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

RavenMorganLeigh · September 9, 2015 9:15 pm

Harriet wrote:
@ Raven: I think if John gets more of that kind of happiness with Mary it might kill him.

Oh, dear. Maybe he'll be better off being miserable and unmarried with Sherlock! Because, he wasn't missing Sherlock at all... except for dreaming about him, and pining for him, going nuts from lack of adventure....

SusiGo · September 9, 2015 9:18 pm

Liberty wrote:
(2) I don't think it's a case of deserving (I don't think I've heard that Mary "deserves" happiness as such - she hasn't really done anything deserving so far). However, she doesn't seem to have done anything deliberately to hurt John - has been protective of him, in fact. (For instance, lying to him was a terrible thing, but I'm pretty sure she didn't to it to hurt him - she did it to protect herself and him) .

She knew how he suffered after Sherlock's death and risked to kill Sherlock so John would have lost him again. For good. I would say this counts among hurting John.

Liberty · September 9, 2015 9:31 pm

But there's no indication that she did it to hurt him. It seems that she believed that he would be gravely hurt if she didn't do it (it would break him).

Harriet · September 9, 2015 9:36 pm

Then we have a new topic here: Is Mary not as intelligent as we used to think?
Discuss!

RavenMorganLeigh · September 9, 2015 9:44 pm

Well, there's intellectual intelligence and emotional intelligence. Surely, Mary has the former. I'd say she has less emotional intelligence than Sherlock, if she thought that shooting Sherlock ( with the likelihood of killing him) wouldn't break John, but lying to him for the entirety of their courtship and subsequent marriage, wouldn't.

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (September 9, 2015 11:59 pm)

tonnaree · September 9, 2015 11:52 pm

I want to see this John with a gun in his hand.

RavenMorganLeigh · September 10, 2015 12:01 am

tonnaree wrote:

I want to see this John with a gun in his hand.

That would be kinda HOT.

Liberty · September 10, 2015 6:41 am

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
Well, there's intellectual intelligence and emotional intelligence. Surely, Mary has the former. I'd say she has less emotional intelligence than Sherlock, if she thought that shooting Sherlock ( with the likelihood of killing him) wouldn't break John, but lying to him for the entirety of their courtship and subsequent marriage, wouldn't.

Yes, I think she's intelligent, but seems to lack insight at times (kind of funny when she made that comment to Sherlock about human nature). Or maybe it was a rational thought - after all, you'd expect that finding out would be devastating. I'm actually surprised that John takes it so well. So I can kind of understand why she might think like that, and I'm pretty certain she didn't do it to hurt him.

Don't get me wrong: I think she does terrible things and has very little to redeem her. But I don't see the point in trying to paint her blacker and claim that she did things deliberately to hurt John. John was her weak point too, I think, and she was protective of him, which I think must be why Sherlock feels safe to leave John alone with her. To be honest, even if they do go down the route of making her an arch-villain rather than redeeming her, I'd like them to leave that aspect in (loving and protecting John). (Or is it a bit of a cliché?)

Last edited by Liberty (September 10, 2015 6:58 am)

RavenMorganLeigh · September 10, 2015 7:04 am

I think my problem-- my sticking point is the idea of "She did it for love" becoming an excuse to give her a Moral pass. It's like there's some sort of disconnect going on here-- and I have to think that it's two things: she's female and she's "in love". Pretty toxic "love", to be sure-- but there it is. But somehow, because of that we are asked not to judge her too harshly-- when what she did was absolutely horrible--to John!!!

I honestly don't understand why those whose favorite character happens to be John Watson aren't up in arms over the lack of respect Mary has shown for him. And I don't actually see anything to show that she was actually protective of him, other than her running to Sherlock about the skip code. And then she stood aside and let Sherlock rescue John. Other than that-- she's been focused on protecting herself. If she were really worried about "not breaking John", she would have been honest with him in the first place-- or at least instead of handing him a thumb drive, had the decency and courage to just talk to him!

But she didn't-- and now we're in this mess. (I'm flashing on Laurel and Hardy) "Here's ANOTHER fine mess you've got us in!"

SusiGo · September 10, 2015 7:18 am

I think a deeply moral man like John cannot be happy in this relationship. Not that I do not wish it to him, I just think it is not possible.

RavenMorganLeigh · September 10, 2015 7:24 am

SusiGo wrote:
I think a deeply moral man like John cannot be happy in this relationship. Not that I do not wish it to him, I just think it is not possible.

YES, exactly!!!!!

mrshouse · September 10, 2015 7:49 am

Swanpride wrote:
My point wasn't about the question if Mary deserves happiness, it was about the question if John deserves it. For the better or the worse, he loves her. So shouldn't we wish him to be happy in this relationship?

Firstly, if John deserves happiness (which he clearly does, there are lots of users here who don't HATE him but simply cannot follow him during S3...) and we assume that this happiness is definitely connected with being with Mary ( which I personally doubt) than Mary must be deserving as well. Which she isn't in the eyes of Mary-sceptics. Because she is not given anything in the end to empathize with the thought of her being happy and the main character being throttled, slapped, shot, snarked at and sent away for his feelings, no matter if friendshippy, romantic, brotherly whatever.
Secondly I seriously wonder: what kind of happiness would that be? It is often argued that Mary fits so well into the Sherlock world because she's the same. But we don't even know her name? All the "Hamish" and "William etc." Sceneries for nothing? I don't think so. If this is the face of "true love and happiness" I never want to see a romance ever again....

SusiGo · September 10, 2015 10:05 am

Yes, yes, and yes.

Zatoichi · September 10, 2015 11:23 am

Yes, yes and yes from me, too. I know forgiveness would be the angelic thing to do (and we are probably supposed to admire John for that), but when it comes to her I still feel like Argus Filch: My ~~cat~~ Sherlock has been ~~petrified~~ shot and I wanna see some punishment!!

But then again after all that's been done I don't want anyone of them to kill her or to take the baby from her and hand her over.. I don't know what solution I'd prefer to be honest. Happiness for all is not an option, I suppose.. So I just want her to go, in her own time but rather quickly.

Last edited by Zatoichi (September 10, 2015 11:45 am)

Liberty · September 10, 2015 6:27 pm

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
I think my problem-- my sticking point is the idea of "She did it for love" becoming an excuse to give her a Moral pass. It's like there's some sort of disconnect going on here-- and I have to think that it's two things: she's female and she's "in love". Pretty toxic "love", to be sure-- but there it is. But somehow, because of that we are asked not to judge her too harshly-- when what she did was absolutely horrible--to John!!!

I honestly don't understand why those whose favorite character happens to be John Watson aren't up in arms over the lack of respect Mary has shown for him. And I don't actually see anything to show that she was actually protective of him, other than her running to Sherlock about the skip code. And then she stood aside and let Sherlock rescue John. Other than that-- she's been focused on protecting herself. If she were really worried about "not breaking John", she would have been honest with him in the first place-- or at least instead of handing him a thumb drive, had the decency and courage to just talk to him!

But she didn't-- and now we're in this mess. (I'm flashing on Laurel and Hardy) "Here's ANOTHER fine mess you've got us in!"

I don't think love gives her a moral pass at all (I'm sure I wrote a post about that a while back! About love being a vicious motivator and so on ... but I suppose it's inevitable that we go round in circles when we don't get any new information after such a long time!).

What I was saying that (if what Sherlock tells us is true, etc. etc.) her aim wasn't to hurt John. It was primarily to protect herself, but she does show some protection of John - she tries to avoid him being hurt (by being "broken", by being accussed of murder, etc.).   What I genuinely don't see is her deliberately trying to hurt John.

I know the argument is that she risked him losing Sherlock, but from what she says she thought the alternative would be worse for him.   In a way, we know much more about John and Sherlock's relationship than she does.   She only met John after Sherlock's "death", and what she saw was that the death did not break him, and that he was able to fall in love, etc.   So actually, I'm not sure she knows quite how much John loves Sherlock, AND she has seen that Sherlock's death would not break him (and thinking of it, him being shot in the line of duty might be a less traumatic loss than the "suicide"). However, she believes that finding out ahout her would break him AND she would lose him.

I think Mary's thinking is much, much closer to that of a psychopath anybody else who is accused of being a psychopath in the show.   She chooses the lesser of those two evils without seeing any other route out of the situation.   But nowhere do I see her doing it because she wants to see John hurt.   (Same as Sherlock didn't fake suicide because he wanted to hurt John - the alternative would have hurt John much more and possibly have seen both of them dead.   Sherlock did it for noble reasons, whereas Mary didn't, but I don't think either wanted to hurt John).

nakahara · September 10, 2015 8:03 pm

Liberty wrote:
(2) However, she doesn't seem to have done anything deliberately to hurt John - has been protective of him, in fact. (For instance, lying to him was a terrible thing, but I'm pretty sure she didn't to it to hurt him - she did it to protect herself and him).

Sherlock also didn´t lie to John about his faked death and about the Fall to hurt him. He also did it to protect himself and him. Plus, Sherlock didn´t make his transgression worse by attempting to murder John´s loved one, for example his sister Harry, for whatever reason.

Yet this very show established it that Sherlock´s deed should be punished by headbutting, vicious beating, contempt and eternal atonement and that no pain is enough to make Sherlock´s lying "right".

So why should Mary be forgiven for the same thing followed by the murder attempt next?

In law, you have a rule that cases similar in their key points shouldn´t be judged differently. So, if Mary should ever be forgiven, let´s reduce her to a pathetic, beaten wretch the way Sherlock was reduced first....

nakahara · September 10, 2015 8:14 pm

Liberty wrote:
I don't think love gives her a moral pass at all (I'm sure I wrote a post about that a while back! About love being a vicious motivator and so on ... but I suppose it's inevitable that we go round in circles when we don't get any new information after such a long time!).

What I was saying that (if what Sherlock tells us is true, etc. etc.) her aim wasn't to hurt John. It was primarily to protect herself, but she does show some protection of John - she tries to avoid him being hurt (by being "broken", by being accussed of murder, etc.).   What I genuinely don't see is her deliberately trying to hurt John.

I know the argument is that she risked him losing Sherlock, but from what she says she thought the alternative would be worse for him.   In a way, we know much more about John and Sherlock's relationship than she does.   She only met John after Sherlock's "death", and what she saw was that the death did not break him, and that he was able to fall in love, etc.   So actually, I'm not sure she knows quite how much John loves Sherlock, AND she has seen that Sherlock's death would not break him (and thinking of it, him being shot in the line of duty might be a less traumatic loss than the "suicide"). However, she believes that finding out ahout her would break him AND she would lose him.

I think Mary's thinking is much, much closer to that of a psychopath anybody else who is accused of being a psychopath in the show.   She chooses the lesser of those two evils without seeing any other route out of the situation.   But nowhere do I see her doing it because she wants to see John hurt.   (Same as Sherlock didn't fake suicide because he wanted to hurt John - the alternative would have hurt John much more and possibly have seen both of them dead.   Sherlock did it for noble reasons, whereas Mary didn't, but I don't think either wanted to hurt John).

What was Mary´s first sentence when she recognised Sherlock in TEH?

"Oh, God, Oh, God.... do you know what you have done?"

(Which in my book means "Do you know what your loss have done to John? Do you?")

And yet the same person is suddenly not aware how devastating Sherlock´s loss would be to John?

Is she schisophrenic or does she have retrograde amnesia?

SusiGo · September 10, 2015 8:18 pm

I think she must have known how hard it was for John, especially if we assume that she and John were already a couple during MHR. The scene with Lestrade clearly showed that he was not over Sherlock's death. And then we see them at the grave right at the beginning of TEH.

Harriet · September 10, 2015 8:28 pm

nakahara wrote:
What was Mary´s first sentence when she recognised Sherlock in TEH?

"Oh, God, Oh, God.... do you know what you have done?"

(Which in my book means "Do you know what your loss have done to John? Do you?")

And yet the same person is suddenly not aware how devastating Sherlock´s loss would be to John?

Is she schizophrenic or does she have retrograde amnesia?

Thanks for remembering that scene, nakahara, my question about her intelligence was unnecessary.

Liberty · September 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Oh, she knew it was hard and that he was deeply affected, but even with Sherlock being supposedly dead, John had managed to fall in love. And she doesn't see him at the beginning, in the initial extremes of grief. She can't have our perspective that goes back years. But nevertheless, he survived Sherlock's death. The big unknown (for Mary) is how he would survive Mary's betrayal. From her perspective, she thinks he wouldn't. Even though she turns out to be wrong, I think we're being told that's her mindset as she takes the shot. And remember (according to Sherlock, etc. - I'll maybe stop saying that because we all know there might be more revealed later, but this is how it stands now) that she wasn't planning to kill Sherlock. She took a risk that she might, but the only other option presented to us as being in her mind was to kill both Sherlock and Magnussen (safest for her, not so good for John ... or Sherlock!). And it doesn't make sense to me that she would shoot Sherlock to hurt John - how do you explain her motivation? What would she gain from hurting him?

Nakahara, I'm not a big fan of punishment in that sense, and I would not like to see John beating up Mary either, especially while pregnant. The restaurants scenes are supposed to be funny, but I think it would be difficult to make an equivalent scene with Mary funny.