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

Harriet · January 31, 2015 11:06 am

Then you probably misunderstand the intention of this thread.

Zatoichi · January 31, 2015 11:07 am

Yes, I agree with Vhanja here - especially in a show that consists out of red-herrings, clues, misleading clues and pretty convoluted plot twists inside an alternate reality with inconsistent internal rules.. no use to rely on your senses in such an environment .

Last edited by Zatoichi (January 31, 2015 11:10 am)

mrshouse · January 31, 2015 11:10 am

But then, at least in parts, it breaks down to the bad writing?? Because I very much support what Susi said: additional information, not the key for understanding. Well put, Susi.

Harriet · January 31, 2015 11:11 am

Please read post #1 and respect the thread starter. Make a thread "Everybody's ideas about Mary".
That's fine. But "My thoughts about Mary" are based on Susi's essay which she wanted to have discussed.

tonnaree · January 31, 2015 11:18 am

In the end you have to remember that not everyone who watches the show is going to buy the DVDs and listen to the commentaries. The writeres would be foolish to make them the source of important information as to understanding the story.

Vhanja · January 31, 2015 11:23 am

I understood this was the thread were we could discuss what we thougt about Mary? In contract to the "What we like about Mary"-thread, were we can only discuss the positive things about her?

SusiGo · January 31, 2015 11:27 am

Tonnaree: Exactly. If as a writer I had to comment on my own work to be understood, I would feel I had somehow failed. Of course you can answer questions or supply additional background information but the story as such should be understood independently. And it does not matter if the story as such is ambiguous because the wonderful thing about that is the we can discuss it for so long and with so much vigour. But I do not need the authors for that. They have delivered their work and now it is me who has to understand it.

Last edited by SusiGo (January 31, 2015 11:27 am)

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 11:30 am

Zatoichi wrote:
Hi Lola Red!
Of course I can elaborate a bit..
I didn´t mean Mary wanted to escape London, just the building.. I thought that if she couldn´t let John be found over Magnussen´s dead body, then of course she also couldn´t let him found over Sherlock´s dead body, so she went for something like a "delayed shooting"..(bit like the "delayed stabbing" from TSoT).. that way she´d ensure Sherlock´s death aka eliminate the eye-witness and and the same time keep John free from a murder charge/police investigation and buy herself enough time to climb down the building, hide her assassin gear and put on her loving-wife-face again before John would call her all devastated.

Well, I´ve been wrong.. but I still think it´s a pretty cool theory ^^.

It is a cool theory, I wonder if it would make that much of a difference in the police investigation if they found John over an already dead Sherlock or if they found John over a Sherlock who died in the hospital though. Other than that, I quite like it; especially the nod to the earlier episode. As Doyle’s Holmes points out: the history of crime tends to be repetitive

SusiGo wrote:
I know that some of you like to use the commentaries in order to explain the writers' intentions.
For me, however, it does not work if I have to know the commentaries in order to decide if a
character is likable or not. This can only be additional information, never the key to understanding
the character. Because it would mean that everyone has to know the commentaries in order to
fully appreciate the show.

I completely agree with you, commentary is additional and while it can be thought-provoking, the show should speak for itself. (I have not even heard the commentary for HLV yet, I am still trying to get my hands on a nice UK import special edition.) Especially when the makers of the show have such a long history of, ehm… not spoiling the surprise.

SusiGo wrote:
The character should be accepted/loved/liked/loathed/whatever by the audience
without any further explanation from the authors. And if people regard Mary as a mostly negative
character and are not satisfied with her being forgiven, then the writing is ambiguous and probably
intended to be so.

I feel the writers meant for us to feel conflicted about Mary. I believe they are too good at their job for this to be an accident. But they continue to underestimate the amplitude of the reaction their shenanigans cause in the fandom.

SusiGo · January 31, 2015 11:40 am

Lola Red wrote:
I feel the writers meant for us to feel conflicted about Mary. I believe they are too good at their job for this to be an accident. But they continue to underestimate the amplitude of the reaction their shenanigans cause in the fandom.

Well said. And what still annoys me are the repeated statements about her not being a divisive character. This thread alone shows that she is exactly that, more than any other character before. So they either truly underestimated her impact or they wrote her like that intentionally (which I think them fully capable of).

Harriet · January 31, 2015 11:41 am

Vhanja wrote:
I understood this was the thread were we could discuss what we thougt about Mary? In contract to the "What we like about Mary"-thread, were we can only discuss the positive things about her?

Read post #1. Other info is secondary

"My thoughts about Mary" is the title of Susi's essay, btw.

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 11:41 am

Harriet wrote:
Please read post #1 and respect the thread starter. Make a thread "Everybody's ideas about Mary".
That's fine. But "My thoughts about Mary" are based on Susi's essay which she wanted to have discussed.

Oh, I seem to have made the same mistake as Vhanja (and possibly others, too). I thought everyone’s interpretation was welcome here. Maybe we can start a new thread for that and copy the posts that are not related to SusiGo's there. Does anyone know how to do that?

SusiGo, my apologies if I have caused or aggravated offence by posting my interpretation in this thread, I misinterpreted its purpose.

Last edited by Lola Red (January 31, 2015 11:42 am)

Harriet · January 31, 2015 11:42 am

Cross, Lola

SusiGo · January 31, 2015 11:49 am

It is fine, Lola Red.

Well, for me the most important thing in starting this thread was that I tried to rely on the show to interpret Mary and nothing else. This really matters to me. Still, I am thrilled what became of this thread which shows that there is a real need to discuss Mary.

So if people want to discuss her character beyond what we get in the show itself and adding material from the comments or other sources and speculation, etc., someone should open another thread. Thank you.

Last edited by SusiGo (January 31, 2015 11:52 am)

mrshouse · January 31, 2015 12:04 pm

Sorry, not a native speaker, what does shenanigans mean?

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 12:18 pm

It means something like mischief. Do you happen to be German? There is a very nice website called leo.org with does not only offer a dictionary but also discussions with contributions from native speakers on both sides. Helps me a lot.

Sorry for the OT.

Vhanja · January 31, 2015 12:51 pm

Harriet wrote:
Vhanja wrote:
I understood this was the thread were we could discuss what we thougt about Mary? In contract to the "What we like about Mary"-thread, were we can only discuss the positive things about her?
Read post #1. Other info is secondary

"My thoughts about Mary" is the title of Susi's essay, btw.

Well, that was what tonnaree clarified in the other Mary-thread, as I understood it.

SusiGo · January 31, 2015 12:55 pm

I have sorted this matter with tonnaree. Please let us stick to my post #2057.

Liberty · January 31, 2015 2:32 pm

Lola Red wrote:
Harriet wrote:
Please read post #1 and respect the thread starter. Make a thread "Everybody's ideas about Mary".
That's fine. But "My thoughts about Mary" are based on Susi's essay which she wanted to have discussed.
Oh, I seem to have made the same mistake as Vhanja (and possibly others, too). I thought everyone’s interpretation was welcome here. Maybe we can start a new thread for that and copy the posts that are not related to SusiGo's there. Does anyone know how to do that?

SusiGo, my apologies if I have caused or aggravated offence by posting my interpretation in this thread, I misinterpreted its purpose.

Yes, me too - I didn't realise it was just about your essay, Susi (I came to it late, and it's so long that I thought it had evolved into a general Mary discussion thread!). I've been adding in my own interpretations, but more than happy to post in a different thread. Has somebody started one? If so, I'll answer your reply to me over there, Lola.

Vhanja · January 31, 2015 3:04 pm

My head is spinning from all the if's and but's considering what I can post in which thread.

Lola Red · January 31, 2015 3:43 pm

Hy,

I created a new thread where whoever wishes to discuss Mary outside of the context of SusiGo’s essay and without the constrains of having to love the character can post (Mary-lovers are very welcome though). Here it is: http://sherlock.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?pid=208656#p208656
Please feel free to copy your posts to the new thread.

Maybe that helps with the head spinning