BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Sherlock and Mary

maryagrawatson · August 15, 2014 5:27 pm

tobeornot221b wrote:
Yes, Sherlock and John. Murderer.
Only Mary is off the hook.
Due to her complex personality. I get this.

All I've been saying is that there are extenuating circumstances to Mary shooting Sherlock. That action alone does not necessarily make her a 'bad person' any more than John is a 'bad person' for murdering the cabby or Sherlock is a 'bad person' for shooting Magnussen.

Yes, now you're going to say, 'But Sherlock was no threat to her the way Magnussen and the cabby were' bla bla bla, which will further prove that you haven't read a thing I wrote about her decision-making process being tampered with by her programming. It doesn't matter how we perceive Sherlock in relation to her in the shooting scene. What matters is how she perceived him, again, based on her programming.

Mary

tonnaree · August 15, 2014 5:32 pm

maryagrawatson wrote:
tobeornot221b wrote:
Laws are the same for all of us. Or is there a different law for assassins in Britain? Mitigating circumstances for pitiful killers with complex personalities?
We're not talking about the law here. But if we were, I'd say that a decent defense attorney could build a solid case for not guilty by reason of diminished mental capacity based on her government-sanctioned programming.

And of course, anything she did for the government, like those 'wet jobs for the CIA', were perfectly legal.

Mary

But let's not forget that CAM casually mentioned at one point she went "Rogue." This gives me the impression that she was doing jobs for money not as any sort of governement agent.

But again. We know next to nothing about the real person behind Mary Morstan. We don't know if she's been programed or if it's just in her nature to be a cold blooded killer. For all we KNOW every single bit of humanity she's shown could be an act and she could in reality be a total sociopath.

Just saying.

maryagrawatson · August 15, 2014 5:47 pm

tonnaree wrote:
But again. We know next to nothing about the real person behind Mary Morstan. We don't know if she's been programed or if it's just in her nature to be a cold blooded killer. For all we KNOW every single bit of humanity she's shown could be an act and she could in reality be a total sociopath.

Exactly. We don't have enough data to know that for sure. It seems that everyone is quick to her that way and villify her when the extreme opposite could be true and she could be someone good at the core who made a bad career decision and is intent on retiring for good. I really don't think we can judge Mary as being an antagonist or protagonist at this point.

Mary

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 6:23 pm

Sorry, but IMO someone good does not kill a person who is not only unarmed but has never threatened her in any way and always offered help. Someone good does not make a living as a free-lance killer. I simply cannot see Mary as being basically "on the side of the angels".
And while knowing full well that both John and Sherlock borth have shot unarmed men they have never made a living out of it. And another difference is that they both had selfless motives, i.e. saving the other one from harm, while Mary mainly tries save herself.

besleybean · August 15, 2014 6:25 pm

Though she tries to kid herself she's protecting John from the truth.

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 6:27 pm

Kidding herself, as you said. She marries a man whose best friend lied to him for two years. And she thinks she is protecting him by lying to him as well? For the rest of her life? This may serve as proof of delusion but not of love.

Schmiezi · August 15, 2014 6:33 pm

maryagrawatson wrote:
Yes, now you're going to say, 'But Sherlock was no threat to her the way Magnussen and the cabby were' bla bla bla, which will further prove that you haven't read a thing I wrote about her decision-making process being tampered with by her programming.

Or it could prove that I've read all of it several times but simply don't agree with you.

I don't see any proof for her being programmed. She shot Sherlock very calculated. She had time to think about it and still did it. She did not show any signs of falling back to an lod behaviour pattern. For example, neither her facial expression nor her gestures show any significant change that would be there should some old programming start working again.

maryagrawatson · August 15, 2014 7:02 pm

I maintain my position that we have absolutely nowhere near enough information to determine whether she is meant to be a protagonist or antagonist. Just because she's done bad things that we don't understand doesn't necessarily make her an antagonist. Isn't there a show on American TV about a serial killer who is actually the protagonist of the series? Same kind of situation could apply here.

Mary

Schmiezi · August 15, 2014 7:04 pm

SHE SHOT SHERLOCK.

Sorry. Just felt the need to state the obvious. Will go and watch John hug him in endless loop for some time. Sniff.

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 7:06 pm

Are you talking about "Hannibal"? As far as I know, he is the antagonist, a sort of bizarre hero but definitely not the good guy. The good guy is the one who has to suffer from his crimes and sick mindplay. He is so bad that even I would not compare Mary to him.

Yes, Schmiezi. I think shooting the hero might count as being the antagonist. I mean, even Moriarty did not kill Sherlock with his own hands.

Last edited by SusiGo (August 15, 2014 7:08 pm)

maryagrawatson · August 15, 2014 7:19 pm

I just checked, the series is called 'Dexter.' I don't know anything else about it other than the main character is the protagonist and he's a serial killer.

As for screaming at me, there's no point. I put hysterical people on mute.

Mary

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 7:25 pm

Can we please remain polite? I see no hysterics in here.

Schmiezi · August 15, 2014 7:36 pm

Sorry if the capital letters irritated you, Mary. The little comment below them could have showed you that my post was not meant as a serious insult or something.
Somehow I doubt that I am known to be hysterical BTW.

I just cannot read anything about Mary without thinking BUT SHE SHOT SHERLOCK. And I did not judge her easily. I spend weeks thinking it all through, read lots of metas and watched S3 again and again. Personally, my conclusion is that there is no cogent explaination for why she shot him. And when you have to assume that there was some brain programming to explain her actions, I would like to point at Occam's Rasor.

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 7:56 pm

Playing off each other well does not necessarily mean that they like or love each other. This is an interesting screenshot.

Last edited by SusiGo (August 15, 2014 7:57 pm)

maryagrawatson · August 15, 2014 8:04 pm

Interesting that it's not okay to comment on the fact that someone is shouting hysterically, but it's okay to shout hysterically. And yes, that's exactly how I perceive using all caps in an attempt to make a point.

So:

John punched Sherlock. More than once.

John head butted Sherlock.

John grabbed Sherlock in a chokehold.

Mycroft just sat and watch Sherlock being beaten to a pulp.

Molly slapped Sherlock. Repeatedly.

What is so different about any of that and Mary shooting Sherlock? I just don't see it. Is it because it's a gunshot wound? Why can you justify the behaviour of those other characters but are unable to do so for Mary?

Oh, right. Of course. You're all JohnLockers, aren't you? Built-in Mary bias right from the start.

Mary

SusiGo · August 15, 2014 8:07 pm

Thisis Susi the mod speaking: This is not about Johnlock. Nobody has mentioned Johnlock for pages and pages. We have been discussing Mary as a character. Using capitals is not equivalent to hysterical shouting. Calling other members hysterical for no other reason than that is not okay.

Yes, this is all bad and I am feeling with Sherlock. And I do not like anyone getting violent towards him. But the only character in the whole series who shot him and killed him (we should not forget that he died on that table) is Mary. Shooting someone in the chest is not equivalent with beating or whipping or headbutting someone. At least not in my world. And I hope in no civilised society anywhere.

Last edited by SusiGo (August 15, 2014 8:12 pm)

Mattlocked · August 15, 2014 8:08 pm

maryagrawatson wrote:
Oh, right. Of course. You're all JohnLockers, aren't you? Built-in Mary bias right from the start.

Mary

Wow, what a punch!! Congratulations!

I liked Mary from the start. Just sayin.

gently69 · August 15, 2014 8:09 pm

No, no ... slapping someone ... and shooting someone with the risk to kill ... and you don't see a difference???

mrshouse · August 15, 2014 8:15 pm

maryagrawatson wrote:
Oh, right. Of course. You're all JohnLockers, aren't you? Built-in Mary bias right from the start.

Mary

I usually like your posts very much, Mary, but this is going too far. Just saying.

SolarSystem · August 15, 2014 8:22 pm

Oh, I'll just admit it: Of course this is all about Johnlock and not about the fact that Mary shot Sherlock and basically killed him. He flatlined. He posed no threat to her, he offered her his help. She didn't care.
Whether or not this had to do with her CIA training and with her being brainwashed and programmed that way, I have no idea. Whether or not the CIA recruited her in the first place because she already brought with her the appropriate character traits, again I have no idea. Maybe we will get more information in the special/S4, maybe not. All I know right now is that in the first two episodes I didn't hate her, I just didn't find her particularly interesting. I would have prefered if they had given us a strong woman without making a killer out of her. But now that she did what she did it would be rather disappointing (for me) if they'd explain it by saying "Oh, but it's not her fault, it's the CIA, they messed with her brain and she's not responsible for her actions!".