Can't disagree with that.

She made an error of judgement, as Irene did...
Molly's still our best female role model to date.

Ozymandias wrote:

I don't understand why people who doesn't like Mary are automatically called Johnlock shippers. I personally like the relationship between John and Sherlock. But I loved Irene and I really like Molly Hooper too. I loved Mary during the first and the second episode. I think most of the people doesn't like Mary because she's morally dubious and very selfish, that's all. 

 
this is what I wanted to point out! We want great chemistry on screen! And if you search the best in this show the answer is not Mary and John, they are what they are, a real life couple, sweet but not thrilling. The answer to that is definitely John and Sherlock. Romantically or not.

Well I watch other shows, too.
Tee Hee.

Willow wrote:

I get sidetracked into the fascinating history of a 3000 bed hospital with 1500 patients suffering from stab and gunshot wounds, which pitches its ad for electives to people like John.

It's a great hospital. Quite a few of my colleagues went there to do their final year electives and had learnt a lot. One of my most striking memories from medical school involves a consultant from South Africa cracking open a chest of a stabbing victim in AE department. Quite unorthodox approach in many ways but there was little to be lost and it did work.

Willow wrote:

Your last point is the killer for the gunshot as surgery thesis; if she doesn't have the knowledge to judge anatomical nuances then she could not do what Sherlock said she did. I absolve Sherlock from the charge that he's an idiot on this one because he said it whilst his brain wasn't getting much oxygen, and, in any event, I'm not convinced he believed it; my head cannon says that 'Its the baby, stoopid' is a far more likely explanation.

It may kill the surgery thesis or it may not. It made me chuckle when I first heard Sherlock say it as I thought to myself that if it was a surgery it was a bit botched. A study of a 1000 liver resections showed an incidence of injury to major blood vessels to be at around 1.5%, sadly most resulted in intraoperative deaths. That’s what sometimes happens when you operate on the liver.

It can happen during a most straightforward operation. To illustrate with a little story as opposed to another statistic. As a baby doctor I was coming to an end of my 4 months anaesthetics rotation, passed my basic competencies and was trusted with a straightforward, healthy young patient. All was going well, I was busying myself making my anaesthetics chart look pretty. Next thing I know there was blood spurting up into the ceiling from the abdominal aorta that got nicked. We have moved very quickly from a playground anaesthetic to a massive transfusion scenario and intraoperative cardiac arrest (there was a happy ending to this story thankfully). I suppose this is a kind of surgery that Sherlock might have in mind. No deadly intentions but with a little slip of a knife it went very wrong.

 

besleybean wrote:

It's a fascinating subject.
I'd like to know if the Johnlockers thought Irene was such a threat, or if they've ever really worried about Molly..

Hmmmn. I'm not sure just chalking up dislike of Mary to being a Johnlocker actually fits...
I'm writing a Johnlock piece right now, so I guess I qualify. I have no problems with any of the other female characters on the show-- I adore Molly (though I thought the slapping thing was Not Good), Janine was awesome, Mrs. Hudson is the biggest Johnlock shipper of them all; and I adored Mary when she first appeared on the show. Loved her. Then, in HLV, she shot Sherlock, and I'm sure everybody here knows exactly how I feel about that. 

I've read some awesome Molly/Sherlock stories, disturbing Irene/Sherlock stories, Lestrade/Sherlock, -- for me, the pairing for ***Fan works*** , not Canon,  need to fit the needs of the story. 

As for me, writing-- it's less about the pairing, and more about the story i want to tell. That's a long winded way of saying, no, I wasn't upset that Mary "came between" John and Sherlock; on the contrary she fit beautifully, and that's why it's such a let down that she turned out the way she did. 


Gawd, I need coffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.......................

belis wrote:

It may kill the surgery thesis or it may not. It made me chuckle when I first heard Sherlock say it as I thought to myself that if it was a surgery it was a bit botched. A study of a 1000 liver resections showed an incidence of injury to major blood vessels to be at around 1.5%, sadly most resulted in intraoperative deaths. That’s what sometimes happens when you operate on the liver.

It can happen during a most straightforward operation. To illustrate with a little story as opposed to another statistic. As a baby doctor I was coming to an end of my 4 months anaesthetics rotation, passed my basic competencies and was trusted with a straightforward, healthy young patient. All was going well, I was busying myself making my anaesthetics chart look pretty. Next thing I know there was blood spurting up into the ceiling from the abdominal aorta that got nicked. We have moved very quickly from a playground anaesthetic to a massive transfusion scenario and intraoperative cardiac arrest (there was a happy ending to this story thankfully). I suppose this is a kind of surgery that Sherlock might have in mind. No deadly intentions but with a little slip of a knife it went very wrong.

 

I'm delighted to hear you were making your chart look pretty; if you'd been doing your sudoku in the corner it would not have looked good

But I agree entirely with the omnipresence of Murphy's Law, and in medicine things can go very wrong, very quickly; I tootled happily around my daughter's graduation ceremony, shivering a bit, which I attributed to the fact that I was north of Watford Gap, and had an early night to resume the festivities refreshed and renewed. My daughter's first 'with the piece of paper' diagnosis was the following morning, on me. Maternal pride compels me to point out that she got it right, but I could have done without pneumonia in both lungs, a fortnight in hospital and an introduction to the wonderful world where Taurolin is the only thing they've got left to throw at the bugs, not that I'm complaining. Taurolin is a wonderful thing, particularly when it's the only thing left to throw at the bugs.

There were an awful lot of retrospective diagnoses from the many experienced doctors who had met me the day before, and even more based on the photographs of me on the day before; I entirely accept that they were doing exactly what John did. They were seeing, not observing, hearing but not listening; they were in 'let's have fun' mode, as was I, and, in fairness, most people do not possess my legendary ability to ignore pneumonia because I've had lots of practise. The only person at fault was myself, because I really should have distinguished between rigor and being north of Watford Gap, but I give myself a pass on the basis that I was pretty ill, just as I give Sherlock a pass on the 'surgery' line because he was pretty ill as well.

These are not circumstances when we think very well; as my daughter pointed out, her first clue that something was seriously amiss was when she brought me a morning cup of tea and discovered that I was doing a sudoku with the book held upside down, though I appreciate that might not be uncommon in your patients. After that everything else was a formality: temperature 40.6, check, absence of breath sounds on both sides, check, dial 999, check.

The difference is that John knew Sherlock was out of hospital long before he should have been, and that he was at very high risk of something exceedingly nasty happening, again, and yet he ignored it. I accept that the writers stuck the red flag of Sholto's 'are you still seeing your psychiatrist' into TSoT to remind us that John has problems, which antedate his first meeting with Sherlock and therefore cannot be attributed to Sherlock, and that therefore John's problems are something we have to take into account, which is why I asked about the possible effect on John of the traumatic experience he had in TEH.

Of course, if Mary hadn't shot Sherlock none of it would have happened, but I am far from convinced that Mary's effect on John is good for him in the first place. After all, her 'dangerous' personality which is what Sherlock claims made him want her in the first place, doesn't seem to be doing him much good; how satisfying can the relationship be when he is having nightmares and gets his kicks from storming a crack house with a tyre lever?

Mary knows that, and knows that John didn't have nightmares when he was working with Sherlock; I really do not think that she intended not to kill Sherlock when she shot him. She may not have deliberately set up the opportunity to kill him, but when it happened she took advantage of it, with the premeditated decision not to make it a direct kill shot in the head coming after she has established that John is on the premises, and must therefore be delayed tending Sherlock rather than pursuing her. But I have no doubt that she wanted Sherlock dead.

Now she has been humiliated, forced to ask John and Sherlock to take her case, is no longer the clever super assassin outwitting everyone around her, and I really cannot see her being able to stand that. It should be fascinating to see how Moftiss deal with it

 

Willow wrote:

I'm delighted to hear you were making your chart look pretty; if you'd been doing your sudoku in the corner it would not have looked good  

Angry birds was my usual way to pass time. lol It's quite true that anaesthetics is 99% of boredom and 1% of pure horror. The sudden shifts between those two weren't doing my own BP any good, which is one of the reasons why I changed my career aspirations.

Willow wrote:

There were an awful lot of retrospective diagnoses from the many experienced doctors who had met me the day before, and even more based on the photographs of me on the day before; I entirely accept that they were doing exactly what John did. They were seeing, not observing, hearing but not listening;

The usual 20/20 vision in hindsight. It's easy to proclaim that something was obvious when you look at it having all the facts or being a detached observer. That's why I firmly defend John for missing what was going on with Sherlock. I don't think it makes him a bad doctor. Just shows what kind of impact emotions can have on decision making. If you choose to add PTSD into the mix it becomes even more clear why John wouldn't be in a right frame of mind to be doctoring at that point.

Willow wrote:

Now she has been humiliated, forced to ask John and Sherlock to take her case, is no longer the clever super assassin outwitting everyone around her, and I really cannot see her being able to stand that. It should be fascinating to see how Moftiss deal with it

I don't think that she has any desire to be a super assassin. I genuinly believe (although accepts a possibility of being proved wrong in the next season) that she wants her quiet life in the suburbia with John. I think she would happily eat the humble pie for the sake of the relationship and the baby.
I really hope that Moftiss is not going to deal with all this by killing her off but I suspect that it may be the case considering canon.
 

Willow wrote:

besleybean wrote:

Yep, she wins all round.

 
I was about to write a lengthy analysis of why Mary would not think that she wins all round, when it occurred to me that the chances of Mycroft allowing her to win all round are zero.

As we know, Mycroft is keen on people learning lessons

I think her style made pretty clear where she headed in the scenes. All lovely and soft during the first dinner, beautiful bride, then being with this red coat and red lipstick, during the domestic rather dark and earthly colours again.
But in the end bright red. Yep, she won for the moment...

Willow wrote:

But she doesn't eat humble pie, does she? The scene in the Holmes' sitting room shows no sign whatsoever of her apologising, expressing remorse, hoping to do better in the future. She is clearly antagonistic to John when he enters the room, and once he's done the dramatic tossing the memory stick in the fire there are a few tears, a few hugs but absolutely no expression in any size, shape or form that she is sorry for what she has done. Indeed the last line she speaks is when she tells John that there's no chance of him naming the baby, which is picked up on in Sherlock's last conversation with John at the airfield.

She is a bit antagonistic to start with, which I take to be a defence mechanism. She is expecting a rejection and bracing herself. Somehow her not apologising works for me. In all honesty I don't think she truly regrets what she has done. The way I see it she has weighed up her options and came to the conclusion that shooting Sherlock was a logical solution to the problem she was presented with at a time. I think that she would regret the final outcome and didn't want to couse the degree of harm that she did but the actual shooting would still be something that she would concider 'right' thing to do under the circumstances. I'm not defending her actione here, I'm trying to look at it from her perspective.

I imagine after reflecting she might have come to a conclusion that she should have handled the situation differently from the outset to avoid being in a position where she needs to decide in a plit second if she needs to shoot Sherlock or not. For that she could have appologised. But i'm not sure if spoken appologies are in keeping with her chracter. I'm trying to imagine these scene with her appologising and it somehow doesn't work.

The way I read the line about baby names is a bit more lightharted. They have forgiven each other and are back to the usual banter. It's a bit like her saying 'now that you have me back things between are going to be as they were and that doesn't involve you always having it your way'.