Offline
May I point out that this thread is for discussing my thoughts stated at the beginning and the other Mary thread for all other discussions about her character?
Offline
Swanpride wrote:
In this case, the result shows the intention. If she had intended to kill Sherlock he would be dead. And to me, intention matters. As long as I can believe that she truly loves John (which I do), I can forgive a lot.
Just curious: would you tolerate the reverse - Sherlock hurting Mary grievously - because he loves John sincerely and think Mary and John´s child stand in the way of his love?
If Sherlock killed/disposed of John´s child and Mary for this reason, would you still consider him symphatetic?
Offline
Please read Susi's 2191
Offline
Harriet wrote:
Please read Susi's 2191
I´ve read it but the post I´m reacting to is still in this thread and since I´m not an administrator, I have no idea (nor have the power) to remove the post No. 2190 into another thread.
Offline
You can quote it and copy the text in the box over there.
Offline
Everytime I try to copy the post of another member that way, the post somehow goes crazy / disappears, so there´s no helping it, sorry.
Offline
I have a question: one of the things Sherlock deduced about Mary was "Short-sighted". I think we've talked about possible issues with her vision, but suppose it actually means "short-sightedness"? Meaning she sees short-term solutions, not the long game. That could explain a lot of her actions--she reacts, and acts without really consdering the consequences.
Offline
RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
I have a question: one of the things Sherlock deduced about Mary was "Short-sighted". I think we've talked about possible issues with her vision, but suppose it actually means "short-sightedness"? Meaning she sees short-term solutions, not the long game. That could explain a lot of her actions--she reacts, and acts without really consdering the consequences.
So you think of a double meaning of the word? Interesting ...
Offline
Harriet wrote:
Please read Susi's 2191
Offline
Harriet wrote:
Harriet wrote:
Please read Susi's 2191
Harriet-- I realize that you now moderate this thread, but I thought I was compliant with SusiGo's original post. Did you read it through? How narrowly are you interpreting things? Just curious-- because my last question had to do with the cloud of deductions Sherlock made about Mary in TEH. How was that non -compliant with your standard of what is allowable, here? Again, just curious-- and a little puzzled.
Offline
I sent you a PM
Offline
As the existence of three Mary threads has caused some confusion, I am going to close this one. 2,200 posts are an amazing numbers which shows the great need for discussing the character. In order to avoid further misunderstandings, I would suggest this:
Why we love Mary: I think this is self-explaining
Mary - the subject of discussion: open, controversial but polite discussion of Mary as a character
As for respecting other's opinions: This means that no one should post negative views in the former thread but also that no one should be prevented from discussing negative views in the latter.
Thank you for all the interesting discussions in here.