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

Harriet · June 17, 2015 3:38 pm

Vhanja wrote:
Harriet wrote:
It could be that exaggerating makes such things worse instead of better.
It could be that not putting all the blame on the minority could also help.

I didn't say that. And I'm not interested in putting blame on anyone here.
You expressed discomfort with your situation, and I'm worried this will go on.

Vhanja · June 17, 2015 3:49 pm

Harriet wrote:
You expressed discomfort with your situation, and I'm worried this will go on.

It probably will, but that's just how it is.

Easiest solution is to not voice my opinion when I know it belongs in the minority. Not disturb the peace of the unison view.

Last edited by Vhanja (June 17, 2015 3:51 pm)

tonnaree · June 17, 2015 3:53 pm

TOPIC!

LET'S DISCUSS MARY IN ALL HER COMPLICATED GLORY.

...........rather than trying to dissect the conversation itself.

SusiGo · June 17, 2015 3:53 pm

I meant as I said before that Mary has been conceived as a controversial character and that people therefore react in a very emotional way. She polarises and therefore often evokes strong reactions. That is all I wanted to say.

Amen and pass the biscuits, tonnaree.

Last edited by SusiGo (June 17, 2015 3:55 pm)

Lola Red · June 17, 2015 4:08 pm

I'm glad we cleared that up
To go back to the discussion:

Lola Red wrote:
I like Irene Adler’s quote of: “Do you know the big problem with a disguise Mr. Holmes? However hard you try, it is always a self-portrait.”
To me that is exactly what makes (or at least potentially, depending on the further developments, makes) Mary interesting: She is both: the loving, supporting woman that we see in TEH and the cold-blooded woman with the gun that we see in HLV. She is the nurse and the assassin. I would actually be quite disappointed if TPTB decide to let her be only one of the two: the sweetheart or the ultimate villain. I like a character that I don’t know what to expect from.

Vhanja wrote:
I don't need to find the shooting to be ok or justified to find Mary a complex and non-villany character. Just as I can't justify everything Sherlok does either. I don't want to and I don't need to. I like that these people are flawed. Not just cutely flawed with a rude remark here and there, but that they actually step so far out of the line that I can't find a way to justify their actions. That intrigues me.

She certainly is very dark in some aspects. What I find the most intriguing is to try to get into the character and try to see why they do the horrible things they do. With Irene it was a combination of trying to guaranty her own safety and personal gain, with Moriarty the sheer joy he had in causing trouble, with CAM the power that came with the dealing in secrets and with Mary it seems to be a combination of trying to leave behind the past and ensure the future she sees for herself. It does not mean I agree with everything (or anything) the characters do, but I find it fun to try to make sense of their actions, from their point of view.

Last edited by Lola Red (June 17, 2015 4:46 pm)

Sherlock Holmes · June 17, 2015 4:18 pm

Yeah, it's a plain simple fact that Mary divides the fandom. Look at us all - Mofftiss would be so proud and rubbing their hands with glee.

I actually really like the fact that Mary is so complicated a character, I think she's a GREAT character, just not one I particularly like on a personal level. I wouldn't want to spend time with her. (I'd be a little fearful for my life). And I think her Nurse/Assassin is a slight mirroring of John's Doctor/Soldier. They're both healers and killers, in their own way, although killing in times of war is much different than being an assassin.

Vhanja · June 17, 2015 4:23 pm

Lola Red wrote:
She certainly is very dark in some aspects. What I find the most intriguing is to try to get into the character and try to see why they do the horrible things they do. With Irene it was a combination of trying to guaranty her own safety and personal gain, with Moriarty the sheer joy he had in causing trouble, with CAM the power that came with the dealing in secrets and with Mary it seems to be a combination of trying to leave behind the past and ensure the future she sees for herself. It does not mean I agree with everything (or anything) the characters do, but I find it fun to try to make sense of their actions, from their point of view.

I would like to learn more about why Mary made the choice of becoming an assassin. It seems that in a way she was also, at least partly, doing it for the "greater good". Her comment "People like him ought to be killed, that is why there are people like me", makes me believe she wasn't being an assassin because she was sadistic or "evil".

I personally don't put too much stock in what CAM said about her, as he was deliberately trying to provoke and goad John. Her "freelance work" could be that she went on her own, killing someone who had wronged her or someone she loved personally. (You could say that her plan on shooting CAM was "freelance work").

It would be very interesting to learn more about what exactly she had done in her past, and why. That would at least tell me a lot more about whether or not she is "on the side of the angels".

tonnaree · June 17, 2015 4:26 pm

*passes Susi the biscuits*

And good comment Lola. Sometimes I think the writers designed Mary to drive us all even crazier than normal.

I'm one of those people who liked Mary at first even though I was slightly suspicious, and then lost all sympathy when she shot Sherlock. That made me feel like I can't take anything she said or did before at face value.

Lola Red · June 17, 2015 4:45 pm

Vhanja wrote:
I would like to learn more about why Mary made the choice of becoming an assassin. It seems that in a way she was also, at least partly, doing it for the "greater good". Her comment "People like him ought to be killed, that is why there are people like me", makes me believe she wasn't being an assassin because she was sadistic or "evil".

It certainly seems that she had some kind of moral code (kind of like Dexter has a moral code in his killings). It would somehow explain how she could end up as a nurse; she is still working “for the greater good”. If her code would hold up to an objective examination depends on details we do not yet know. Under the right circumstanced John and Sherlock might be a willing to forgive her past, as both have killed when they felt their opponent deserved it. But her comment about not wanting to watch John reading what is on the stick because he would not love her when he is finished makes me doubt if she always followed a moral code.

Lola Red · June 17, 2015 4:49 pm

tonnaree wrote:
Sometimes I think the writers designed Mary to drive us all even crazier than normal.

and look how well they've done

PS can I have biscuits, too?

Last edited by Lola Red (June 17, 2015 4:50 pm)

lil · June 17, 2015 5:21 pm

Probably I am wrong here or looking too deeply so excuse my ramble here.
But the character comparison to Sherlock is interesting because I see Sherlock acting a lot like we would expect Mary to , wedding planning , bridal , less Interest in crime , emotional , etc. And as mentioned Mary acts much like maybe we expect Sherlock would (who doesn't like me, stick em by the bogs , people like that should be killed ) etc and John perhaps is acting a bit like we might expect Sherlock to , less emotional than usual , seeing the neighbour like a client ,using Molly for drugs test.Everyone is OOC.
But its superficial , Sherlock solves crimes so he became a detective, they seemed to make a previous point that Sherlock could be a great criminal and get away with things like Moriarty did but he isn't because his type of fun is solving the puzzle. With Mary , must be bored by now , the implication seems to be she was an assassin and so her answer to Magnussen was assasination because killing people is her type of fun, way of dealing.
So Sherlock solves crimes as an alternative to getting high and Mary kills people as an alternative to ?
The obvious answer is being a victim and thats likely Marys story.
She had to kill in the past for self defence and just got into the habit and no longer considers the morality of it and probably thats why she did not trust John or Sherlock because an , I have a killer instinct , habit , is generally considered more than a bit not good and very dangerous to everyone around her.
This is why I don't trust Mary and I suspect she may kill again if she feels herself or maybe John or her baby threatened and possibly we get the arrested for blowing peoples heads off scenario Hudders described and relief from those close to her.

tonnaree · June 17, 2015 5:56 pm

BISCUITS FOR EVERYONE!

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 6:23 pm

SusiGo wrote:
So you think Sherlock would regard someone who has killed numerous people and married his best friend under false pretences and as good as killed himself not as a baddie? Sorry, but I cannot believe that for the life of me.

Thank you!!!!!
This, exactly!

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 6:40 pm

mrshouse wrote:
Yes, I see your point and I would go as far as to say that this difference between real life and show already occured in the earlier series.
But again: also within a fictional universe a characterization should be -at least for the broader adience- consistent in itself and believable. I don't have numbers but I somehow have a feeling it didn't really reach the wider audience. So in comparison with the first two series there was something..... not so good.

I agree-- I think a lot of the difficulty in trying to find a way to "like" Mary comes from the fact that the narrative is funky! Steven Moffatt has been quoted as saying that he doesn't trust backstory, when it comes to writing-- and I remember Benedict Cumberbatch talking about how he had to browbeat Mofftiss into giving him backstory in how to play Sherlock-- and that characterization seems to change from season to season--- the characterization with Mary, though thought provoking and unforgettable is also inconsistent as heck, there's a lot that just doesn't make any sense-- and it's not about mystery. It's like she's unfinished somehow-- there's not a really strong foundation for her character, so her motivations don't quite make sense-- the logic is dodgy.

I also think, woven into (what character development they've got for Mary) that there's a rather outdated view of women going on here that is used to justify Mary's actions. Her motivations don't really work for today's women, but they're spot on for a movie back in the 30's up to say, the early 60's. It reminds me of a movie starring Jack Nicholson called "As Good as it Gets", where Jack plays this jaded, cynical writer, and a woman asks him how he writes female characters so well, and he replies, “I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”

That's kinda what I'm seein' in the way Mary is written...

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 6:47 pm

SusiGo wrote:
I think the explanation is quite simple: Mary is written to polarise and there is not much place for middle ground in the discussion. Most people have a very clear opinion about her.

Agreed.

Sherlock Holmes · June 17, 2015 7:08 pm

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
mrshouse wrote:
Yes, I see your point and I would go as far as to say that this difference between real life and show already occured in the earlier series.
But again: also within a fictional universe a characterization should be -at least for the broader adience- consistent in itself and believable. I don't have numbers but I somehow have a feeling it didn't really reach the wider audience. So in comparison with the first two series there was something..... not so good.
I agree-- I think a lot of the difficulty in trying to find a way to "like" Mary comes from the fact that the narrative is funky! Steven Moffatt has been quoted as saying that he doesn't trust backstory, when it comes to writing-- and I remember Benedict Cumberbatch talking about how he had to browbeat Mofftiss into giving him backstory in how to play Sherlock-- and that characterization seems to change from season to season--- the characterization with Mary, though thought provoking and unforgettable is also inconsistent as heck, there's a lot that just doesn't make any sense-- and it's not about mystery. It's like she's unfinished somehow-- there's not a really strong foundation for her character, so her motivations don't quite make sense-- the logic is dodgy.

I also think, woven into (what character development they've got for Mary) that there's a rather outdated view of women going on here that is used to justify Mary's actions. Her motivations don't really work for today's women, but they're spot on for a movie back in the 30's up to say, the early 60's. It reminds me of a movie starring Jack Nicholson called "As Good as it Gets", where Jack plays this jaded, cynical writer, and a woman asks him how he writes female characters so well, and he replies, “I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”

That's kinda what I'm seein' in the way Mary is written...

You're certainly not the first person to say that Steven Moffat writes women badly.

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 7:10 pm

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
mrshouse wrote:
Yes, I see your point and I would go as far as to say that this difference between real life and show already occured in the earlier series.
But again: also within a fictional universe a characterization should be -at least for the broader adience- consistent in itself and believable. I don't have numbers but I somehow have a feeling it didn't really reach the wider audience. So in comparison with the first two series there was something..... not so good.
I agree-- I think a lot of the difficulty in trying to find a way to "like" Mary comes from the fact that the narrative is funky! Steven Moffatt has been quoted as saying that he doesn't trust backstory, when it comes to writing-- and I remember Benedict Cumberbatch talking about how he had to browbeat Mofftiss into giving him backstory in how to play Sherlock-- and that characterization seems to change from season to season--- the characterization with Mary, though thought provoking and unforgettable is also inconsistent as heck, there's a lot that just doesn't make any sense-- and it's not about mystery. It's like she's unfinished somehow-- there's not a really strong foundation for her character, so her motivations don't quite make sense-- the logic is dodgy.

I also think, woven into (what character development they've got for Mary) that there's a rather outdated view of women going on here that is used to justify Mary's actions. Her motivations don't really work for today's women, but they're spot on for a movie back in the 30's up to say, the early 60's. It reminds me of a movie starring Jack Nicholson called "As Good as it Gets", where Jack plays this jaded, cynical writer, and a woman asks him how he writes female characters so well, and he replies, “I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”

That's kinda what I'm seein' in the way Mary is written...
You're certainly not the first person to say that Steven Moffat writes women badly.

Y'know, I'm not going to say "badly"-- I will say that I see him as taking most of his inspiration from Old Hollywood tropes... :-D

NatureNoHumansNo · June 17, 2015 9:29 pm

Reactions to several things
1/

SolarSystem wrote:
But there is nothing wrong with looking beneath the surface and behind facades... after all, that's what Sherlock is doing all the time.

Indeed..By the way, that's exactly what he has done after Mary shot him....he wondered why she didn't shoot in the head, and deduce she may wanted to spare his life
Nevertheless, in the canon, Holmes always underlines the importance of data...all the data, not the chosen ones.
One of my favorite quote, from scandal in bohemia, is this : " It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts"
2/

SolarSystem wrote:
And to me believing that everything is just fine at the end of HLV is an assumption that is polluted by fanatsy.

I don't take for granted that everything is fine, I always specify " As far as we know" ( you can look back to my messages)
As far as we know : john and Mary are back together, rebuilding the marriage and preparing to welcome a baby
As far as we know, Sherlock trusts her...
Maybe S4 will deliver proof to the contrary, but, as long as it didn't happen, assuming otherwise is fantasy and speculation (to me, there's nothing wrong with fantasy and speculation, it's even a great pleasure of the show. Just better you're aware they are such)

3/

LolaRed wrote:
She is both: the loving, supporting woman that we see in TEH and the cold-blooded woman with the gun that we see in HLV

that sounds good to me, I've read a lot things about mary not showing regrets or begging for forgiveness.
And yes, maybe she does'nt because she's both a loving woman and an assasin.
Maybe she doesn't have regrets because she's taking responsability of his actions, and even if she's sad it happened ( that's what she expresses when she says " I'm truly sorry".)
She's on the run, she hid her identity to her husband ( actually, that's what agents do, even in real life) and reduces to silence ( at least temporarely) those who threaten all this.
She doesn't ask for forgiveness because she doesn't consider it was a mishapps. it rather " I had my reasons, take it or leave it"... and as far we know sherlock and, and more important ,John, take it.

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 11:05 pm

But--- the show tells us that she wasn't just an Agent, she went rogue, she ticked off a lot of people, there are people who want to put her in prison for the rest of her life, and even she says this.

She shows absolutley no remorse for all that she has done; and that psuedo-apology sounds more like what parents say when they're about to give their kid a punishment and say, "I'm sorry, this is going to hurt me more than it's hurts you" sort of thing. And she "apologizes" before she shoots Sherlock--her dear friend...

I don't know-- I just feel that if she were taking any sort of responsibility for any of her actions, she'd have been honest with John before she married him.

I mean, look at the fallout that she could be leaving John and the baby vulnerable to:

John and the baby may now become targets for all those that Mary hurt in the "past"--

If she's killed, John and the baby may not be able to claim any money, the house-- they could lose everything, because the marriage was fraudulent, indeed, Mary isn't even Mary...

Is John even actually legally married to Mary????

Seems like an awfully insecure foundation to base a marriage on....how the heck are they going to resolve this in s4? Whew!

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (June 17, 2015 11:05 pm)

RavenMorganLeigh · June 17, 2015 11:19 pm

Lola Red wrote:
Vhanja wrote:
I would like to learn more about why Mary made the choice of becoming an assassin. It seems that in a way she was also, at least partly, doing it for the "greater good". Her comment "People like him ought to be killed, that is why there are people like me", makes me believe she wasn't being an assassin because she was sadistic or "evil".

It certainly seems that she had some kind of moral code (kind of like Dexter has a moral code in his killings). It would somehow explain how she could end up as a nurse; she is still working “for the greater good”. If her code would hold up to an objective examination depends on details we do not yet know. Under the right circumstanced John and Sherlock might be a willing to forgive her past, as both have killed when they felt their opponent deserved it. But her comment about not wanting to watch John reading what is on the stick because he would not love her when he is finished makes me doubt if she always followed a moral code.

The thing is-- though Dexter had a very strict moral code, him being a serial killer (and Mary, as an assasin would be a serial killer for hire, by the way) -- well, just because Dexter had reasons to kill that we could all justify--didn't mean that he was not toxic in the extreme.

I mean, his father killed himself because of what he'd done by putting Dexter onto the path of being a serial killer/vigilante. Dexter gets his wife, Rita killed-- because he's a serial killer. It even gets Deb, Dexter's sister killed. There's a pile of bodies around Dexter, and a lot of it is his fault. This is why he goes off alone--leaving his son and the woman he loves (another serial killer) to themselves...

Now all that doesn't mean I dislike the character at all-- Dexter is one of my favorite shows. But I've never felt any pressure to not acknowledge that Dexter is a serial killer and that, as lovable as he can be-- he's still toxic, he's very dangerous. I wonder if sometimes we can't distinguish that though villains can be lovable and fun to watch, we wouldn't want to have dinner with them. :-) At least, not without a S.W.A.T. team present.

No-one is trying to make me believe that he's a sweet little lamb that would never hurt anyone...

But there's a tendency to really, really want people to believe that Mary is that sweet, harmless, little lamb, just with mad skills with a pistol and silencer.

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (June 17, 2015 11:19 pm)