's an amazing shot but not absolutely perfect she actually did kill him, but then Sherlock miraculously came back from the almost dead" is kind of ... silly. But having Sherlock less seriously injured would have worked very well.

I would still like an explanation of Sherlock's urgency in exposing Mary (as soon as he was physically capable - and he was only JUST physically capable), to the point of risking his life. Or maybe that is just good drama.

But on the other hand, I do see, that if Mary was hellbent on keeping Sherlock quiet, she would have killed him as soon as she could - in the hospital. Because he could have spoken at any time.   He could have spoken in hospital when John and Mary were both there. He'd just need to have mentioned the perfume to help it dawn on John.   And then it would be too late for Mary to kill him - so there was as much urgency in Mary's need to kill him as there was in Sherlock's need to tell John.

The trouble is, I don't think we're going to get a full explanation.   I don't think we did get a full explanation of TRF in TEH - it's just an explanation of the mechanics of the fall, really, but not of what really was going on with Moriarty on the rooftop.   I suspect it will be the same this time.

Schmiezi · January 31, 2015 7:42 am

I still trust what we see on screen more than what we hear in the commentaries. Especially when it comes from a man who said, "If I organised you a surprise party, of course I would say, I am not planing a surprise party!" (quoted from memory).

I still fail to see why Mary shot him in the first place. Or maybe I need to put it in another way. I know reasons for doing it, but I still have to find a reason that does not make me dislike her.

Liberty · January 31, 2015 8:00 am

Well, that's what anybody would say if they were planning a surprise party! Or it wouldn't be a surprise!

The commentaries don't absolutely say that Mary is not going to be a villain - it's more the little bits and pieces about how they see Mary and how they think the characters and the audience see Mary that make me think they thought she was loveable enough that we'd accept the story.   Now, they could be leading us down the garden path because they want her as a villain in S4, and I kind of hope they are.   But the Callan reference rang true.

And what we see on the screen IS ambiguous.   The fact that they even show Mary shooting Sherlock in the head, for instance, does seem to underline that she chose NOT to do that.   There's also a kind of strange mixture of fear and arrogance from her that could fit with either view. She doesn't look as if she's playing a part - she's not trying to defend herself, or manipulate anyone.

I think self-defence is a reason - I'm not saying it's a good or noble reason, but I do think Mary's life was at risk. And the explanation we see on screen is that she'd have been safer klling both of them to save herself, but instead meant to only injure Sherlock and leave Magnussen alive because she wanted to spare Sherlock (at risk to herself) and protect John.   I'm not saying that's very plausible (the fact that she almost killed Sherlock doesn't quite fit), but it's the on-screen explanation - she tried to temporarily save herself, but also put herself at risk because of her feelings for Sherlock and John. Which then meant she was at risk for months.

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 8:27 am

Liberty wrote:
Well, I was absolutely convinced that Mary really intended to kill Sherlock and that it would be revealed in the next series.   It all seemed to fit - the fact that Sherlock virtually died, the fact that he was so scared of her, the fact that he risked his life to (apparently) try to take away her reason for killing him, the complicated set up of a "safe" place to confront her, etc.    But some of the things said in the commentary (things like the "Callan" comment) makes me thing that this isn't what was intended. I do feel a bit cheated, BUT I have to say that I can look at it and see other clues that Mary DIDN'T want to kill Sherlock.

For me, the big mistake in the writing - not saying it's bad writing, because I know it works for some, but the bit that really, really doesn't work for me personally, is that Sherlock only survived by the slimmest chance. I still feel that if they'd wanted to show us that Mary wanted him to live, it would have been SO much better to not have his heart stop.    The whole "she tried to aim so that she wouldn't kill him, but because she's an amazing shot but not absolutely perfect she actually did kill him, but then Sherlock miraculously came back from the almost dead" is kind of ... silly. But having Sherlock less seriously injured would have worked very well.

I would still like an explanation of Sherlock's urgency in exposing Mary (as soon as he was physically capable - and he was only JUST physically capable), to the point of risking his life. Or maybe that is just good drama.

But on the other hand, I do see, that if Mary was hellbent on keeping Sherlock quiet, she would have killed him as soon as she could - in the hospital. Because he could have spoken at any time.   He could have spoken in hospital when John and Mary were both there. He'd just need to have mentioned the perfume to help it dawn on John.   And then it would be too late for Mary to kill him - so there was as much urgency in Mary's need to kill him as there was in Sherlock's need to tell John.

The trouble is, I don't think we're going to get a full explanation.   I don't think we did get a full explanation of TRF in TEH - it's just an explanation of the mechanics of the fall, really, but not of what really was going on with Moriarty on the rooftop.   I suspect it will be the same this time.

I can see your reasoning and I had some of the same issues, e.g. the “surgery”. It just feels too close a call to say the intention was definitely not to kill him, but it also left him too much of a chance to call it a kill shot. It really makes every interpretation hard, because it could have ended either way (and in a way actually did end up both ways).
I could imagine Sherlock’s urgency could be because it was Mary’s turn to make a move and there was no saying what she might do. She had worked herself into a very tight corner and was bound to try and break free, likely making mistakes in the meantime. Sherlock needed to make sure she made the right mistakes. To me it almost feels like a very macabre game of chess, going something like that:

Mary: Check. You are shot; you’ll live or you die. Your move.
Sherlock: I’ll live. Your move.
Mary: You don’t tell John. Your move.
Sherlock: Come and find me then. Your move.
Mary: I found you. Your move.
Sherlock: Checkmate…

And I absolutely agree with you, we will probably never get a full explanation. It might end up being one of the unanswered questions of the show, just like the question if Sherlock had chosen the right pill in ASIP.

Schmiezi · January 31, 2015 8:41 am

Lola Red wrote:
And I absolutely agree with you, we will probably never get a full explanation. It might end up being one of the unanswered questions of the show, just like the question if Sherlock had chosen the right pill in ASIP.

I only hope we will get enough of an expanation to be emotionally satisfied, one way or another.

I like your idea about chess, btw.

mrshouse · January 31, 2015 8:57 am

LolaRed, I like lots of your thoughts since yesterday and surprisingly can warm up to them. I'm in the uncomfortable position that I'm one of the fans for whom the whole scenarios did not work at all. I see where you come from and you explained very eloquently where the writers most probably came from. Thank you. But that leaves me alone with not being content with artistic decisions and very much feeling forced into a " not fish, not flesh" situation concerning Mary. Lucky those, who can buy it.... I would be very happy to go back to screenwriting and a show that leaves room for interpretation but I don't need 2 hours of comments as to what was intended.

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 9:00 am

Schmiezi wrote:
Lola Red wrote:
And I absolutely agree with you, we will probably never get a full explanation. It might end up being one of the unanswered questions of the show, just like the question if Sherlock had chosen the right pill in ASIP.

I only hope we will get enough of an expanation to be emotionally satisfied, one way or another.

I like your idea about chess, btw.

Hope spring eternal, but after TEH the balance of probability seems somewhat askew

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 9:09 am

mrshouse wrote:
LolaRed, I like lots of your thoughts since yesterday and surprisingly can warm up to them. I'm in the uncomfortable position that I'm one of the fans for whom the whole scenarios did not work at all. I see where you come from and you explained very eloquently where the writers most probably came from.

That might be the greatest compliment anyone can hope to get in a discussion. Thank you.

I feel you in that there is a lot of room for interpretation and very little definitive explanation on this show and it can get frustrating at times. One the other hand, it gives us something to do during those long hiatuses, so I don’t want to complain too much. There are not that many shows that can keep me entertained for 2 years with just 270 minutes running time per season.

mrshouse · January 31, 2015 9:12 am

That's true. Buuuuuut it gets hard if there's a new set up of protagonists that you cannot warm up with and the scenario that is supposed to make it likeable is ....well....flawed and explain worthy, to say the least.

Liberty · January 31, 2015 9:20 am

Lola Red wrote:
I can see your reasoning and I had some of the same issues, e.g. the “surgery”. It just feels too close a call to say the intention was definitely not to kill him, but it also left him too much of a chance to call it a kill shot. It really makes every interpretation hard, because it could have ended either way (and in a way actually did end up both ways).
I could imagine Sherlock’s urgency could be because it was Mary’s turn to make a move and there was no saying what she might do. She had worked herself into a very tight corner and was bound to try and break free, likely making mistakes in the meantime. Sherlock needed to make sure she made the right mistakes. To me it almost feels like a very macabre game of chess, going something like that:

Mary: Check. You are shot; you’ll live or you die. Your move.
Sherlock: I’ll live. Your move.
Mary: You don’t tell John. Your move.
Sherlock: Come and find me then. Your move.
Mary: I found you. Your move.
Sherlock: Checkmate…

And I absolutely agree with you, we will probably never get a full explanation. It might end up being one of the unanswered questions of the show, just like the question if Sherlock had chosen the right pill in ASIP.

The shooting isn't ambiguous enough for me. It WAS a kill shot, whether that was intentional or not, because Sherlock effectively "died". He didn't survive because of anything Mary did with the positioning of the bullet, but because of an extremely unusual and unrelated phenomenon (that occasionally people do "come back to life" spontaneously). He wasn't even being resuscitated at that point. There is no way Mary could have predicted that.

The only thing in favour of "surgery" is Mary not shooting the coin in the centre - i.e. that she accidently made a kill shot, when trying to make it an incapacitating shot. I find that kind of tenuous, but the fact that Moffat wished he'd included something to emphasise that aspect makes me wonder if the intention is for us to believe it. (And of course, it's possible - it's perhaps actually slightly more plausible than Sherlock rising from the dead).

I see what you mean about them making moves, but it's still in my mind that Sherlock was risking his life to make his. It SEEMS as if he thought the chances of Mary kiling him in hospital were actually higher than the chances of him dying by leaving (he seems to think that his heart could well stop). If they hadn't played up how seriously in danger he was medically - the scene with the paramedics - then it wouldn't feel quite so urgent. I don't quite understand it. It would have been safer for him to wait until he was better - even a day or two better. The only reason for him to take that risk was that the risk from Mary was greater - whether or not she planned to kill him, Sherlock must have thought that she planned it. If she was going to kill him to stop him telling John, then the only way to stop her was to tell John. I can't quite find a "good Mary" explanation that fits with that. (Although there may well be one - maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way).

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 9:33 am

mrshouse wrote:
That's true. Buuuuuut it gets hard if there's a new set up of protagonists that you cannot warm up with and the scenario that is supposed to make it likeable is ....well....flawed and explain worthy, to say the least.

True, but take comfort in the fact that, if they stay true to the canon, Mary will not be there forever. Maybe she is not even supposed to be a wholeheartedly likable character, as opposed to say Molly, Lestrade or Mrs. Hudson. I just hope they did not just settle her with an improbable back-story to make her character “more interesting”, but in preparation of future adventures (and I don’t mean the crime-solving trio). For now I choose to trust in TPTB, but I might get upset if they don’t do anything interesting with the things they have set up. The Bee Gees or a nod to the fandom, while both brilliant, won’t quite cut it for me this time.

Zatoichi · January 31, 2015 9:43 am

Lola Red wrote:
I agree with you that the episode left me feeling abit conflicted. But from what I just read your reasoning does, for me, not quite add up. Would you care to elaborate a bit? Where was Mary going to go and why had she not left yet when Sherlock woke up again? I can get behind the idea of her wanting to escape, but why stay in London until she knows if Sherlock is going to live or not?

Hi Lola Red!
Of course I can elaborate a bit..
I didn´t mean Mary wanted to escape London, just the building.. I thought that if she couldn´t let John be found over Magnussen´s dead body, then of course she also couldn´t let him found over Sherlock´s dead body, so she went for something like a "delayed shooting"..(bit like the "delayed stabbing" from TSoT).. that way she´d ensure Sherlock´s death aka eliminate the eye-witness and and the same time keep John free from a murder charge/police investigation and buy herself enough time to climb down the building, hide her assassin gear and put on her loving-wife-face again before John would call her all devastated.

Well, I´ve been wrong.. but I still think it´s a pretty cool theory ^^.

Last edited by Zatoichi (January 31, 2015 9:57 am)

mrshouse · January 31, 2015 10:04 am

Lola Red wrote:
mrshouse wrote:
That's true. Buuuuuut it gets hard if there's a new set up of protagonists that you cannot warm up with and the scenario that is supposed to make it likeable is ....well....flawed and explain worthy, to say the least.
True, but take comfort in the fact that, if they stay true to the canon, Mary will not be there forever. Maybe she is not even supposed to be a wholeheartedly likable character, as opposed to say Molly, Lestrade or Mrs. Hudson. I just hope they did not just settle her with an improbable back-story to make her character “more interesting”, but in preparation of future adventures (and I don’t mean the crime-solving trio). For now I choose to trust in TPTB, but I might get upset if they don’t do anything interesting with the things they have set up. The Bee Gees or a nod to the fandom, while both brilliant, won’t quite cut it for me this time.

Amen and pass the biscuits.

Zatoichi · January 31, 2015 10:14 am

Liberty wrote:
I see what you mean about them making moves, but it's still in my mind that Sherlock was risking his life to make his. It SEEMS as if he thought the chances of Mary kiling him in hospital were actually higher than the chances of him dying by leaving (he seems to think that his heart could well stop). If they hadn't played up how seriously in danger he was medically - the scene with the paramedics - then it wouldn't feel quite so urgent. I don't quite understand it. It would have been safer for him to wait until he was better - even a day or two better. The only reason for him to take that risk was that the risk from Mary was greater - whether or not she planned to kill him, Sherlock must have thought that she planned it. If she was going to kill him to stop him telling John, then the only way to stop her was to tell John. I can't quite find a "good Mary" explanation that fits with that. (Although there may well be one - maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way).

One possible (albeit quite improbable - but we´re talking about HLV here, arent´t we? ;P) "good Mary - stubborn Sherlock"- explanation: In one deleted scene John says something in the terms of "Sherlock is hunting someone".. Mary gets scared he´s after her, grabs her gun and goes out to find him first. If that´s true and Sherlock is hunting than maybe he is just so fixed on winning or hunting Mary down and present her lies to John that he just defies the danger it means for himself - he is indestructible after all, he has it all timed and figured out, the paramedics will come just in time and restart his heart again, no big deal for Sherlock Holmes (eyeroll..)
^^

Liberty · January 31, 2015 10:26 am

Yes, maybe ... he's not always terribly self-protective. And I think you're right that in this fictional world, Sherlock would be able to time the paradmedics arrival and be sure that they could restart his heart (i.e. he had what seemed to be a failsafe way to prevent him actually dying). It's not real life .

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 10:30 am

Liberty wrote:
The shooting isn't ambiguous enough for me. It WAS a kill shot, whether that was intentional or not, because Sherlock effectively "died". He didn't survive because of anything Mary did with the positioning of the bullet, but because of an extremely unusual and unrelated phenomenon (that occasionally people do "come back to life" spontaneously). He wasn't even being resuscitated at that point. There is no way Mary could have predicted that.

I think what we both mean with “kill shot” might be two slightly different things. It was indeed a shot that could potentially kill (and very very nearly did). But it was not a shot whose only possible outcome was certain death (as a shot through the brain stem would have been), which is what I mean with “kill shot”. There is indeed no way for Mary to predict what happens next, which I read as a sort of very macabre passing the ball to Sherlock. It is not even a fair 50/50 chance. But if she wanted to kill him for a certainty, she could have done so just as easily.

Liberty wrote:
The only thing in favour of "surgery" is Mary not shooting the coin in the centre - i.e. that she accidently made a kill shot, when trying to make it an incapacitating shot. I find that kind of tenuous, but the fact that Moffat wished he'd included something to emphasise that aspect makes me wonder if the intention is for us to believe it. (And of course, it's possible - it's perhaps actually slightly more plausible than Sherlock rising from the dead).

As I said, I’m not quite happy with the word “surgery”, because I assume Mary had enough experience to know that there was a chance, but no certainty, for Sherlock to die from his injury. Feels more like Russian roulette to me. But that is the writer’s doing.

Liberty wrote:
I see what you mean about them making moves, but it's still in my mind that Sherlock was risking his life to make his. It SEEMS as if he thought the chances of Mary kiling him in hospital were actually higher than the chances of him dying by leaving (he seems to think that his heart could well stop). If they hadn't played up how seriously in danger he was medically - the scene with the paramedics - then it wouldn't feel quite so urgent. I don't quite understand it. It would have been safer for him to wait until he was better - even a day or two better. The only reason for him to take that risk was that the risk from Mary was greater - whether or not she planned to kill him, Sherlock must have thought that she planned it. If she was going to kill him to stop him telling John, then the only way to stop her was to tell John.

I believe that Mary was at her most dangerous when Sherlock was hospitalised, more dangerous than when she pointed a gun at him even. She had worked herself into a corner, realised that and was about to do something desperate. Left to her own devices, she was completely unpredictable. And yes, I believe there could have been the possibility of her killing Sherlock after all, or going for Magnussen again, getting herself killed. She could have even gone for John, making sure he would never know. I believe she truly was a loose cannon during that time. I think Sherlock saw that he had to take control over the situation, not just to safe himself, but also to keep John and Mary safe, as he had promised. The only way to do that was to leave the hospital, even if that resulted in him getting worse again. Only after he had stabilised the situation, he could let himself have the time to heal.

Liberty wrote:
I can't quite find a "good Mary" explanation that fits with that. (Although there may well be one - maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way).

I am not sure there is a “good Mary” to find there. I think there is a desperate Mary (and desperate people are the most dangerous, they feel they have nothing to loose). If that makes her good, bad or just human, I cannot say.

SusiGo · January 31, 2015 10:56 am

I know that some of you like to use the commentaries in order to explain the writers' intentions.
For me, however, it does not work if I have to know the commentaries in order to decide if a
character is likable or not. This can only be additional information, never the key to understanding
the character. Because it would mean that everyone has to know the commentaries in order to
fully appreciate the show.

The character should be accepted/loved/liked/loathed/whatever by the audience
without any further explanation from the authors. And if people regard Mary as a mostly negative
character and are not satisfied with her being forgiven, then the writing is ambiguous and probably
intended to be so.

If you have a look at my opening post you will see that my basis for this thread was to strictly
rely on what I see and hear in the show. I know there are different approaches of interpreting
a work of art. I prefer to look at the work itself and draw my conclusions from this.

Last edited by SusiGo (January 31, 2015 11:02 am)

Harriet · January 31, 2015 11:03 am

Susi, I think as the thread starter here you made quite clear that this thread is about "what we see and what we hear in the show" and not about other sources. Thank you again.

Vhanja · January 31, 2015 11:05 am

We will always interpret a character or a scene from our personal background and experience. That is why we will have so wildly different views on the scenes, the actions taken and whether we like a character or not. So to know what the writeres actually meant is a god-sent for me. It works as a compass for me, to see if I've steered myself right or not.