Hmmm...

http://incurablylazydevil.tumblr.com/post/99068424128/mary-morstan-stabs-you-in-the-back-mary

This post offers in a short and humorous way the explanation why Mary cannot be excused for shooting Sherlock only because she called an ambulance.... I also find it doubtful that she didn´t aim to kill - Sherlock died on the table, didn´t he? If you are in a state of clinical death for a longer time, your brain can be irreparably damaged and even roused, you could end as a vegetable... also, what actual proof do we have that Mary didn´t aim to kill? Aside from some dubious stories from Sherlock who a) has a Stockholm syndrome, b) doesn´t see into Mary´s head and c) was unconscious when she allegedly called an ambulance?

Thanks Whisky, exactly me thoughts as well.

I think that no matter who she really is, she knew who Sherlock was before he returned. Hence she knew that speaking against Sherlock would surely create a distance between John and herself. And she would do anything to prevent that. So she know she has to support the boy's friendship to keep John.

I am not saying she doesn't like Sherlock. I am just pointing out that she chose the most logical way to go.

Just as he's deduced Mary works for Mycroft...who knows if he's right?

I don't know (there's a chance that there might be fire, so maybe he's being safe ... and also making it clear that he's responsible and separate from John), but he seemed to be giving himself up immediately rather than asking or expecting to be shot.  He throws away the weapon and puts his hands in the air, which immediately makes him not a target. 

nakahara wrote:

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. 

There's a lot I like about this post. 

nakahara wrote:

stoertebeker wrote:

What about Mary comforting her neighbour at the beginning of HLV? And what about TEH and TSoT? There were a lot of loving, caring moments from her - at least I can see them. That's probably the whole problem, if someone detest a character to such extend as some here does, it's almost impossible to see any good moments she had (or one tend to interpreting everything as malice). Like Vhanja I prefer a more differentiated perspective on a character.
 

Yes, Mary patted the back of her neighbour comfortingly when she was crying. But right after, she tried to prevent John from helping this neighbour when he decided to find her son for her. In my eyes, this makes her kindness in that scene a bit dubious.

Mary´s kindness from TEH and TSOT, on the other hand, was invalidated for me when we discovered that whole Mary´s indentity is fake. With this knowledge in mind, her kindness could well be a mask and who knows what she was thinking or doing behind John´s and Sherlock´s back where she was not wearing a disguise of a meek and mellow nurse? Well, we could only judge from her actions and her actions in HLV were a bit not good (kicking a coin so that gravely injured Sherlock was forced to bend and pick it up was a good example).

As to villification:
Vilification is a public act that incites others to hate or to severely ridicule individuals because of their race, religion, sexuality or gender identity.

But people don´t have the low opinion of Mary based on her gender, race or religion. People have low opinion on her based on her acts (murders for hire) which include the attempted murder of her friend who offered to help her. And the last time I checked, murders were held to be reprehensible in every human culture on earth. So I´m not sure if pointing out Mary´s bad side can be considered vilification.

I despise characters like Hannibal or Dexter on the same grounds, perceiving their stories as an undue adoration of murderers. Do I "villify" them, according to you?

I actually loved both Dexter and Hannibal-- but here's the thing; neither of those shows put forth those characters as "Heroes", "Nice", fluffy", etc, . Dexter skirted it-- but there was always the underlying message that Dexter was a serial killer-- and as much as he wanted to be "normal", all he did was bring death to his loved ones, including his sister, Deb. 

What I hear people saying, here though is, "Sure, Mary's a serial killer ( because what else is an assassin-- they just kill people for money) but she's such a NICE girl. 

We won't give Sherlock a pass for his bad social faux pas, but we'll excuse Mary for shooting a man offering to help-- in cold blood? (And all those other killings in her past?) 

besleybean wrote:

Wow, some people really don't like Mary.
I see a woman who likes Sherlock and loves John and I feel they return the compliment.

She loves them both so much that she shot John's best friend and very nearly killed him! Knowing what kind of hell it would put her husband through, and she did it anyway. I'd hate to see what she would do to someone she doesn't care all that much about...

I tend to feel it was more about protecting John from being accused and possibly shot.