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

mrshouse · December 29, 2014 8:57 am

Firstly, I have to agree with Solar: I'm one of the poor fans who simply don't like Mary as a character and feel slightly overrun by the writers that I'm supposed to like her. And this trouble mostly began with the way she was shown after the shooting, not necessary imho.
But my main concern is this: I somehow have the feeling that there's a pattern over the last pages to see everything Sherlock does in the most negative light to defend her ambiguous character and deeds. The main question for me personally as a fan is, where the writers want to go. You can like the side characters like Lestrade or Donovan or you don't. But if she's set up to be a more or less main character that is for me personally too much a leap from canon and from the show I fell in love with.

SusiGo · December 29, 2014 9:15 am

I agree, mrshouse and Solar.
My problem with Mary - and I never had this with any other character, good or bad or grey - is that I feel somehow manipulated as a viewer. Not by the plot twist regarding her past, this is brilliant and clever, but by feeling forced into forgiving her by showing how Sherlock and John (apparently) forgive her. To me it feels contrived and illogical - even within the universe of show. If I look at what other characters have done and how they have been punished it feels completely disproportionate and therefore - to me - incredible.

But I also believe that there will be more - for example we never heard about her family. (Which btw is one of the largest plotholes or mysteries to me: Sherlock read the wedding telegram from CAM. His brilliant mind should have made the connection when CAM was brought to his attention by Lady Smallwood. And Mary is connected to Janine. So this is either a crater-sized plothole or something that is going to be important for future episodes.)

besleybean · December 29, 2014 9:22 am

To address your latter point, the team deal with this on the commentary.
They simply point out that when Sherlock likes somebody, he becomes blind to the clues about them:
He did it with Irene and he does it with Mary.,
Because he genuinely likes Mary and recognises John loves her...he momentaily sees the glimpses under the facade, but brushes them away...
He also misses the obvious when trying to be clever, as he does with CAM.

Last edited by besleybean (December 29, 2014 9:23 am)

SusiGo · December 29, 2014 9:25 am

I am not talking about his initial deduction about Mary (liar) or that he should have seen her as guilty of anything. But the telegram was strange and sent by someone he started investigating only days or weeks later, someone he detested deeply. Lady Smallwood must have come to him shortly after the wedding because in HLV he is already deep into the case and has not seen the Watsons for only a month. So being Sherlock he should have remembered the telegram from CAM.

mrshouse · December 29, 2014 9:26 am

Okay, but that doesn't explain why Sherlock is punished so badly and emotionally wrecked throughout S3 and a new character is left unharmed. Where do the writers go?

Vhanja · December 29, 2014 9:28 am

mrshouse wrote:
But my main concern is this: I somehow have the feeling that there's a pattern over the last pages to see everything Sherlock does in the most negative light to defend her ambiguous character and deeds.

The only reason I do that is to even the balance. The bias towards Mary is strong in this thread, and it seems she is critizised for every little thing she says and does, and that those things "proves" she is a bad person, whereas Sherlock can do absolutely everything he wants and it's all handwaved away.

That, and only that, is the reason I write what I do in this thread.

SusiGo · December 29, 2014 9:31 am

Well, if you look at my very first post in this thread you will see that this has always been a Mary-critical thread. We also have a "Why we love Mary" thread.

Vhanja · December 29, 2014 9:32 am

I don't have a problem with being critical towards Mary, I personally wouldn't shead a tear if she dies in the Special (something I hope she does). I just don't get the unfairness and unbalance of such a view.

SusiGo · December 29, 2014 9:35 am

You call it unfair. I call it analysing a character.

Vhanja · December 29, 2014 9:37 am

I'm not talking about analyzing a character, but having two sets of standard for two characters, where one gets away with murder while the other won't get away with a joke even.

mrshouse · December 29, 2014 9:42 am

But I don't think there's anybody on this forum who handwaves away that Sherlock shot CAM. I think nobody is happy with this. It's an awful way out.

Vhanja · December 29, 2014 9:45 am

mrshouse wrote:
But I don't think there's anybody on this forum who handwaves away that Sherlock shot CAM. I think nobody is happy with this. It's an awful way out.

I've seen that most of the things Sherlock has done through the series has been handwaved away in this thread, whereas Mary gets shot down for telling a joke or saying something at the wrong moment. The difference between what is accepted or not from the two of them is staggering.

SolarSystem · December 29, 2014 9:49 am

It also feels a bit like people are relativizing things to death here. Because Sherlock did bad things it's okay for Mary to do bad things, as well, that's what it seems to come down to here. But for me that's not analysing a character, that's finding excuses by showing that others are also capable of doing really, really bad things - and thank god there are others we can compare her to. What would we say about her if Sherlock hadn't killed CAM, if Sherlock hadn't lied to John for two years, if Sherlock hadn't done an experiment on John in THoB...? How would we explain the character of Mary then?

nakahara · December 29, 2014 9:53 am

My problem with Mary is similar, mrshouse and Susi. Mary is not just Mary Sue who suddenly plays the first fiddle in the show, Mary also caused the other characters in the show to be dumbed down so that she can shine - and so a brilliant Sherlock suddenly misses obvious clues only to not see her true nature, all-seeing Mycroft does not notice her presence around his brother at all and don´t make me even start on John who changed into an absolute dumbass by being paired up with her.

If I remember how much critique and complaints were aimed at the characters of Molly and Irene Adler who were beautifully written and who had both good sides and flaws without loosing their believability, I cannot be but dismayed at the obvious attempts to force us to like Mary who reeks of such artificiality.

Also, Sherlock is suddenly "the monster", so that we can apologise Mary´s inexplicable shooting of him. Who cares if such psychopath dies - Mary did a good thing by running a bullet through his heart, didn´t she? (or such is the logic I sense behind the dissing of Sherlock on this thread)

And in all this, I´m still missing the logical reason that would explain why shooting of Sherlock was neccessary. What exactly did Mary achieve by shooting him? She is a trained assassin - she could knock CAM out the moment Sherlock interrupted her, then turn to him and tell him: "Sherlock, please, don´t tell anything to John. I´ll explain everything later" and flee. How would this scenariou worsen her situation? It wouldn´t!

But no, she needs to shoot her husband´s best friend in front of the blackmailer, thus making her situation even worse for herself. John would be abhorred by her past, or so she thinks - now, that she added the murder of his best friend to it, would he be more tolerant towards her deeds? No! The blackmailer who already has so much material on her now has an additional information about her shooting a best friend of their family - did that diminish CAM´s dangerous dealings? No, just the opposite! She successfully hid from Mycroft up to this point - is she safer now that she shot Mycroft´s brother? No! She managed to mislead Sherlock into thinking she is an ordinary girl - is she better off now that she made an enemy out of him? No!

No, no, no! It doesn´t make sense at all!

Last edited by nakahara (December 29, 2014 9:56 am)

mrshouse · December 29, 2014 9:54 am

I see your point, Vhanja. But I ask myself if there isn't a problem in its very roots? If you can't agree with the way Sherlock does things you most probably have the trouble from the very beginning, thus you probably don't like the way the show was set up from the very beginning. But we all fell in love with the show, with its characters. It causes serious trouble in a poor fans soul if in the middle someone occurs to shake things through but you have serious trouble with the way it is done. You honestly ask yourself if this is still the show you fell in live with.
And concerning the balance, I hardly see balance for Sherlock's benefit in S3.

Last edited by mrshouse (December 29, 2014 9:59 am)

Schmiezi · December 29, 2014 9:59 am

Vhanja, I can only speak for myself, but I can asure you that I am not biased against Mary. (Yet I feel slightly offended by your post, but maybe that is just me being a bit emotional.)

I liked Mary in TEH and TSOT, and I still liked her until she shot Sherlock. Sorry, but that is something I cannot forgive her. I am sure I would still like her anyway had she shown any sign of remorse or at least apologized.

IMO she felt sorry for being caught, not for shooting him.

And because of that, I frankly don't care what the team says about reconsiliation. I have not forgiven her, and I have a very hard time believing that John did.

Vhanja · December 29, 2014 10:07 am

I don't have a problem with how Sherlock does things. I find BBC Sherlock to be one of the most interesting characters on tv for years. I love Sherlock, he is a brilliant character. But the fact remains that sometimes, quite often, actually, he acts like an arse towards those around him, including John.

I have no trouble about people not liking Mary, thinking she has ulteriour motives or not being able to like or forgive her after she shot Sherlock. Not at all. I just don't see the logic behind Sherlock getting away with his enormous amonts of arse-ness, while Mary gets shot down for trivial details compared to what Sherlock has done.

If a snarky comment that feels out of place is something that should be strongly criticised, then Sherlock should be in bigger trouble than Mary.

Edit: SolarSystem also brings up a good point here.

Last edited by Vhanja (December 29, 2014 10:08 am)

Liberty · December 29, 2014 10:13 am

nakahara wrote:
And in all this, I´m still missing the logical reason that would explain why shooting of Sherlock was neccessary. What exactly did Mary achieve by shooting him? She is a trained assassin - she could knock CAM out the moment Sherlock interrupted her, then turn to him and tell him: "Sherlock, please, don´t tell anything to John. I´ll explain everything later" and flee. How would this scenariou worsen her situation? It wouldn´t!

Yes, it just postpones the problem (albeit to a time when she maybe has more time, more control and no Magnussen present). But it doesn't even work very well ("Mary" is Sherlock's first word, when she isn't there to stop him saying it). (Would Sherlock have kept that secret from John, though, if Mary had asked? What about John's safety? He does tell John as soon as he can - if he hadn't been shot that might have been the minute Mary left. So I can see that it would have been a gamble to go down the preferred route).

I get the impression that the real reason is to play with us - how far could a character go and still be liked? What about shooting Sherlock dead?

SusiGo · December 29, 2014 10:13 am

Vhanja- I am getting tired of this discussion but once again:

Sherlock did bad things, he was often cruel and inconsiderate, but he usually did all this in order to solve a case, to bring someone to justice, to help abducted victims, to be forgiven, to save those near to him. He never did anything for money. Money has never been his driving force, quite the contrary.

Mary has been paid to kill people. When going to Magnussen she does not do so as a woman who has left her past behind, not as Mary Watson wishing to protect her husband, but is wearing her old assassin's outfit. To me this is a clear hint that she has not left her past behind. She could have worn everything but they deliberately chose this.

So please do not tell me that Sherlock and Mary are the same.

Last edited by SusiGo (December 29, 2014 10:14 am)

mrshouse · December 29, 2014 10:19 am

Liberty wrote:
nakahara wrote:
And in all this, I´m still missing the logical reason that would explain why shooting of Sherlock was neccessary. What exactly did Mary achieve by shooting him? She is a trained assassin - she could knock CAM out the moment Sherlock interrupted her, then turn to him and tell him: "Sherlock, please, don´t tell anything to John. I´ll explain everything later" and flee. How would this scenariou worsen her situation? It wouldn´t!
Yes, it just postpones the problem (albeit to a time when she maybe has more time, more control and no Magnussen present). But it doesn't even work very well ("Mary" is Sherlock's first word, when she isn't there to stop him saying it). (Would Sherlock have kept that secret from John, though, if Mary had asked? What about John's safety? He does tell John as soon as he can - if he hadn't been shot that might have been the minute Mary left. So I can see that it would have been a gamble to go down the preferred route).

I get the impression that the real reason is to play with us - how far could a character go and still be liked? What about shooting Sherlock dead?

Well, if we assume Sherlock likes Mary we should all have faith that he could follow Mary's plea not to tell anything, especially since his last wad to offer help.
Interesting last point, Liberty, never thought about that.