To understand Mary it is vital to accept that pre HLV revelations to John , she is nothing but Magnussons puppet.
Important to know....how long..and whos puppet was she before that..
A  puppets actions only have meaning when we know who pulls the strings and why.

Swanpride wrote:

On, and about the claim that Mary never apologizing or expressing regret: Not true either. She did, immediately after the bullet hit Sherlock.

"I'm sorry Sherlock. I truly am."

Yup, she really sounded regretful there, especially in her eyes. I could see her cold facade waning after she shot him.
 

Last edited by LoveIsAViciousMotivator (February 26, 2014 10:56 pm)

SolarSystem wrote:

Well, at least she suspects that John is in danger, because when Mrs. Hudson opens the door to her Mary says something along the line of "I think someone's got John!".

 
I agree, the exact line, as she pushes past Mrs Hudson (thus establishing that there was at least one, it not two, people there Mary could have texted, emailed or rung if she had wanted to enquire about Jon.

'MARY: Sorry – I-I think someone’s got John – John Watson."

I think it is pretty clear that this is not the sort of approach one would expect from a highly trained super assassin, perfectly capable of analysing skip code, and with high level Google skills. .

Willow wrote:

But the obvious way to find out what St James the Less is to Google it; the first answer that comes up on Google is that it is a church in Pimlico, with a handy little map showing how to get there.  Any ordinarily intelligent person can put a query into Google, just as any ordinarily intelligent person would know that if you want to know whether John is, or has been, at Baker St you text/email/ring Sherlock and/or Mrs Hudson.

What you don't do is take a car into central London and go to Baker St to ask Sherlock; it isn't sensible for an ordinarily intelligent person, which means that it's obviously idiotic for a highly trained agent.

And really, what sort of highly trained agent can't use Google? What sort of highly trained agent decides, in an emergency, to drive into central London? You don't need to be from England to use Google, just as you don't need to be from England to know that driving into central London is immensely time consuming. All you have to do is spend some time here, and Mary had apparently been here for five years...

So am I understanding correctly that we are just ignoring the fact that this is a show with writers who are going to go for what makes the best scene for their purposes ?

It's called Sherlock. Of COURSE she's going to go get sherlock and they're going to steal a motorbike and ride off at break neck speed together in to the unknown.

How boring would she and him texting about it and googling be? It's an action scene.

I think when we refuse to acknowledge this is television and not real actions we just jump down into the rabbit hole of over analyzation that leads to all kinds of false assumptions.

I mean its fun, but I think you guys are also trying to really analyze and figure her out before season 4 and disregarding her motivations are anything but something that moved the plot along the way Moftiss wanted is not going to achieve that goal.

Wiggins wrote:

Willow wrote:

But the obvious way to find out what St James the Less is to Google it; the first answer that comes up on Google is that it is a church in Pimlico, with a handy little map showing how to get there. Any ordinarily intelligent person can put a query into Google, just as any ordinarily intelligent person would know that if you want to know whether John is, or has been, at Baker St you text/email/ring Sherlock and/or Mrs Hudson.

What you don't do is take a car into central London and go to Baker St to ask Sherlock; it isn't sensible for an ordinarily intelligent person, which means that it's obviously idiotic for a highly trained agent.

And really, what sort of highly trained agent can't use Google? What sort of highly trained agent decides, in an emergency, to drive into central London? You don't need to be from England to use Google, just as you don't need to be from England to know that driving into central London is immensely time consuming. All you have to do is spend some time here, and Mary had apparently been here for five years...

So am I understanding correctly that we are just ignoring the fact that this is a show with writers who are going to go for what makes the best scene for their purposes ?

It's called Sherlock. Of COURSE she's going to go get sherlock and they're going to steal a motorbike and ride off at break neck speed together in to the unknown.

How boring would she and him texting about it and googling be? It's an action scene.

I think when we refuse to acknowledge this is television and not real actions we just jump down into the rabbit hole of over analyzation that leads to all kinds of false assumptions.

I mean its fun, but I think you guys are also trying to really analyze and figure her out before season 4 and disregarding her motivations are anything but something that moved the plot along the way Moftiss wanted is not going to achieve that goal.

Yeah, but it's a show known for leaving all sorts of clues, visual puns, -- I mean, there's a whole lot more there than  first meets the eye. And I think the producers of the show expect us to parse everything.

What I keep hearing is, people are tired of the bickering, so they want us to just take the show at face value and question nothing.

The fact that we are doing all of this questioning and debating and speculating  etc, means that Moffat and Gattiss were sucessful in creating a show that generated this level of interest; and yes, that also includes the character Mary. 

Why bother to have a forum, if the only thing you're allowed to do is gush over the show? 

This is supposed to be part of the fun. :-)

Swanpride wrote:

@RavenMorganLeigh You can believe what you want...the point is, though, that here were posts claiming that Mary never acted loving or even said sorry, that there is nothing in the text which portrays her positive. My post was designed to show that this is not true.

She says "I'm sorry", but does she really mean it?
She's actually sorry enough to afterwards walk into the hospital and talk to Sherlock in a pretty creepy manner, telling him to not tell John. And she's actually sorry enough to meet Sherlock at Leinster Gardens, bringing a gun and once again threatening him. That's actually how sorry she really is, if you ask me.
 

That's true, but just for a second there, immediately after Sherlock calls her "Mrs. Watson", I have the impression that she's losing it for a tiny second. I'd have to watch it again to be absolutely sure, but if you look into her eyes... it does have an effect on her. But then it seems as if the professional in her kicks in again - and she shoots him.

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

This is a fascinating Meta on exactly what happened to Sherlock s a result of his being shot. It's written by a medical proffesional : here's the link: http://archiveofourown.org/works/1235479/chapters/2535226

 

 
Thanks for this..amazingly interesting meta on Sherlocks shooting.
I had pretty much decided that Mary didn't care either way and Sherlocks death was irrelevant to Mary at that moment. This certainly makes me lean a little more to the - shoot to kill thoughts.


When I saw Mycrofts "..what was directly behind you when you were murdered..." Sherlocks reply , " I haven't been murdered yet.."
And Mycrofts " balance of probabilities little brother..."

WoW.
Yet just after recovery Sherlock uses the she saved me line..all based on inaccurate and factually impossible shooting.
Sherlock must be stalling for time because of the baby.

As for Sherlock just being a show...well if not to talk about it and question it, why are we here?
The writers say they assume they have intelligent viewers..and deliberately leave things for us to deduce and discover for ourselves. I have no interest in dumbed down shows that explain eveything.
This is exactly what we are supposed to do isn't it?

And on Mary bashing..well the fact is the writers have given us a character that does a lot of bad things which is obviously going to lead to people thinking bad thoughts about her and saying bad things.
When the writers decided to bring in a Mary, they knew a lot of people would dislike it , when they had her murder Sherlock and have manipulated John with lies they knew people would bash her for it. Deservedly so don't you think?

Last edited by lil (February 27, 2014 9:20 am)

SusiGo wrote:

I have been reading that meta, too, and it is very interesting. Did you see the last chapter so far with the screenshots of the object on the floor that looks to be a phone and which Magnussen tries to pick up? I never noted that before but it is definitely there. 

 
Yes I did. I had not noticed before,  I would say Magnusson for sure dialed 999
If Lestrade listened to the 999 calls made, standard procedure, he would have recognised Marys voice.
So ..Mary didn't call an ambulance...or it's just a show answer.

Last edited by lil (February 27, 2014 10:31 am)

This would raise the question if Sherlock really assumes that Mary called the ambulance or if he says this for John's sake or a plan of his own we do not know about. Because he would have been unsconscious when Magnussen dialed the number, wouldn't he?