Harriet wrote:

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

Well, should you still be interested in a sincere answer to your question you can find it here, otherwise, ignore along.
 
I think if Mary is intelligent or not really depends on the question if she was planted on John’s side or if she just ended up there because she fell in love. In the second case, with her past, she did not prove much intelligence. Every ex-assassin with a good head on her shoulders should keep away from Sherlock. She should have fed John’s anger and make sure those two men never see each other again. With Sherlock that close, it was only a matter of time until he would have figured her out (or about 10 seconds into the eventually inevitable encounter with Mycroft). But, if Mary was planted, she is incredibly intelligent. She managed to trick Sherlock for months while dancing around right underneath his nose. If she is a true villain, and neither Sherlock nor Mycroft where able to figure her out for months, she is a terrifying one.
 

Lola Red wrote:

Harriet wrote:

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

Well, should you still be interested in a sincere answer to your question you can find it here, otherwise, ignore along. 

What are you intending?


 

Nakahara, yes, that is all that I've been saying - that Mary was not deliberately trying to hurt John.   Not everybody agrees, but I find it difficult to find a motivation for her to hurt him.  (And also, what she did seems bad enough to me without having to find a worse motivation which isn't really there). 

I don't find the restaurant scenes funny, but I know people do and that they're meant to be funny.  I suppose it's supposed to be funny (in that situation) because it's comedy violence, and because it's the reaction people think John should have.  And it has no lasting effects.  But personally, I don't want to see Mary beaten by anybody (but especially not John or Sherlock).  I don't want to watch that.  I'd be quite happy for her to be killed off, though. 

I think what I'd like most is a proper explanation.   I've tried to write about her motivations by drawing on what we're given in the show - but really, it's so little.   I still don't like the surgery explanation. 

I still think she didn't aim to hurt John and that she believed that finding out about her would hurt him more than Sherlock being injured (considering the way people bounce back from injuries in the show, she has a point!).  In her mind, she had to act on one or the other - injuring Sherlock (which would hurt John) or revealing who she was (which would hurt John more, and put her at risk).   Or a third option was mentioned: killing Sherlock and Magnussen (which would hurt John but keep her safe).   I think the primary motivator was self-protection ... but I still don't see any motivation to hurt John, and she did take the risk of not simply shooting Sherlock in the head.

Though I didn't like Sherlock being beaten and strangled by John one bit, I didn't see him being reduced to a pathetic, beaten wretch to be honest.. He handled his bleeding nose pretty well. And that he can never atone for the Fall enough is more fanon than canon imo.. the way I see it they really reconciled at the end of TEH, and that they don't seem so close anymore is due to their circumstances. There was not much room for reestablishing their close bond with everything that happened in S3. Don't get me wrong, I really wish John had given her a much harder time and we had seen more of his protectiveness for Sherlock.. I adored that in S1/2, and almost felt betrayed for such scenes in S3 (Sherlock, we're losing you.. really?)  But I don't think seeing Mary hit rock bottom the same way Sherlock did in his mind-palace would make up for it.. Neither would John actually being violent against her. I don't know what would.. Maybe her actually making a sacrifice for Sherlock (and not in the "I aim a bit too low when shooting you to give you a chance for survival even though it could really get me into trouble old sentimental fool that I am"-way..)

I get the feeling that quite a lot of people regard the situation between Sherlock, John, and Mary as broken. 
 

I think that's an interesting aspect, that John is only at the beginning of getting to know Mary at the end of S3.    He has forgiven her, but in a way, he doesn't quite know who he has forgiven.   I know we talked about this aspect earlier, and I do think it's quite possible that the Mary he knew is still Mary.   But the revelation is such a huge one, and the Mary he thought he knew, wouldn't have acted like that. 

Yes, it does raise some professional issues if Mary was not a nurse, but employed as one and treating patients.  I think she could well have been a nurse, but it's not absolutely clear, is it?   I imagine she would have to have trained and registered after the name change (using the fake identity), but it's also possible that she faked her credentials and never trained (although more difficult as there would have to be a Mary Morstan registered as a nurse - unless she could hack the system).

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

SusiGo wrote:

I get the feeling that quite a lot of people regard the situation between Sherlock, John, and Mary as broken. 
 

I'm one of those. I keep thinking, in what world is the situation with John/Mary and ....Sherlock NOT broken? Seems pretty dysfunctional to me, even if you take johnlock comepletely out of the equation. Even if you relegate Sherlock to being a "pal" to John, and nothing more-- it's still broken. 

Why? Because John is married to someone he doesn't even know, who used to kill people for money and lethally shot his best friend . 

 
I could imagine that in the Moffat-verse it's totally fine.. It's dysfunctional but they are all dysfunctional in a way and such a cool gang of psychopaths! How lucky little Sheryl is to be born in such a kick-ass family!!1!

Ehm..

But seriously, he doesn't know Mary, and he chose to toss the only evidence for her true nature and what she is capable of in the fire. If he had at least looked at the stick, decided he could live with what he saw and based his decision on that.. But he just closed his eyes to the truth and based their marriage on "I don't want to know what I possibly couldn't stomach". What we as the audience get to stomach this decision just minutes after we learned the "true surgery explanation" is that Sherlock obviously wants it like that. Because he still thinks they are great together, just like his parents, for some unknown reason. Probably because he just likes her, as does John. Additional reasons besides "because I say so, trust me" aren't given, and for those of us who don't just like her and thus forget everything else it's more than a bit thin.. (But I read that they explicitly stated the show wasn't written for people who don't forget everything they saw as soon as the telly is switched off.. so there.)

Zatoichi wrote:

 I could imagine that in the Moffat-verse it's totally fine.. It's dysfunctional but they are all dysfunctional in a way and such a cool gang of psychopaths! How lucky little Sheryl is to be born in such a kick-ass family!!1!

Now this is a thing I have wanted to say for a long time: 
I am currently watching my 8th series of Dr. Who, starting with the Ninth Doctor. And I have often read in here, especially with regard to Mary, that this is what Moffat does. IMO it is not, no way. I cannot remember a single instance in all those episodes and specials in which we are forced to accept or even like a character who it not at least basically a good person. Moffat's "good" characters are flawed, the Doctor included, they make mistakes and can be hurtful but in the end the good prevails. They show regret and remorse for their wrongdoings. Families sometimes may be a motley crew but they are connected by love (Rose and her mother, Donna and her family, etc.) I cannot remember a single character who is "on the side of the angels" which I would compare to Mary. Not one. So please explain to me how the Mary situation is typcially Moffat.