BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / "Mary will remain in series 4"

**Posted by zeratul** January 27, 2014 11:11 pm

http://www.cultbox.co.uk/news/headlines/8980-mary-will-absolutely-remain-part-of-sherlock-cast

Moffat commented: "Mary's absolutely here. We don't just off her. How would that be at the start of [Series 4]. 'Where's Mary?' 'Dead!'"

Sounds like a typical Moffat lie, doesn't it?
Thinking of the one about Moriarty...

**Posted by SilverMoonDragonB** January 27, 2014 11:34 pm

There is also a loop hole in that statement....

"We don't just off her. How would that be at the start of [Series 4]"

So maybe she will die in the first episode, just not at the start of it...

I have no idea...and I've accepted that there is no way to know for sure until the actual episodes air. The writers are sneaky and sly like that, yep, 'dem geniuses

Last edited by SilverMoonDragonB (January 27, 2014 11:35 pm)

**Posted by tonnaree** January 28, 2014 1:02 am

HUGE loophole.

**Posted by Davina** January 28, 2014 10:37 am

Just don't trust him! Although I don't expect her to have just been 'offed' a the start either!

**Posted by SolarSystem** January 28, 2014 10:53 am

Me neither, but apart from that I would say that everything is possible.
Even without Moffat saying this, I never expected them to get rid of her during hiatus and then come back without her. But again, that leaves so many possibilities... I just don't really believe that she will still be in the picture at the end of S4.

**Posted by SilverMoonDragonB** January 28, 2014 2:57 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
Me neither, but apart from that I would say that everything is possible.
Even without Moffat saying this, I never expected them to get rid of her during hiatus and then come back without her. But again, that leaves so many possibilities... I just don't really believe that she will still be in the picture at the end of S4.

Same here ^

**Posted by SilverMoonDragonB** January 28, 2014 2:59 pm

Davina wrote:
Just don't trust him! Although I don't expect her to have just been 'offed' a the start either!

Exactly!

**Posted by tonnaree** January 28, 2014 3:20 pm

They would NEVER give up the narrative possiblities they'd lose if she was dead when Series 4 started.

**Posted by mrshouse** January 28, 2014 4:00 pm

tonnaree wrote:
They would NEVER give up the narrative possiblities they'd lose if she was dead when Series 4 started.

Good point, tonnaree.
But the most intruiging question for mofftiss would be then: is it more interessting to be a tragic figure or a smooth, doting (boring?) one...?

**Posted by Willow** January 28, 2014 4:29 pm

mrshouse wrote:
tonnaree wrote:
They would NEVER give up the narrative possiblities they'd lose if she was dead when Series 4 started.
Good point, tonnaree.
But the most intruiging question for mofftiss would be then: is it more interessting to be a tragic figure or a smooth, doting (boring?) one...?

Well, they have also ruled out having a lethal killer nurse following S&J around shooting anyone who might conceivably be a threat to our heroes, and that makes perfect sense; it would destroy the show. How they can prevent that happening is an interesting question; Mary is not good at taking advice, and will be only too aware that she has forfeited any place in investigations because she has sat in the clients chair.

I suspect also that John's reference to whether 'we' want you is not going to sit well with Mary long term. It is one thing to be nice to a rival that is getting on a plane and unlikely to ever return, and a very different thing to have someone constantly around the place reminding people by his very presence that she nearly killed him.

And, of course, the people who want her dead still exist; they don't miraculously disappear because CAM is dead. She is still vulnerable to discovery, and the only thing which could prevent that is going into something like a Witness Protection Scheme. But I think we are going to learn a lot more about who Mary really is before they kill her off

**Posted by Criosdan** January 30, 2014 9:30 am

I really hope that Mary's death won't be bookverse. It was so "poof she died somehow while the audience wasn't looking". So I trust Mofftiss to make the dead a good one. As far as that is possible.

**Posted by silverblaze** January 30, 2014 9:44 am

She's gonna be hunted down by all the terrorists and criminals whose friends she killed.

**Posted by Be** February 2, 2014 5:27 pm

In canon she vanished and was just gone between stories (The final problem and the empty house).
So it might be a good idea to do the same and tell her story in flashbacks. But then we had that already in TRF. So?
What about starting series 4 with John visiting Ella again and she is dead? As long as we expect her death she will probably survive.
If we are honest to ourselves we want her gone, don't we. The writers built her storyline nicely with a lot of missing information that can suddenly arise from somewhere. Her victims or the family of her victims might want to find her and take revenge. Rightfully so. What if somebody becomes a client and Sherlock is supposed to find the murderer (Mary)? She could have a husband in the U.S. who is the father of her child. The possibilities are endless because we miss a lot of information about "Mary".
In a way she is the metaphor for a person with a hidden past who tries to keep a secret and that goes awfully wrong. When we presume that TRF is still in need of an explanation there can be a link to Sherlock and something to learn for him and John.

**Posted by Tinks** February 2, 2014 5:41 pm

The only reason I would want her written out now is because of her shooting SH, and John accepting and forgiving that.
I feel that if they don't revisit that, if John really has simply moved on from it, then that whole episode is weakened for me.
I really hope she's not killed off though - I hope they can find another, plausible way to write her out.
Honestly, I really liked her until HLV, but what she did and the way it was so easily forgiven just made me sad - it reinforced this idea that Sherlock will always be an outsider because honestly, we know he'd never forgive anyone that did that to a friend.
And I'm slightly nervous about the storyline too - he was so desperate for them to stay together; I'd hate it if it turned out he knew something about her and wanted John to stay with her just so Sherlock can keep a tail on her.

**Posted by tonnaree** February 2, 2014 8:50 pm

"She could have a husband in the U.S. who is the father of her child."

I'd accept an unknown prior husband but timeline-wise I don't believe it would be possible for him to be the baby's father.

**Posted by SHERlocked33** February 3, 2014 7:34 am

Oh, it really says only that she will be there in the beginning of S4. Nothing more. And that I personally believe.

I would prefere if she died as a villain becoause if she dies as a hero, it will have too bad impact on John. But anyway, I hope she won't last very long. (an awful thing to say, isn't it? But then again, I don't talk like this about real people ). Or maybe she could move somewhere for her safety or something, but it again would have to be under such circumstances to prevent John from following (= she would have to prove sort of villain).

tonnaree: I like your Havel quote in your signature :-)

**Posted by Willow** February 3, 2014 12:38 pm

Tinks wrote:
The only reason I would want her written out now is because of her shooting SH, and John accepting and forgiving that.
I feel that if they don't revisit that, if John really has simply moved on from it, then that whole episode is weakened for me.
I really hope she's not killed off though - I hope they can find another, plausible way to write her out.
Honestly, I really liked her until HLV, but what she did and the way it was so easily forgiven just made me sad - it reinforced this idea that Sherlock will always be an outsider because honestly, we know he'd never forgive anyone that did that to a friend.
And I'm slightly nervous about the storyline too - he was so desperate for them to stay together; I'd hate it if it turned out he knew something about her and wanted John to stay with her just so Sherlock can keep a tail on her.

I think this is where we get back to 'it's the baby, stoopid'. Sherlock has a romanticised view of motherhood; he assumes that mothers are like his own mother, who gave up her brilliant career as a mathematician to have children. Mofftiss recognised that the only way to explain why neither S nor J would turn her in was to involve another innocent who should be protected, and Mary being pregnant works for that.

Sherlock has better ways of keeping tabs on Mary than John; I do think there will prove to be connections between Mary and others which we don't yet know, but for me the game changer is the baby. Otherwise we would have a John Watson acting completely out of character; in canon he is notoriously bad at judging women- it's a running joke- so Mary is not uncanonical, but he always protects Holmes. But the Dr Watson driven by chivalry would protect a baby, particularly when Holmes is acting to protect a baby as well...

**Posted by Willow** February 3, 2014 1:09 pm

I have been looking at canon for some thoughts about love, and came across the Sussex Vampire which includes these lines spoken by Sherlock Holmes to the father of two children:

'It is the more painful because it is a distorted love, a maniacal exaggerated love for you, and possibly for his dead mother, which has prompted his action.'

The action in question was the attempted murder by the elder boy of his young half brother; I think that this certainly provides evidence that ACD was no stranger to the idea that love is not necessarily a pure and virtuous emotion. And Mofftiss are indisputably ACD fanboys

**Posted by Tinks** February 3, 2014 1:17 pm

Willow wrote:
Tinks wrote:
The only reason I would want her written out now is because of her shooting SH, and John accepting and forgiving that.
I feel that if they don't revisit that, if John really has simply moved on from it, then that whole episode is weakened for me.
I really hope she's not killed off though - I hope they can find another, plausible way to write her out.
Honestly, I really liked her until HLV, but what she did and the way it was so easily forgiven just made me sad - it reinforced this idea that Sherlock will
always be an outsider because honestly, we know
he'd never forgive anyone that did that to a friend.
And I'm slightly nervous about the storyline too - he was so desperate for them to stay together; I'd hate it if it turned out he knew something about her and wanted John to stay with her just so Sherlock can keep a tail on her.
I think this is where we get back to 'it's the baby,
stoopid'. Sherlock has a romanticised view of motherhood; he assumes that mothers are like his own mother, who gave up her brilliant career as a mathematician to have children. Mofftiss recognised that the only way to explain why neither S nor J would turn her in was to involve another innocent who should be protected, and Mary being
pregnant works for that.

Sherlock has better ways of keeping tabs on Mary than John; I do think there will prove to be connections between Mary and others which we don't yet know, but for me the game changer is the baby. Otherwise we would have a John Watson
acting completely out of character; in canon he is notoriously bad at judging women- it's a running joke- so Mary is not uncanonical, but he always protects Holmes. But the Dr Watson driven by chivalry would protect a baby, particularly when Holmes is acting to protect a baby as well...

Very good points, and in fact I'd been wondering what the relevance of Mummy Holmes giving up her career was supposed to be - I'd wondered if it was pointing to Mary giving up her past to become a Wife and Mother, but I like your take on it.

**Posted by tonnaree** February 3, 2014 1:49 pm

"tonnaree: I like your Havel quote in your signature :-) "

Thanks! It's one of my all time favorites. Suits me too. *giggle*

Last edited by tonnaree (February 3, 2014 1:50 pm)