BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

**Posted by Willow** February 9, 2014 12:46 am

lil wrote:
Irrespective of whether Mary loves John , is she good for John?
Every single episode of s03 gives us examples of her being not good for John.
Sherlock has drugs , Harry has alcohol and John has Mary.
All dangerous habits with a risk of death.

Beautifully put!

**Posted by lil** February 9, 2014 2:13 am

Willow wrote:
Swanpride wrote:
@RavenMorganLeigh That's not what I meant (or wrote)...I meant that the people who now like Mary (independent from the question if they liked her to begin with or maybe even like her now that she is more than just the nice little shipper on deck) take what Sherlock told them face value and are ready to believe that despite the lies, she truly loves John and John truly loves (and needs) her. Their view of Mary is not less "factual" than the one view of the ones arguing against her - just less cynical. If I followed the argumentation correctly they don't excuse her actions, but they understand them, and they are ready to forgive her because Sherlock and John did too.

While the anti-Mary fraction basically argues that is was wrong of Sherlock and John to forgive her because she did something utterly despicable in their eyes.

Well, I don't know whether there is an 'anti-Mary fraction' sic, so I leave that to others.

I'm not anti-Mary, nor am I pro-Mary; it's hard to be that if, like myself, you took a degree in drama and theatre arts. My perspective is that of someone accustomed to analysing dramatic works, whether it's Hamlet or Sherlock Holmes; the same principles apply. I don't, and indeed cannot, treat these characters are real people because they are not real people; they are characters in a dramatic work, and if I had ever written an essay suggesting that I viewed characters as real people, then it would not have been well received by my tutors. Or, for that matter, the University shrink.

I am distanced because I know a lot more of the mechanics of putting the structure together; my criticisms are far more likely to be technical, in terms of construction; or whether a particular actor, given a particular part, played that role well.

But I never import assumptions about characters on the basis that they seem nice, because I have seen vast numbers of dramas in which supposedly nice characters ended up doing dreadful things; which is just as well because nice people doing nice things isn't exactly compelling, unless it's Top Hat, of course.

And when it comes to Mycroft and the Civil Service stuff I do have long experience of the way the thing works in practice; I was one of them, so the way I watch those scenes is informed by that long experience. I dealt in facts, because no investigator ever starts by asking themselves what all the possible reasons for something might be, since there could could be millions of them. Investigators start by establishing the facts, which can be, and frequently is, exceedingly tricky, but that's the only way it can be done. People lie all the time, so you judge them on what they actually have done, rather than what they say they have done...

Technically....
I would say the writers have chosen so far to stay mostly within the canon character boundaries Doyle set for SH/JW, and intend to do so.
With Mary they had none and so let themselves go a bit, thus yes they gain hugely in the entertainment/interest factor, but as always loose in the credibility factor.
Credibility of Mary is challanged in the coincidences...preparation etcs that are addressed many times in other threads.
I think this could all be easily counterbalanced when we discover the unknown factors..say she is a undercover operarive for either side.
Her character/storyline is out of sync with the others atm...but I guess with Mary they were free to have a lot of fun and push boundaries and have done so..however in the future it will all make more sense and become credible/more balanced in perspective to the whole.

Last edited by lil (February 9, 2014 2:20 am)

**Posted by RavenMorganLeigh** February 9, 2014 5:37 am

Swanpride wrote:
@RavenMorganLeigh That's not what I meant (or wrote)...I meant that the people who now like Mary (independent from the question if they liked her to begin with or maybe even like her now that she is more than just the nice little shipper on deck) take what Sherlock told them face value and are ready to believe that despite the lies, she truly loves John and John truly loves (and needs) her. Their view of Mary is not less "factual" than the one view of the ones arguing against her - just less cynical. If I followed the argumentation correctly they don't excuse her actions, but they understand them, and they are ready to forgive her because Sherlock and John did too.

While the anti-Mary fraction basically argues that is was wrong of Sherlock and John to forgive her because she did something utterly despicable in their eyes.

Big disctinction-- and now I get it.

**Posted by Willow** February 9, 2014 11:44 pm

lil wrote:
Willow wrote:
Swanpride wrote:
@RavenMorganLeigh That's not what I meant (or wrote)...I meant that the people who now like Mary (independent from the question if they liked her to begin with or maybe even like her now that she is more than just the nice little shipper on deck) take what Sherlock told them face value and are ready to believe that despite the lies, she truly loves John and John truly loves (and needs) her. Their view of Mary is not less "factual" than the one view of the ones arguing against her - just less cynical. If I followed the argumentation correctly they don't excuse her actions, but they understand them, and they are ready to forgive her because Sherlock and John did too.

While the anti-Mary fraction basically argues that is was wrong of Sherlock and John to forgive her because she did something utterly despicable in their eyes.

Well, I don't know whether there is an 'anti-Mary fraction' sic, so I leave that to others.

I'm not anti-Mary, nor am I pro-Mary; it's hard to be that if, like myself, you took a degree in drama and theatre arts. My perspective is that of someone accustomed to analysing dramatic works, whether it's Hamlet or Sherlock Holmes; the same principles apply. I don't, and indeed cannot, treat these characters are real people because they are not real people; they are characters in a dramatic work, and if I had ever written an essay suggesting that I viewed characters as real people, then it would not have been well received by my tutors. Or, for that matter, the University shrink.

I am distanced because I know a lot more of the mechanics of putting the structure together; my criticisms are far more likely to be technical, in terms of construction; or whether a particular actor, given a particular part, played that role well.

But I never import assumptions about characters on the basis that they seem nice, because I have seen vast numbers of dramas in which supposedly nice characters ended up doing dreadful things; which is just as well because nice people doing nice things isn't exactly compelling, unless it's Top Hat, of course.

And when it comes to Mycroft and the Civil Service stuff I do have long experience of the way the thing works in practice; I was one of them, so the way I watch those scenes is informed by that long experience. I dealt in facts, because no investigator ever starts by asking themselves what all the possible reasons for something might be, since there could could be millions of them. Investigators start by establishing the facts, which can be, and frequently is, exceedingly tricky, but that's the only way it can be done. People lie all the time, so you judge them on what they actually have done, rather than what they say they have done...

Technically....
I would say the writers have chosen so far to stay mostly within the canon character boundaries Doyle set for SH/JW, and intend to do so.
With Mary they had none and so let themselves go a bit, thus yes they gain hugely in the entertainment/interest factor, but as always loose in the credibility factor.
Credibility of Mary is challanged in the coincidences...preparation etcs that are addressed many times in other threads.
I think this could all be easily counterbalanced when we discover the unknown factors..say she is a undercover operarive for either side.
Her character/storyline is out of sync with the others atm...but I guess with Mary they were free to have a lot of fun and push boundaries and have done so..however in the future it will all make more sense and become credible/more balanced in perspective to the whole.

The difficulty is that the actions of Mary have in turn undermined the canonical basis of John; it isn't the fact that she shot Sherlock which is the true gut punch, it's John's reactions in Baker St. And putting that right is technically very difficult because there still have to be new stories and new plotlines, which doesn't leave much space for showing that John has grown up a bit and has started taking responsibility for his own actions. A Dr John Watson who flounces around complaining about why his life is so unfair whilst his best friend is dying in front of him is so far from canon as to be unrecognisable; it's fascinating from an analytical viewpoint to see just how wrong Sherlock was in his Best Man's speech, but in terms of 'how do they walk John back into being Dr John Watson?' it's a nightmare.

And they need to walk John back because otherwise it's no longer Sherlock Holmes; the point is that not only are Moftiss ACD fanboys but also Benedict has made it very clear that he's interested, provided they remain faithful to the original. That is a very significant proviso; I have great respect for Martin's acting but he is not the central focus. Benedict is. He didn't sign up for a show featuring Mr and Mrs Psychopath, he signed up to be Sherlock Holmes, and he can't do that without his loyal and trusty comrade Dr John Watson.

Hence the need to find that loyal and trusty comrade as soon as possible; I wonder whether John has an identical twin who could be pressed into service if all else fails?

**Posted by RavenMorganLeigh** February 10, 2014 12:29 am

Willow wrote:
lil wrote:
Willow wrote:

Well, I don't know whether there is an 'anti-Mary fraction' sic, so I leave that to others.

I'm not anti-Mary, nor am I pro-Mary; it's hard to be that if, like myself, you took a degree in drama and theatre arts. My perspective is that of someone accustomed to analysing dramatic works, whether it's Hamlet or Sherlock Holmes; the same principles apply. I don't, and indeed cannot, treat these characters are real people because they are not real people; they are characters in a dramatic work, and if I had ever written an essay suggesting that I viewed characters as real people, then it would not have been well received by my tutors. Or, for that matter, the University shrink.

I am distanced because I know a lot more of the mechanics of putting the structure together; my criticisms are far more likely to be technical, in terms of construction; or whether a particular actor, given a particular part, played that role well.

But I never import assumptions about characters on the basis that they seem nice, because I have seen vast numbers of dramas in which supposedly nice characters ended up doing dreadful things; which is just as well because nice people doing nice things isn't exactly compelling, unless it's Top Hat, of course.

And when it comes to Mycroft and the Civil Service stuff I do have long experience of the way the thing works in practice; I was one of them, so the way I watch those scenes is informed by that long experience. I dealt in facts, because no investigator ever starts by asking themselves what all the possible reasons for something might be, since there could could be millions of them. Investigators start by establishing the facts, which can be, and frequently is, exceedingly tricky, but that's the only way it can be done. People lie all the time, so you judge them on what they actually have done, rather than what they say they have done...

Technically....
I would say the writers have chosen so far to stay mostly within the canon character boundaries Doyle set for SH/JW, and intend to do so.
With Mary they had none and so let themselves go a bit, thus yes they gain hugely in the entertainment/interest factor, but as always loose in the credibility factor.
Credibility of Mary is challanged in the coincidences...preparation etcs that are addressed many times in other threads.
I think this could all be easily counterbalanced when we discover the unknown factors..say she is a undercover operarive for either side.
Her character/storyline is out of sync with the others atm...but I guess with Mary they were free to have a lot of fun and push boundaries and have done so..however in the future it will all make more sense and become credible/more balanced in perspective to the whole.

The difficulty is that the actions of Mary have in turn undermined the canonical basis of John; it isn't the fact that she shot Sherlock which is the true gut punch, it's John's reactions in Baker St. And putting that right is technically very difficult because there still have to be new stories and new plotlines, which doesn't leave much space for showing that John has grown up a bit and has started taking responsibility for his own actions. A Dr John Watson who flounces around complaining about why his life is so unfair whilst his best friend is dying in front of him is so far from canon as to be unrecognisable; it's fascinating from an analytical viewpoint to see just how wrong Sherlock was in his Best Man's speech, but in terms of 'how do they walk John back into being Dr John Watson?' it's a nightmare.

And they need to walk John back because otherwise it's no longer Sherlock Holmes; the point is that not only are Moftiss ACD fanboys but also Benedict has made it very clear that he's interested, provided they remain faithful to the original. That is a very significant proviso; I have great respect for Martin's acting but he is not the central focus. Benedict is. He didn't sign up for a show featuring Mr and Mrs Psychopath, he signed up to be Sherlock Holmes, and he can't do that without his loyal and trusty comrade Dr John Watson.

Hence the need to find that loyal and trusty comrade as soon as possible; I wonder whether John has an identical twin who could be pressed into service if all else fails?

Brilliant point. I think what they are going to have to do is create some scenario where John has to Deal. With. Reality. Not hide from it, ignore it, blame someone else for it, or take out his anger on it.

And that leads me to another point-- I really, really want a scene where Sherlock refuses to take John hitting him again, or -- actually hits him back. Because Sherlock's actually a very good fighter, and he never defends himself against John; and I think, somewhere John knows that--

I was really disturbed that John threatened to hit *Sherlock* who was suffering from the gunshot delivered by Mary--- during the showdown scene.

**Posted by lil** February 10, 2014 12:53 am

@Willow yes I agree totally . The John reaction /Mary line has taken them out of sync in a few places and really pushed boundaries.
I thought what Benedict said was right and at the canon reminder,they do need to take care bringing John back inline with canon character/ John we know.
Tho I think they have done beautifully with SH character growth from the start...we are left a bit WTH atm with John, but its likely Johns a bit wth@himself too.Your right @the dilemma.
I have a slightly diff take on the confrontation scene tho..I think John was hurt and confused and looked to Sherlock for comfort/to solve his problems rather than his wife, and thats just what Sherlock did for him.So JW can trust SH reversed thing / trust issues resolved.
But we did miss a Garridebs shooting in reverse type reaction from John which I wld of expected from his character.My feeling is his character needs the Mary lesson for the future ,(what he thinks he always wanted isn't what makes him happy) but they underspent on the JW/SH , it may have been time? Idk.
MGT have added a unique and brilliant touch to SH so far..I guess we just have to hope/trust they know where they are going . It wld be tragic if Ben pulled out because as you say this is Sherlock and the show should be made around SH/JW and deffinatly not wander any further than it has.

So double yups.

**Posted by SherlocklivesinOH** February 10, 2014 1:07 am

Why didn't Sherlock and John take Mary along to Appledore (then perhaps things could have worked out so SHE shot CAM). Because of the baby? Or because they didn't fully trust her?

**Posted by lil** February 10, 2014 1:33 am

Perhaps Sherlock knew if it came to planX(shoot magnusson)
....Mycroft/plan Y , wld get him off.
But John or Mary wld goto prison for life.

Last edited by lil (February 10, 2014 1:34 am)

**Posted by Tinks** February 10, 2014 6:06 am

I think there are some brilliant points made in here.
I want to say that I'm not anti Mary at all, but I am anti what Moftiss did with her and really don't understand at this stage why they did it.
John could've found out about her past in any other way, and forgiven her, but having her shoot his friend, having John behave the way he did and then having him forgive her without even bothering to check her file for who she really was - the whole thing just feels like the rug has been pulled from under our feet.
It would only make sense now, if, as has been suggested, John was to find out who she really is and deal with that in a way that doesn't involve blaming Sherlock, but I really don't think that will happen, and while I'm happy to accept Mary as part of the show's future if she's in it for the long run, at the back of my mind, I can't get past the callousness of either her shooting Sherlock in the way she did or of hers and John's behaviour towards him afterwards

Also, on the subject of Ben staying in the show - it did cross my mind that IF he got too busy to carry on with it, the writers have got themselves a nice little set up with Mary and John where they could do a spin off if them solving crimes together while Sherlock's supposedly off on other cases.

**Posted by besleybean** February 10, 2014 6:46 am

Won't happen.
Mark ad Steven have both stated that if either Benedict or Martin become unavailable, the show will end.
What you described would be a great other show, but it wouldn't be Sherlock.

Last edited by besleybean (February 10, 2014 6:47 am)

**Posted by Tinks** February 10, 2014 6:53 am

besleybean wrote:
Won't happen.
Mark ad Steven have both stated that if either Benedict or Martin become unavailable, the show will end.
What you described would be a great other show, but it wouldn't be Sherlock.

Hope you're right!

**Posted by Zatoichi** February 10, 2014 7:05 am

Tinks wrote:
Also, on the subject of Ben staying in the show - it did cross my mind that IF he got too busy to carry on with it, the writers have got themselves a nice little set up with Mary and John where they could do a spin off if them solving crimes together while Sherlock's supposedly off on other cases.

WHA..No! Please don´t, it would be a tragedy.

Okay, thanks to besleybean I am relieved now.

Before actually seeing HLV I thought I would never forgive Mary for what she put him through, and I did not buy the 'surgery'-stuff because it was such a close thing. If he had fallen forwards he would have died, he died anyway but managed to come back. (I read a lot of spoilers and watched a lot of clips ).

The one thing that changed my mind after actually seeing the whole scene was that she warned him before she shot - if you take one more step I will shoot you. She was cornered, her plan has been crashed, her husband was in the building, she had to come up with something really quick. Maybe if Sherlock had stayed in his place she would have tried to talk to him, but he didn´t. I can buy that in this second her trained killer instincs took over and instead of thinking "okay I´ll trust this guy to get us all out here safely and keep my marriage intact in spite of all he knows" she put him out in a way that included a chance for survival.

Does not mean I am pro-Mary now, but I can live with Sherlock and John forgiving her without too many doubts on my side (especially for the baby´s sake).

Last edited by Zatoichi (February 10, 2014 7:08 am)

**Posted by Willow** February 10, 2014 3:18 pm

At the risk of stating the boringly obvious, individual anatomy varies considerably. For example, even though my lung X-rays are done at a world famous institution specialising in respiratory medicine, I have to tell them every single time that they will need to extend the view because my lungs extend much further down than they would estimate by simply looking at me.

These are people who do lung X-rays all day, every day, with experience of many thousands of people, who are very well aware of the need to reduce radiation exposure, and if they can't get it right by looking at me then I very much doubt that an assassin could...

**Posted by besleybean** February 10, 2014 4:44 pm

Well she is a nurse.
But ok, artistic licence.

**Posted by Willow** February 10, 2014 5:42 pm

besleybean wrote:
Well she is a nurse.

I love it! Although the fact that she is a pregnant nurse who didn't realise that she was pregnant suggests that possibly her observational skills need some work

besleybean wrote:
But Ok, artistic license.

I really don't mind artistic licence; I am merely pointing out that it can't be justified as science, because there is no scientific justification. Also, I don't want anyone shooting me in the lung by mistake

**Posted by besleybean** February 10, 2014 5:46 pm

I know, sorry, just trying to cheer myself up.

**Posted by Willow** February 10, 2014 6:33 pm

besleybean wrote:
I know, sorry, just trying to cheer myself up.

Hey! Nothing to be sorry for, provided you weren't planning to shoot me

**Posted by besleybean** February 10, 2014 7:26 pm

Tee Hee.

**Posted by Be** February 11, 2014 11:01 am

Did you notice that we got two similar lines from Mary about Sherlock and CAM about Lady Samllwood?
"I like her/him"

I'd like to point out another aspect of Mary's ambigious personality:
I am not quite sure that Mary really wanted John and Sherlock to go for a case in TEH. She in fact manipulated them to "run" each other. Why? You don't actually believe in altruistic reasons of a soon to be bride in full wedding organisation mode with invitations to print, colours to chose and a reception to plan, do you. What could possibly be a motivation for an oridnary women who possibly believes in a wedding that is supposed to be the most important day of her life to stop the most fun she could have?
What really happened is that Sherlock found out and mentioned that her side of the church looked thin and she had to explane that she was (apparently) an orphan without family and just friends.
I suspect that she wanted to escape further questioning about her past and therefore managed to engineer a scenario where John and Sherlock were out of the way and distracted.

**Posted by SolarSystem** February 11, 2014 11:39 am

I actually never thought about the possibility that John and therefore also Sherlock didn't know that she was an orphan....? I might have to watch that scene again (it was in TSoT btw, not in TEH), but from Sherlock's reaction - not really surprised - and the way in which she explained it - pretty much casually - I always thought that Sherlock knew about this.