You are right. But I suppose we have to thank Moftiss for that - it seems they created the most controversial character so far. It is quite difficult to discuss series 3 without mentioning Mary. 
 

I wonder if the authors intended/foresaw this. Because it is not about Johnlock - at least not all the time - but about moral issues. 

Yes, they would. Because it is too simple just to say "I hate Mary because she comes between the boys." There is much more to it as one can see from the various threads which leads us back to SH's original question. 
 

A bit thruth in there@swan... But I disagree it's only weirdos with hearts in their eyes for the boys but as I have already pointed out that some just might feel overrun by her, by everything she fulfills. And maybe she was one smart person too much in the scenery. I could do with her decent in the background.

mrshouse wrote:

A bit thruth in there@swan... But I disagree it's only weirdos with hearts in their eyes for the boys but as I have already pointed out that some just might feel overrun by her, by everything she fulfills. And maybe she was one smart person too much in the scenery. I could do with her decent in the background.

She was a Mary Sue figure; anything Sherlock can do, she can do better. She is the sort of character which turns up in bad fan fics, and for that reason alone it is obvious that there is something badly wrong; Mofftiss don't write bad fan fic characters. They presented her as too good to be true, and of course she was too good to be true.
 

It seems that no matter what angle we approach the subject from we end with a similar argument in the end. Must feel worth discussing though becouse all those 6 threads are going strong.

Willow wrote:

Well, are you up for a seminar on Dr John Watson's PTSD in the context of almost being burned alive in TEH? Admittedly it would almost certainly get back to Mary in the end, but I am interested in your thoughts on whether it would have affected him...
 

That's a good question. Being kidnapped and almost ending up burned alive inside a bon fire deffinitely qualifies as a traumatic event. What gives one person PTSD though doesn't affect another very much and John has a curious attitude to danger. He looked understandably shaken up by what happaned but there was no indication so far that he developed any PTSD symptoms relating to the insidence (unless I missed anything). He is predisposed becouse he had a PTSD reaction to one trauma so he may well react in a similar manner to this incident.

It will go back to Mary as I would argue that finding out what Mary was up to was more stressful to him then the bon fire incident. ;)

belis wrote:

Willow wrote:

Well, are you up for a seminar on Dr John Watson's PTSD in the context of almost being burned alive in TEH? Admittedly it would almost certainly get back to Mary in the end, but I am interested in your thoughts on whether it would have affected him...
 

That's a good question. Being kidnapped and almost ending up burned alive inside a bon fire deffinitely qualifies as a traumatic event. What gives one person PTSD though doesn't affect another very much and John has a curious attitude to danger. He looked understandably shaken up by what happaned but there was no indication so far that he developed any PTSD symptoms relating to the insidence (unless I missed anything). He is predisposed becouse he had a PTSD reaction to one trauma so he may well react in a similar manner to this incident.

It will go back to Mary as I would argue that finding out what Mary was up to was more stressful to him then the bon fire incident. ;)

So, physical danger and the prospect of a terrible death didn't shake him up too much but emotional betrayal really freaks him out. How would you fit that into his dream/nightmare at the beginning of HLV? He does seem to be pretty freaked out after a month of matrimonial bliss.

It was interesting that the writers put the big red flag up in TSoT with Sholto asking him very bluntly if he was seeing his psychiatrist. That isn't conventional chit chat at someone's wedding...
 

I interpreted the nightmare as a sign that John was missing danger. After all, the words ringing in his ear when he woke up were "the game is on", then he immediately went out and stormed a crack den.

belis wrote:

Willow wrote:

So, physical danger and the prospect of a terrible death didn't shake him up too much but emotional betrayal really freaks him out. How would you fit that into his dream/nightmare at the beginning of HLV? He does seem to be pretty freaked out after a month of matrimonial bliss.

It was interesting that the writers put the big red flag up in TSoT with Sholto asking him very bluntly if he was seeing his psychiatrist. That isn't conventional chit chat at someone's wedding...
 

I have forgotten about that nightmare in HLV. It may relate to the bon fire incident. Or the wedding. Major change in life circumstances, like getting married, often leads to relapse. Even if change itself is of a good variety. Most likely it’s a combination of many things happening in John’s life. Sherlock coming back, nearly burning to death, getting married.  All in a short space of time.

In my head canon John got invalided from the army for his mental health, not physical injuries. If this was common knowledge it wouldn’t be surprising that Sholto asked. Also I imagine things went South big time in terms of John’s mental health after Sherlocks ‘death’.  We don’t know what happened exactly in that time but Sholto may be referring to that and wondering if John is now recovered.

Alternatively the reason why Sholto brought this up has more to do with Sholto than John. Sholto has mental health problems of his own. Maybe it was his attempt to try and talk about it and find out a bit more about John’s therapist and what happens when you seek professional help. I suppose it sets the scenes a bit for him contemplating killing himself a bit later on in the episode.
 

I'm pretty sure that your head canon is right about John being invalided out on mental health grounds, and Sholto as his mentor and senior officer, knows precisely what those grounds were. We don't, but judging from the fact that Sholto is asking whether he's getting psychiatric treatment several years later those grounds may have been somewhat spectacular.

I can see where you are coming from about Sholto's question as a marker for Sholtos own problems; my one reservation about your Sholto hypothesis is one of rank. I don't have personal experience of the army; my father served for 35 years in the RAF, and perhaps it's different, but a senior officer could ask a junior officer about the junior officer's mental health. He wouldn't seek a junior officer's help about his own mental health; it's one of those things which is just not done. He might talk to someone of his own rank or above; rank has its privileges but it also has obligations.

My impression was that of a senior officer asking a junior officer because he was concerned about John, and we know that Sholto knows what the events leading to the medical discharge were, though we don't.

It's much the same thing in the Civil Service; you don't dump emotional things on people junior to you, nor do you seek advice on any personal matter from people junior to you, because it isn't fair. I was about as junior as it is possible to be and still be a mandarin, but a mandarin nevertheless, and that is something I would never have contemplated doing.

So, plenty of scope for your diagnostic skills this season; I look forward to reading your further analysis