RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Question on whether an apology is acceptable: If someone walked up, slapped you really, really hard in the face, ( for something that wasn't your fault!) and then said to you, " I'm sorry___, I truly am", how seriously would you take that apology? Would you be in a hurry to forgive? Just asking.

 
you are leaving out how the person is under lots of pressure, emotional confusion, fear of loosing a loved one, forced into a decision she maybe rather wouldn't do.

The scenario you describe, leaving out the rest, would indeed make an apology look stupid.

I just think there's a bit more going okn here.
The least I would say for Marys sake is that she doesn't shoot Sherlock for the fun of it. She has got reasons. How we judge this reasons... different story again.

Yes, he did choose Mary, but I don't see that being "chose her over everything". And I don't see her being the reason their goodbye was a bit distant (and I agree that it was).

I never saw any choice between Sherlock and John, I never saw that as an option anywhere. Especially considering how Sherlock pushed John to forgive Mary. No, that doesn't make it Sherlock's "fault" that John did, but it does mean that I am unable to see there being a choice between the two of them.

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Vhanja wrote:

Well, it seems that Sherlock has forgiven her.

I don't see a choice between Sherlock and Mary at Christmas. Could you please elaborate what you mean?

 
Okay, here's my reasoning. After Sherlock was shot by Mary, after the forgiveness scene at Christmas, when Sherlock and John are headed off to Appledore, Sherlock asks John if he still wants to save his wife, and John says yes. And after that, Sherlock shoots Magnussen to save Mary for John, at the cost of his own life. And when Sherlock's flying off on his suicide mission, John remains hand in hand with Mary, after the most distant goodbye I could have imagined. ALL of those things together say to me, John chose Mary.

He chose her over his own sense of right and wrong, he chose her over his sense of loyalty. In the end (if we're going strictly by a surface reading) John chose Mary over everything.

There's this tendency to want to excuse John for this, and say, "oh, Sherlock made him do it,", or, other variations of that which absolve John of any responsibility for that choice. I tend to find that that view emasculates John, where I'd just rather he owned it, and later realizes that he might have made a mistake, and owns up to it. That's closer to the John I know. He'd admit when he's wrong.

 

Maybe John is simply in love with his wife at this point. And not in love with Sherlock. Shout at me, but maybe he simply chooses his wife instead of his best friend, and I think that's a choice which happens in real life, and isn't unrealistic.

Sherlock didn't tell John that him being send to a death mission was the price for saving his wife. Yes, because nobody knew. But we don't know how John's choice would have been in that scenario, if he could have chosen. Not so sure then. Would he let Sherlock become a murderer for saving Mary? We don't know.
So, yes, he chooses Mary. Several times. But I get the impression he totally misjudges Sherlock here. Doesn't realise where Sherlock stands in this. (same place as mary "would do anything", with the difference he fights for Johns happiness and not for his own)

Whisky wrote:

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Vhanja wrote:

Well, it seems that Sherlock has forgiven her.

I don't see a choice between Sherlock and Mary at Christmas. Could you please elaborate what you mean?

 
Okay, here's my reasoning. After Sherlock was shot by Mary, after the forgiveness scene at Christmas, when Sherlock and John are headed off to Appledore, Sherlock asks John if he still wants to save his wife, and John says yes. And after that, Sherlock shoots Magnussen to save Mary for John, at the cost of his own life. And when Sherlock's flying off on his suicide mission, John remains hand in hand with Mary, after the most distant goodbye I could have imagined. ALL of those things together say to me, John chose Mary.

He chose her over his own sense of right and wrong, he chose her over his sense of loyalty. In the end (if we're going strictly by a surface reading) John chose Mary over everything.

There's this tendency to want to excuse John for this, and say, "oh, Sherlock made him do it,", or, other variations of that which absolve John of any responsibility for that choice. I tend to find that that view emasculates John, where I'd just rather he owned it, and later realizes that he might have made a mistake, and owns up to it. That's closer to the John I know. He'd admit when he's wrong.

 

Maybe John is simply in love with his wife at this point. And not in love with Sherlock. Shout at me, but maybe he simply chooses his wife instead of his best friend, and I think that's a choice which happens in real life, and isn't unrealistic.

Sherlock didn't tell John that him being send to a death mission was the price for saving his wife. Yes, because nobody knew. But we don't know how John's choice would have been in that scenario, if he could have chosen. Not so sure then. Would he let Sherlock become a murderer for saving Mary? We don't know.
So, yes, he chooses Mary. Several times. But I get the impression he totally misjudges Sherlock here. Doesn't realise where Sherlock stands in this. (same place as mary "would do anything", with the difference he fights for Johns happiness and not for his own)

That's actually my point, awful as it is--John is willing to throw Sherlock under the bus for Mary.

Just because Sherlock "forgave" Mary doesn't mean that John was obligated to. He did, and chose Mary of his own free will.
 

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (May 3, 2016 9:21 pm)

Whisky wrote:

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Whisky wrote:

 
you are leaving out how the person is under lots of pressure, emotional confusion, fear of loosing a loved one, forced into a decision she maybe rather wouldn't do.

The scenario you describe, leaving out the rest, would indeed make an apology look stupid.

I just think there's a bit more going okn here.
The least I would say for Marys sake is that she doesn't shoot Sherlock for the fun of it. She has got reasons. How we judge this reasons... different story again.

I'm not sure it makes Mary seem more palatable to give her excuses that don't even exist in canon? Unless she was having a psychotic break?

Her "sorry" is extremely arrogant and condescending, by the way--as if she were a parent spanking a child, "this will hurt me more than it does you, " or, even worse, the abusive husband who tells his wife after he beats her,"Sorry.I truly am".

I think to try to get to know the character of a person, reasons are important. They can tell a lot. To look at the  actions is one thing, and an easy way to judge a character.
 But that's like saying: okay, Mary is a bad girl. Fullstop.

I would always ask for reasons. Because i don't believe in people doing bad stuff for the fun of it. Doing so doesn't equal justification, though, which I feel is what you are worried about?

What do you mean with "excuses that don't exist in canon"?



I don't think he's throwing sherlock under a bus, no. I think John doesn't make any conscious choice. He loves Mary (apparently, for reasons), and decides Sherlock will be his friend anyway. Sherlock's comittment to John is sth which John doesn't see, or at least not clear enough yet. He unknowingly forces Sherlock to show his hand, and then it's too late to make a different choice.
Sherlock could have told John that he jumped for him in HLV. But also, Sherlock went for Moriarty, ignoring John's warnings. Sherlock is also dismissive in the same amount that he sacrifices. Neither of them could see all consequences.
I don't agree with the strong opinion that Sherlock is the only suffering one here. He wants magnusson. He pulls everybody in this. I'm not sure how early he catches on that Mary and therefore john are part of it. It starts with lady smallwood's letters, not Mary's past.

If Sherlock would have stayed out of it, what would have happened?
Mary only acts when she has to. She could have told John the truth on the first date. But John wouldn't have continued dating, would he, then? Mary's actions aren't any good. But understandable, yes. Imo-

If John has no idea how much Sherlock cares by now, he's very much like the Emperor with no clothes!

Maybe Sherlock should have stayed out of it. Then, when inevitably, John and Mary ended up having to deal with the people she hurt, whose family members or loved ones she killed, Sherlock would be out of the blast range.

Maybe, he should have left Mary to Magnussen?

If Sherlock had told John all about Moriarty's plan while he was on the phone with him, on the roof-- maybe John would have survived being shot by his sniper-- poor Mrs Hudson and Lestrade wouldn't have been so lucky. But, maybe he was being arrogant, trying to save their lives, right?

Maybe you're right, and Mary's actions are excusable because she was in love, and that trumps everything. I just hope Sherlock will get over that self-sacrifice thing he's got going. If nothing else, Mary has proved to Sherlock that Mycroft was right: caring is not an advantage.

As for John, I hate to think that he just blindly follows and does what he's told, never questioning, never thinking for himself-- if that's the case, it explains exactly why Sherlock couldn't just level with John about Reichenbach. Anyone could have influenced John in ways that would have gotten them both killed!

Here's another question: why does understanding why Mary shot Sherlock matter? Understanding the motive doesn't equal forgiveness of the act. It would be one thing if it was self-defense, but she shot an unarmed man who was offering her assistance down in cold blood! Any court of law would send her to prison.

Lastly, on John: remember that he is now covering up an attempted murder,  covering up another attempted murder, harboring an international fugitive, who would go to prison for the rest of her life if caught, and possibly committing treason against the Crown by harboring said fugitive and perverting the cause of Justice. And he's planning to raise a child with this woman.

Again, this is going by the current surface reading of s3. I'm waiting for s4 to prove that John's forgiveness of Mary was a ruse, and a trap to bring her down. :-)

I have been unusually verbose today, and may need to watch that coffee intake!!! I'm going to shut up now, and let somebody else talk!:-D



 

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

[

If John has no idea how much Sherlock cares by now, he's very much like the Emperor with no clothes!

Maybe Sherlock should have stayed out of it. Then, when inevitably, John and Mary ended up having to deal with the people she hurt, whose family members or loved ones she killed, Sherlock would be out of the blast range.

Maybe, he should have left Mary to Magnussen?

If Sherlock had told John all about Moriarty's plan while he was on the phone with him, on the roof-- maybe John would have survived being shot by his sniper-- poor Mrs Hudson and Lestrade wouldn't have been so lucky. But, maybe he was being arrogant, trying to save their lives, right?

Maybe you're right, and Mary's actions are excusable because she was in love, and that trumps everything. I just hope Sherlock will get over that self-sacrifice thing he's got going. If nothing else, Mary has proved to Sherlock that Mycroft was right: caring is not an advantage.

As for John, I hate to think that he just blindly follows and does what he's told, never questioning, never thinking for himself-- if that's the case, it explains exactly why Sherlock couldn't just level with John about Reichenbach. Anyone could have influenced John in ways that would have gotten them both killed!

Here's another question: why does understanding why Mary shot Sherlock matter? Understanding the motive doesn't equal forgiveness of the act. It would be one thing if it was self-defense, but she shot an unarmed man who was offering her assistance down in cold blood! Any court of law would send her to prison.

Lastly, on John: remember that he is now covering up an attempted murder, covering up another attempted murder, harboring an international fugitive, who would go to prison for the rest of her life if caught, and possibly committing treason against the Crown by harboring said fugitive and perverting the cause of Justice. And he's planning to raise a child with this woman.

Again, this is going by the current surface reading of s3. I'm waiting for s4 to prove that John's forgiveness of Mary was a ruse, and a trap to bring her down. :-)

I have been unusually verbose today, and may need to watch that coffee intake!!! I'm going to shut up now, and let somebody else talk!:-D

 

Bravo! I agree with every word!

I can also add that forgiving Mary destroys John´s credibility as a character. The man who forgives attempted murder of his best friend and burns the evidence convicting the mass murderer of her crimes in the fire  cannot be considered "the man of strong moral principles" anymore. Nor can he be considered the loyal and dependable supporter of Sherlock anymore - his loyalties obviously lie elsewhere. Also, despite witnessing Mary´s attempts at violence towards Sherlock first-hand in Lennister gardens, he ignores this and only reproaches Mary that she is "the lying wife", he never ever mentions in his reproach that she is the murderer. This makes it look as if this side of Mary´s personality doesn´t bother him at all. The same man reproached Sherlock in the past that he was not visibly sad when encountering the bodies of murdered victims - but actually killing these victims is suddenly all right.

Whisky wrote:

I don't agree with the strong opinion that Sherlock is the only suffering one here. He wants magnusson. He pulls everybody in this. I'm not sure how early he catches on that Mary and therefore john are part of it. It starts with lady smallwood's letters, not Mary's past.
If Sherlock would have stayed out of it, what would have happened?
Mary only acts when she has to. She could have told John the truth on the first date. But John wouldn't have continued dating, would he, then? Mary's actions aren't any good. But understandable, yes. Imo-

Victim blaming, full stop.
Mary was involved with CAM way before Sherlock took Lady Smallwood´s case. Mary received CAM´s letter on the day of wedding when Sherlock didn´t yet know that he will be involved with this blackmailer in the future. So Mary was already the part of CAM´s affair - Sherlock certainly didn´t pull her into it.
Also, when Sherlock took CAM´s case, he was not aware that Mary and CAM are somehow connected, he only found out second before Mary shot him. Sooo, once again - how did he pull her into it?
You simply accuse him that he was not a claivoyant and he "selfishly" pursued the case despite other parties of which he was unaware at the moment were active in it.
It would be better if he stayed out of it? Very interesting thought - so because he knows nothing about Mary´s past, he should preventively stop taking up any cases, because she could be theoretically involved in any of them. Superb detective that would be - not allowed to solve any cases and castigated as selfish because he does his job and pursues the case to its solution.
Plus, he only invited John to help him with cases, he never tried to bring Mary into it.

http://welovethebeekeeper.tumblr.com/post/143833209108/marys-action-of-shooting-sherlock-all-biological

Mary’s action of shooting Sherlock, all biological damage theories aside, is that in her action, she reduced him to insignificance. Mary shot Sherlock on a whim, without so much as a thought, a patronising tone of ‘I will shoot you’. He was no more than an inconvenience to her, his offer to help cast aside as being unnecessary, below her consideration. Mary didn’t CARE enough to aim for his head or heart, it was a careless shot that was meant to kill, but of such unimportance it was slightly off target. This wasn’t surgery it was sloppy. Mary disposed of a problem, one her arrogance deemed as a nuisance, Sherlock rates so low on Mary’s priority list she could kill him as easy as an ant beneath her feet.To her Sherlock is a child, a brat, a sad gay man who pines after John, a drug addict whose sad lonely life will lead to his death. Mary does not value Sherlock in any way. 

I don’t believe there was anything calculated about shooting Sherlock in CAM Towers, he merely was there, and as she was exposed she took care of the problem. His survival was a further aggravation, she intended to finish the job that night in Leinster Gardens, she brought her loaded gun, only Sherlock involved John. Mary’s arrogance excludes Sherlock as a threat on any meaningful level, we saw that in TAB so it maybe that Sherlock knows this is fact. 

Sherlock not only came close to physical death the night Mary shot him, but he suffered a the death of relevance. Sherlock hides his self-esteem issues beneath a carefully constructed armour, he uses his intellect as a USP, occasionally as a weapon, but everything we know about his psyche tells us that this man questions his own relevance to others. He thinks he is reduced to a commodity, his intellect, and his personality is so repulsive he does not deserve friendship or love. And Mary doesn’t even value his intellect. He is nothing to her but a nuisance. She could, and did, dispose of him in an instant. In the death MP sequence we saw Sherlock fight for his life based on relevance, he could just allow death to take him, give up the emotional pain, accept the sentence of a woman with little respect for him. A woman that represents all of the people who have rejected Sherlock in his life, called him the freak, bullied and taunted him, the Sebastians and Sallys. His death was not only physical but psychological. On the floor of his MP padded cell, was his self esteem, dying right next to Moriarty in all his mad glory. Sherlock understood why he was being erased; he was not worthy.

The resurrection was triggered by John Watson, the man that values Sherlock, loves him and gives Sherlock’s self esteem resuscitation. Sherlock crawls up those stairs to life, for John, but also because of John. John who deems him worthy of love and friendship, respect and care. Sherlock not only returns to life, he returns to life anew. 

I don’t want Mary to be a kick ass villain, or to be Moriarty, she doesn’t deserve it. She deserves to be dispatched just as she attempted to dispatch Sherlock, insignificant in the scheme of things. She did her job as false love interest, fixed a canon problem, now move over as you are not required anymore. The real bad ladies are in town: Janine with her sly, sarcastic respect for Sherlock, Molly with her unrequited love turned seething anger, Irene with her insight and fondness for Sherlock and amused respect as an equal. No, lets not champion Mary as the Big Bad, she reduced Sherlock to insignificance, she didn’t see what we see, she disrespected both Sherlock and John in her distain and supercilious attitude toward them. Let’s stick to canon, she sadly departs off stage. A quick paragraph and she’s gone. 

Last edited by nakahara (May 4, 2016 9:50 am)

Well, the author of the post watched the same show as all of us and this is the impression she carried off from it.
What she says about Mary reducing Sherlock to insignificance and how Sherlock suffered death of relevance by that act... yes, I had similar impression when watching the scene, but never could find the right words to express it, since now, when I discovered this post. That´s why I posted it here.

Of course, that doesn´t mean you can´t find some meta that supports the claim that Mary´s act of shooting Sherlock was not calculated and post it here too.

Yes, there are cold moments. And then there are caring moments. But when the focus is on the cold moments, and the caring moments are ignored/viewed as lies/triviialized, then I understand how some can villify her to this extent. I prefer to see Mary as a whole - both very caring and also very cold. Because that is what I am shown.