IMO there is a clear shift from TEH where Mary apparently tries to get them reconciled. In TSOT we get the scene with Sholto which for me shows Mary in quite a nasty light, and in HLV we do not get a single scene in which Mary is encouraging the friendship or in which we get a positive view of the marriage. All the common tropes and elements of a romance - coming back to life for someone, dreaming of someone, sacrificing yourself for someone, etc. - are between Sherlock and John. 

But what should be the sense of using romantic tropes and not acting on them? I think you can depict a strictly heterosexual male friendship without using these tropes so I assume that they are there for a reason. 

Maybe nasty is too strong a word but I really do not like her behaviour in this scene or in the napkin scene. Sherlock has done everything to ensure a perfect wedding, has gone completely out of his comfort zone, and gets patronised for that. But it may be that some people, me included, feel that what may have been intended as humour makes them just uncomfortable. I have never liked the "fibbing" comment and some other things. And let us not forget that Mary is a liar and that we cannot know if John ever talked of Sholto or not. 

As for the "neither of us were the first" - that is a tricky one. Mary - i.e. John's wife  - equalling herself not just with Sherlock but also with his former commander is quite interesting and prompts questions. Does she feel she is John's commander? Does she see attraction including sexual attraction between Sherlock and John resp. Sholto and John? Has Sholto been John's best friend (you remember the scene in the Chronicles? They changed the scene on the park bench from "previous best friend" to "previous commander" if I am not mistaken). Food for thought indeed. 


 

Liberty wrote:

Looking at it from the point of view of assuming the writers are not writing Johnlock (but as they've said, see the friendship as central) I'm thinking should they have left that aspecf out, to avoid misinterpretation?  I'm not sure they could have done and still shown the friendship in the same way.  In fact, I think they've not only left in those bits, but played with the idea and taken it further

Well written, Liberty, that's the Johnlock discussion in a nutshell.

Vhanja wrote:

I really like her "neither of us were the first"-line. It speaks of maturity. Of understanding and accepting that John has had romantic and sexual relations with women before her. I always understood that line to mean that she wasn't the first woman in John's life, and Sherlock wasn't the first close (and reclusive) friend in John's life.

Yes, that's what makes the most sense.   There's an obvious similarity between Sherlock and Sholto (the most unsociable man?) that doesn't include Mary.  And Sherlock clearly isn't jealous with Mary in the way he is with Sholto. (I suppose it's meant to be funny that Sherlock is not just upset about John having similar feelings for somebody else, but about himself not measuring up to being unsociable enough - hardly a desirable quality!).

A different scene, but there's another little parallel to Sherlock and John's situation when Mrs Hudson talks about getting married herself and what happened to her friendship.  I'm sure that fear is in the back of Sherlock's mind, and like Mrs Hudson's best friend, he leaves the wedding early. 


 

Just found this - it's Canon:

"The July which immediately succeeded my marriage was made memorable by three cases of interest, in which I had the privilege of being associated with Sherlock Holmes and of studying his methods."
— The first damned line of “The Navel Treaty,” in which Watson is apparently entirely focused on his newly minted wife.

Which on this strictly limited case makes me long for Victorian times. I can do very well without someone wedging themselves into their cases, thank you very much. 

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

It just doesn't make sense to have her be in the show and *not* be a part of the "team".

It will also makes sense if she is the next villain.

IMO, all her talents (being able to fool Sherlock, being able to break into Magnussen's office and knocking down her good friend Janine, remaining undetected by Mycroft) would be wasted as a goodie. Especially as a goodie with a baby.

Of course they have changed Mary from Canon and got her character mixed up with elements from other characters. But for me this does not mean they are going for a crime-solving trio but chose this way to enhance the drama as far as possible. 
I mean, what could be more dramatic than a dangerous murderous spouse coming between a couple? 

They took the bare fact - Mary Morstan comes between the men - and raised it to a much higher level. 
And what happened then? She (presumably) died, Holmes secretly bought Watson's practice who then moved again Baker Street. 
Therefore I expect them to somehow dispose of Mary and finally make them move together again. Of course it will happen in a completely different, far more dramatic way, just like reunion was far more dramatic and comedic and moving than it was in Canon. 
 

This sums up quite well what I have been trying to say so often in this debate. Of course slash fics are a great read for many people including me but in the end this is what their relationship is about. And this - spending your life with someone - can only work if there are two of you, not two and a wife/girlfriend on the side. HLV (and Canon where Mary Watson is nearly obliterated after the marriage) proves quite well that this is not possible:

http://the-navel-treatment.tumblr.com/post/85671139403/so-this-quote-they

Liberty wrote:

SusiGo wrote:

This sums up quite well what I have been trying to say so often in this debate. Of course slash fics are a great read for many people including me but in the end this is what their relationship is about. And this - spending your life with someone - can only work if there are two of you, not two and a wife/girlfriend on the side. HLV (and Canon where Mary Watson is nearly obliterated after the marriage) proves quite well that this is not possible:

http://the-navel-treatment.tumblr.com/post/85671139403/so-this-quote-they

It's a nice pair of quotes, and funnily enough, I think it sums up what I've been trying to say too!   I think they love each other, but don't fancy each other.   (And that's why sex keeps being brought up, because if they don't fancy as well as love each other, it's not really Johnlock - depending on your own personal definition of Johnlock, of course.).  Their love is always going to trump other relationships in the end, and I don't think it has to involve fancying each other to do that.

 
I agree. And, I really hope Mofftiss don't  do the trio thing, I think it would be a mistake.