Offline
Where in HLV have we ever seen "the happy Watsons?"
Offline
SusiGo wrote:
Where in HLV have we ever seen "the happy Watsons?"
The tarmac scene.
Offline
This is not funny.
Offline
I've read the post that was linked again, and realise I've misunderstood: the question was about how would Mary benefit from wounding rather than killing Sherlock. So I've gone through and tried to answer the questions, as I think they're really good ones! I'm not pro-Mary, unfortunately, but I don't think that matters too much.
If Mary’s shot was truly “surgery”, if Mary didn’t want Sherlock to die and intended for him to live, how did shooting him in the first place help or benefit her at all?
The only way it would benefit her was that Sherlock would be alive. In all other ways, it's a much worse course of action for her than killing him (and Magnussen).
I think that must have been a big part of Sherlock's deduction, and helps to explain why he's able to forgive her and to feel that John will be safe with her. It turns out that when it would have benefited her hugely to kill Sherlock and put her at risk to not do so, she chose the latter, because (presumably) she cared for him. (Yes, she did almost kill him, so mixed messages, but I've probably complained enough here about my dislike of that plot point! I'm just trying to see what Sherlock sees, as presumably he understands her motivations).
Because if you go by the theory that this was a move to silence Sherlock, but only temporarily, what good did it do Mary? Or Sherlock or John, for that matter?
Basically, that Sherlock got to survive (just!). That benefited both him and John. And as I said, the fact that there wasn't any benefit for Mary beyond having Sherlock live, is the point, I think. It's not even as if she'd think she could keep his friendship if she lived, so she doesn't benefit herself in any way (beyond knowing that Sherlock survived). Because of that, Sherlock believes that she cared enough that she was unable to kill him, even when it put her at risk. (Although not enough to stop her shooting him).
John still found out she was lying to him, because Sherlock outed her. And of COURSE he did. Even if he’s defending Mary and her actions, even if he’s trying to understand, and even if he is still supportive of her relationship with John, he’s not going to keep something like that from John. Does anyone think Mary really believed he would?
I don't think she was thinking long term at that point. And we know that she misjudged both of them (Sherlock did accept her case, John wasn't broken), and she does know that Sherlock has a history of keeping things from John. I imagine she was going to confront him at some point and "negotiate", now that she knew he took her threats seriously. She wasn't hiding who she was from him any longer. I find it hard to imagine this happen in any sort of friendly way, so I imagine it would have involved some sort of threat. (Although it could possibly be a sort of damsel in distress appeal).
So, not only do Mary’s secrets still get revealed, but they’re compounded by the fact that she shot and nearly killed Sherlock. John would be pissed enough about the hiding of the past I imagine. How does grievous injury of John’s best friend improve the situation at all?
It gives Mary that chance to negotiate and threaten. There wasn't time for it in the office. She tries to threaten Sherlock but it doesn't work. At that point, she didn't believe that John could cope with knowing who she was, or that Sherlock would take her case. I don't believe she thought revealing herself to John (or letting Sherlock do it) was an option.
You see, I always theorized that Mary DID expect Sherlock to die, but that she didn’t want him to die instantly because she wanted to be sure John would stay behind with Sherlock and not come after her.
I really like that theory, but Sherlock doesn't seem to work it out. So unless we're going to have it revealed in S4, I don't think we're meant to believe it (and I suspect we're not going to go back to the same deduction in S4).
Do you think Mary perhaps did intend for Sherlock to die in the moment, but later realized her mistake when he stood up for her?
No. I think if she had intended to kill him, she'd have shot him in the head (going by what we see as Sherlock tells the story). But more importantly, she'd also have shot Magnussen.
Do you think it was surgery and Mary thought she could convince Sherlock to keep quiet about what he saw?
Yes. Maybe "hoped" is more accurate than "thought".
Do you think we will find out more about her backstory going forward?
I hope so. I don't think we will find out more about the shooting, but I think Mary being an ex-assassin and secret agent is too big to ignore.
Do you think she will die or leave the story in some other way?
Probably. I can actually see the writers playing with the idea that she dies "off-screen" in the books. They've kind of reversed everything else - the books show her up to the point of proposal, then she "disappears", whereas in the show, she appears almost at the point of the proposal. That could just mean that they are going to show her death on-screen. Or it could mean that she's not going to die at all.
Do you think she will have a redemption arc, or do you feel she doesn’t need to be redeemed or has already been redeemed through John and Sherlock’s forgiveness?
If she's going to be a "goodie" then I think she will have some sort of redemption. I don't think there's quite enough in HLV. Perhaps she'll even be more of a villain first, and then have a redemption (although I suppose it wouldn't be good to have too much swinging around between the two). I don't think it's so likely to go the other way (that she'll be redeemed, then become a villain again). It's possible that her death or disappearance might be redemptive.
(Sorry, this is long! Trying to answer all the questions!).
Last edited by Liberty (October 23, 2015 1:13 pm)
Offline
Liberty wrote:
If Mary’s shot was truly “surgery”, if Mary didn’t want Sherlock to die and intended for him to live, how did shooting him in the first place help or benefit her at all?
The only way it would benefit her was that Sherlock would be alive. In all other ways, it's a much worse course of action for her than killing him (and Magnussen).
I think that must have been a big part of Sherlock's deduction, and helps to explain why he's able to forgive her and to feel that John will be safe with her. It turns out that when it would have benefited her hugely to kill Sherlock and put her at risk to not do so, she chose the latter, because (presumably) she cared for him. (Yes, she did almost kill him, so mixed messages, but I've probably complained enough here about my dislike of that plot point! I'm just trying to see what Sherlock sees, as presumably he understands her motivations).
But there would have been an easy way to have Sherlock being alive - not shooting him first place.
Offline
Mary's dodgy past caught up with her and she did not want to lose her fresh future with John.
If anybody understands loving and not wanting to lose John...it's Sherlock.
Offline
You mean why did she leave him alive but incapacitated, rather than just not shoot at all, Schmiezi? I think she believed he would tell John as soon as he walked in (or even that he would try to get the gun off her, or try to stop her leaving - he didn't believe her threat). Or if she'd stopped to try and negotiate there and then, John would have walked in and seen her. Not only would that mean that the thing she would do anything to stop would happen, but she'd probably have gone to prison for the rest of her life). So I think that's why she didn't consider that as an option. That could still all happen if she shot Sherlock and left him alive, but it did give her a chance to negotiate later, when Sherlock would believe her threat.
So:
1. leaving Sherlock alive and well = worst possible scenario for Mary, she loses everything
2, killing Sherlock and Magnussen = best possible scenario for Mary, she is safe, but Sherlock would be dead
3. leaving Sherlock alive but incapacitated = averts the danger for a while, Mary may well be able to keep safe, and keep John, may lose Sherlock's friendship, but Sherlock would be alive.
I don't think she really considered the first one (maybe very briefly, because she did try to threaten Sherlock initially, instead of just shooting him, but she found that didn't work). And I think Sherlock worked out that the only reason she'd choose 2 over 3 was because she cared for him.
Offline
Re. 3: Which still leaves us with the fact that Sherlock ended as good as dead.
Offline
Indeed.
Had this been almost anyone but Sherlock, they would have died for good (fell the wrong way and bled to death, died from shock, lacked the superior strength of will to fight back from death and claw their way back to life, etc).
Offline
Yes, this is a good argument although all this knowledge did not help him in the end. It was the idea of John being in danger that saved his life.
Offline
Well, actually, that knowledge did help him in the end, as it ensured he remained alive long enough to reach the depths of his mind and realize that John was in danger.
Offline
Yes, good point. So shall we say that the combination of having this knowledge stored in his mind plus realising that John was in danger saved his life and not Mary's surgical skills?
Offline
I absolutely agree
Offline
Crucially we need to know what Sherlock and John think...
Though we may want to ask why Sherlock really is being brought back,
Offline
Plus the help from the medical team.
The romantic notion is that he was brought back to life by the thought of John being in danger. Which is cool on film (and that entire Mind Palace scene is one of my favorite ones in the entire series, truly awesome!). But in reality he was saved just as much by the medical team.
Also, he almost bled to death because she hit a vein (can't remember the name, not a medical expert), a vein that lies slightly different within each individual and is impossible to calculate precisely, especially when the person is wearing clothes.
But hitting the liver was the best (or: lesser evil) of where to hit him if she wanted him to be both incapacitated, but also with the highest chance of survival. So, yeah, impresice surgery as good as you can do it in a stressed-out situation with a gun towards someone with clothes on.
Offline
And requiring a real leap of faith if you ask me.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
Crucially we need to know what Sherlock and John think...
Though we may want to ask why Sherlock really is being brought back,
Because the show is called "Sherlock"?
Offline
I meant: is he being brought back to deal with Mary?
Offline
No. He is brought back because this is the "Sherlock and John show", not the "Mary and John show".
Offline
I did have another thought(it happens occasionally!).
Should we see the episode as a whole?
It's about people being rescued, facing up to the darkness, but redeemed and coming home.
It begins with Isaac, though we do also have the reference to John coming home after war...
Then we have Sherlock coming back to life.
Mary has to face her past, then seems to be forgiven.
Sherlock flies back.
Is Moriarty coming home, too?