Let me explain, because I think it was me who brought up the comparism!  This was in response to the idea that Mary is being presented as irredeemable, similar to, if not worse than Moriarty.    I don't agree - I think she's much more ambiguous.   Not so much different shades of grey, but a big blank of unknown.  

I think an interesting choice has been made to make Sherlock essentially carry out her murder for her.    It means that we can't just see Mary as evil and irredeemable because she's a murderer, because we don't think that of Sherlock and he's now also a murderer.   Not only that he went for the same target as Mary (Magnussen), and kind of for the same reasons (both are protecting "the three" in some way). 

I think the argument was that they can't be compared because Sherlock atones for his crime and looks for punishment.   But I would argue that that's not the case.   It's obviously part of his plan that he's seen carrying out the murder (as otherwise John would be implicated, which would mean Sherlock failed to protect the three. And I wonder about protecting Mycroft too).   it's quite possible that if it had been possible to pretend Magnussen was murdered by an unknown assailant, Sherlcock would have done that (and Moftiss say that's what they think happened in the ACD story).    We're also not shown him making reparations to Magnussen's family, or even going to trial or to prison.  He takes the preferred option of going off to likely death rather than face "justice".   This is not a criticism of how he acts - but just saying that we're not being shown that this crime is different because Sherlock atones for it. 

Instead we're being shown similarities: both Sherlock and Mary came to the conclusion that Magnussen had to be killed: one tried to do it, and the other did it.  The difference with Mary is that she's done it before, that there were other murders.   But if they were all similar to the Magnussen one, then does that make her irredeemable?  If Sherlock was ever in a similar situation again again, would he become irredeemable.  (I don't think so.  I also believe he planned Moriarty's death, so he does have some "previous" .    We're being shown that murder can sometimes be justified, which raises the possibility that all of Mary's murders could have been justified.   I don't think the story would have been set up like that if we're meant to think that she was an irredeemable villain.  (She may become one.   But I don't think she's being shown that way at the moment).

Which leaves shooting Sherlock as the problem, rather than Mary's past.    I don't think anybody thinks she was justified in shooting Sherlock, but is she redeemable?   (I haven't decided for myself, but Sherlock seems to think she is). 
 

Last edited by Liberty (September 18, 2015 9:31 am)

nakahara wrote:

Lola Red wrote:

How is it that any attempts to understand why Mary did what she did (which btw is different from painting her white, she is still a dark shade of grey, but instead of a “cold hearted psychopathic killer” she is a “loving friend and wife and (ex-) assassin who has lied about her past and shot her good friend Sherlock in an attempt to keep it concealed”) is head canon, while disregarding everything we see on screen before HLV and parts of what we see during is a accurate representation of the facts? I would say either head canon is allowed for everyone. I have no problem if it is treated as such, but then please also for everyone, not just for those we disagree with.
 

Well, an official authority, that is Amanda Abbington herself, declared Mary a psychopath not that long ago. Plus, we witnessed her emotioneless, calculating behaviour right there on the sceen.

I already pointed out that everything we saw on the sceen before HLV could be an act or a facade from Mary´s side. Show is deliberately ambivalent here in the manner that never occured with Sherlock or John. So until we get more data on Mary in S4, the outlooks on Mary (that she is a loving friend or wife, that she loves John and likes Sherlock, that she has a heart of gold etc.) will remain headcanons, because they are not supported by sufficient evidence yet. But of course, it may happen that they will be all validated in S4. Because of the deliberate ambivalence, the writers have numerous possibilities where to lead her character next....
 
 

but you will agree with me that the marked bit is also head canon. yet it is usually treated as a sufficent base of discussion. why is the same not possible with other pieces of head canon, without disregarding them as white-painting? or to put it differently, why, when it comes to Mary, is black-painting ok and white-painting (if you want to keep to those terms), not?

Last edited by Lola Red (September 18, 2015 10:04 am)

Lola Red wrote:

nakahara wrote:

I already pointed out that everything we saw on the sceen before HLV could be an act or a facade from Mary´s side.
 

but you will agree with me that the marked bit is also head canon. yet it is usually treated as a sufficent base of discussion. why is the same not possible with other pieces of head canon, without disregarding them as white-painting? or to put it differently, why, when it comes to Mary, is black-painting ok and white-painting (if you want to keep to those terms), not?

Is it? Isn´t it what Sherlock openly declares in Leinster Gardens?
"That´s what you are Mary.... a facade."
 

Dorothy83 wrote:

OK, just to make this simple: if we suddely got told in s3 that before meeting John Sherlock was going around killing innocents for money, or that his name is not his real name because he changed it when he went into hiding so he wouldn't get arrested/killed by the family of his victims, and if he suddenly shot Lestrade or even John, I would think that Mofftiss have gone completely insane and I would stop liking Sherlock immediately.

Whether I like a character or I don't depends on what they do, I don't have double standards.
 

Yes to all that.

Plus, perfect post Zatoichi! You absolutely perfectly defined why is not really possible to compare Sherlock with Mary.
 

nakahara wrote:

Vhanja wrote:

Sherlock also openly declares that John should trust Mary.

Different context for both situations, don´t you think?
Plus, should Sherlock tell him "she is an untrustworthy killer" in front of the paramedics?
 

This is my point, why does it only work one way? The other way around it is head canon, white-painting, different context. Why can’t it be: “Ok, that is another way to look at it”?

Last edited by Lola Red (September 18, 2015 10:39 am)

Lola Red wrote:

This is my point, why does it only work one way? The other way around it is head canon, white-painting, different context. Why can’t it be: “Ok, that is another way to look at it”?

OK, I stated many things that excuse John and Sherlock in my eyes + they were visible onscreen during the show. This (and Zatoichi´s) post was mostly ignored here. Please, do a similar thing and list some facts that we can see on screen during the show and are in favour of Mary - especially in HLV. This would be the best proof that not headcanons, but real facts are in play here.
 

Liberty wrote:

But we don't get told that Mary killed "innocents", or that she did it "for money".  That's speculation, which may or may not be correct.  

You're right. We don't get told that. We get told something much worse: that was she did was so bad that John will stop loving her if he found out (by her own admission). Which, gosh, gives me shivers - do you think John would stop loving her if he found out that she did what he also did - killed criminals??

No, he wouldn't. So what has she done?? Tortured people? Killed children? what?

As you can see, it's really hard to feel better about Mary even if we cling to the fact that we don't get told in detail what she's done.

Liberty wrote:

The only target we see is the same one that Sherlock later feels justified in murdering 

Do you really think he feels justified? Because I don't see it that way. I see a man who has screwed everything up, naively provoked an evil man who will now certainly go after not only Mary but also his best friend (as in fact CAM starts doing straight away!) and is now desperate. I see a man who perfectly knows a murder in cold blood isn't justified hence why he makes sure he does it in front of MI6 so John wouldn't be implicated and they would know exactly who to arrest, a man who sinks down on his knees and accepts whatever punishment is coming his way. A man who has resorted to the extreme, illegal option in order to save John's life - but knows that it shouldn't have gone this way.

How exactly does he feel justified?

Liberty wrote:

And the big thing is, that we need Sherlock to figure out Mary - Mary's background only becomes possibly OK because Sherlock seems to trust her and because he carries out a similar crime and we still accept him.   We're shown a way in which murder can be acceptable in this fictional world.  I mean, if we'd been told before HLV that Sherlock would try to solve a case, but ended up murdering a businessman because he couldn't find the evidence he wanted, then we'd think that was unacceptable.   But we get a different view when watching it.

I have objections to this too. We've shown that the murder can be acceptable? Really? What we've shown is that Sherlock will be sent to his death. Either that, or possibly life imprisonment. What about that sends the message that what he did was acceptable?
As I mentioned above, in my opinion we are told that Sherlock is desperate, and finds himself having to choose between the lesser of two evils - John suffering, or his own suffering after murdering CAM. Neither of those are shown as acceptable, as I see it.
Also, once again - I don't see any similarities whatsoever between what Mary did (which would make John stop loving her) and what Sherlock did (which in fact saved John's life and which didn't make John stop loving him, at all).
 

Last edited by Dorothy83 (September 18, 2015 11:02 am)

@Dorothy, I'm trying not to overquote!   But I'll answer your ponts.

We don't know what Mary thought might make John not love her.  So that's not something we can judge her on (yet).  I've had various ideas: that she used seduction when she worked as an agent, that John was actually a target, that there was an ulterior motive to the wedding, etc.  Or it could be something much, much worse.  It could be something that would make John not love her, but isn't actually that bad.  But it's all speculation.   We just don't know at this point.  So there's scope for the story to go either way. 

I do think Sherlock feels justified in shooting Magnussen, or he wouldn't do it.   I think he finds it extremely difficult and looks pretty horrified when he realises what he has to do.  But I think he believes it's the right thing, before and after.   If he could see a better solution, he'd have taken it. 

I do think that the murder is made acceptable to us.  It doesn't matter that Sherlock gets sent on the mission (if anything that maybe makes it even more acceptable).   We are still watching, still on Sherlock's side.  If people truly find it unacceptable and unforgiveable, then they wouldn't be engaged with the show in the same way.   I think Sherlock has to be a hero (even if he claims he's not!).  And yes, there might be a minority who think he can no longer be considered one, and have bowed out (I can understand that - murder is about one of the worst things they could think of for him to do), but I think most of us are still here and still like the character.

I think we're just talking about different meanings, of "acceptable", "justified", etc.   By "acceptable", I mean that we still accept Sherlock despite the murder.   Just read some of the responses here: people are still with him, on his side, even though I'd guess we're all pretty anti-murder.   That's quite a feat of writing!

And by Sherlock thinking the murder was justfied, I mean that he thought it was the best option, before and after.   I don't get the feeling he regrets it, or wishes he could suffer to atone for it.   And I actually think that is part of his character, the being on the side of angels but not one of them: he gives himself permission to do something very dark, if it's the right thing to do.  

Just a general point: I'm talking about how the character is being presented, what we're being shown about her, rather than what I'd feel about those things in real life.   There's a bit in ASIB where Sherlock tortures the CIA guy quite horribly by throwing him repeatedly out of a window.  He's torturing him to the extent of planning to cause fractures, but also risking death, brain damage, permanent disability, etc.  In the world of real life, it's pretty unacceptable.   But I don't think that's what we're being shown.   We're being shown Sherlock being sweetly protective of Mrs Hudson, and some comedy violence - it's funny, not horrific.   I accept that, and I still think of Sherlock postively.   And that's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of with Mary: what are we being shown? 
 

nakahara wrote:

Lola Red wrote:

This is my point, why does it only work one way? The other way around it is head canon, white-painting, different context. Why can’t it be: “Ok, that is another way to look at it”?

OK, I stated many things that excuse John and Sherlock in my eyes + they were visible onscreen during the show. This (and Zatoichi´s) post was mostly ignored here. Please, do a similar thing and list some facts that we can see on screen during the show and are in favour of Mary - especially in HLV. This would be the best proof that not headcanons, but real facts are in play here.
 

I have done so in the great majority of my posts, but I will go into more depth assuming that you will have the grace to not disregard everything I say as head canon or circumstances that make everything I say invalid. In short, I think (or at least I assume until we get more data) that everything we have seen till now was genuine. So I think that her love for John and her friendship with Sherlock before HLV was genuine, I think her going into her assassin persona was genuine, I think her "I'm sorry Sherlock, I truly am" is genuine, I think the dangerous vibe she was giving off between the shooting and 221B was genuine, I think Sherlock’s renewed trust in her was genuine, I think her relieve at Christmas and at the plane was genuine. For me, that makes for a deeply conflicted character, one that is capable of shooting a friend to protect her secrets, but also for one that can feel love and friendship for other characters. Of cause there is always interpretation of the facts involved. If I would assume that Mary was planted, never loved John or liked Sherlock, then I would interpret the events of HLV different. But as I don’t here is what I hear and see, starting from the shooting as I think that would be the most interesting for you:

“Sherlock, if you take one more step I swear I will kill you” – Mary is in great trouble. She wanted to do this discretely, she wanted to have the life back she had built for herself. Now that Sherlock is here, this is no longer possible. He says he wants to help her, but he even if he means it, he couldn’t. CAM can only be stopped in one way and he has just prevented it from happening.
“No, Mrs. Watson, you won’t” – A.G.R.A knows that the sensible thing is to take this person out, then everything can go largely back to normal (she has helped John get over his grieve once, she can do it again), but Mary does not want to kill her friend, both collide and it almost costs Sherlock his life.
“I’m sorry Sherlock, I truly am” She is, she never wanted it to come to this. She just wanted CAM gone and go back to being with John and being friends with Sherlock.

(I will go from here to when Mary hears that Sherlock woke up with her name on his lips, because everything in between depends on the accuracy of Sherlock’s deduction)

By now she must have fully realized she is in trouble. Not only is CAM still alive, but Sherlock clearly remembers something. She has to get the message across. He cannot tell John under any circumstances, which is what she tells Sherlock in his drugged state.

(Then Sherlock flees the hospital, very aware that Mary poses a danger as long as he has information that she does not want John to hear. Mary goes after him, and through Anderson arrives at Leister Gardens)

She has a gun, and she thinks she is ready to use it once more to ensure Sherlock’s silence. Sherlock disagrees, otherwise he would not put John in the line of fire while he stayed out of the fighting zone. He is right, despite all her threating, she can still not bring herself to shoot him at first side. He starts to explain the trap, getting her to talk. Then he reveals his trick to her. This is definitely the end of her world, now John knows. Defeated, she follows them back to Baker Street, let’s John have his anger without trying to explain anything, she just goes blank and let’s everything happen (this scene plays out mainly between John and Sherlock, Mary only has very few lines in the whole 221B scene). Sherlock actually seems willing to take her on as a client and so, despite his anger, does John. She offers up all of her past in the form of an USB stick, flinching when she has to tell John that the letters written on it are her initials. It hurts to admit that even the name he calls her is not the one she was born with. She takes her chance as Sherlock’s and John’s client, but with every piece of truth she offers, the distance between her and John is growing. She has one request: not having to see this process completing, so she asks him to read what is on the stick without her watching. Sherlock gives his version of the events until the paramedics arrive. She, together with John rush to his aid when his knees buckle, but when the paramedics try to take over she stands back, looking not quite sure what will happen next.

(From there we get nothing until Christmas. It is not clear if John and Mary still live together at this point, but they apparently do not talk much.)

She seems very fond of Sherlock’s parents, but filches when Dad asks her if she is the “sane one”, she knows she isn’t. John comes in and (assuming they had the May wedding they were talking about in TEH and the whole CAM business happened a month afterwards) after almost half a year seems willing to talk, with all the Holmeses just one room away. She reacts snappish. He makes his speech and throws the USB into the fire. She cannot believe he would just take her back like that “but you don’t even know my name”, better even, he starts bantering playfully, so she joins in (we have seen that kind of interaction between them since TEH).

(At about this point, Mary faints and we only see her again at the plane. John’s questions to Sherlock imply that only Sherlock and Mycroft know about the details of the mission)

She gets out of the car, they have to say goodbye to Sherlock. They liekly think that thanks to Mycroft he has avoided going to jail, but he has to do some kind of job for him. CAM is gone, John is back at her side and Sherlock seems to have forgiven her completely, they hug, he even calls her his girl. As far as Mary knows, her nightmare has ended and despite all her mistakes there is no lasting damage done.

Last edited by Lola Red (September 18, 2015 1:16 pm)