BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / Mary – the subject of discussion

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:10 am

I don't think he has lost the ability, I think he doesn't see it in this particular instance. I don't think that is unrealistic. In the case with Irene Adler, the things that happened were things that John could easily recognize as something that would cause distresss. But here, he doesn't see why the marriage should cause distress because in his mind, nothing will change. It's just a ceremony.

It's not always easy to spot something that might be a problem for someone else when it's not a problem for you.

**Posted by mrshouse** March 13, 2015 9:21 am

nakahara, you made good points there. In canon Holmes and Watson are often apart for longer time periods. But it's mostly done with at the beginning of the stories and never causes the need to rebond.
Vhanja, I'm not sure if this wedding only means a ceremony for John and he feels nothing about the changing of times. What is the point then in scenes like the one when he scans Sherlock's mobile and urges him to "pick one"? Or the talk on the bench? That would mean either that Mary asked him to talk to Sherlock in that matter (which I wouldn't like, because, as I said above, it doesn't sit well with me that suddenly they need this "support") or John feels the need for this talk solemnly for Sherlock's sake. Which wouldn't sit well with me either, as it leaves Sherlock a bit alone.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:26 am

mrshouse wrote:
Vhanja, I'm not sure if this wedding only means a ceremony for John and he feels nothing about the changing of times. What is the point then in scenes like the one when he scans Sherlock's mobile and urges him to "pick one"? Or the talk on the bench? That would mean either that Mary asked him to talk to Sherlock in that matter (which I wouldn't like, because, as I said above, it doesn't sit well with me that suddenly they need this "support") or John feels the need for this talk solemnly for Sherlock's sake. Which wouldn't sit well with me either, as it leaves Sherlock a bit alone.

He did all those things because of the talk Mary had with him in the kitchen.

There is nothing wrong with needing some support and nudge sometimes. I don't see why that is a bad thing? They aren't an island. An particular with these two boys, whom together have enough emotional issues and baggage to cover a whole room, I think they could both benefit with some outside support.

**Posted by SolarSystem** March 13, 2015 9:31 am

mrshouse wrote:
Or the talk on the bench? That would mean either that Mary asked him to talk to Sherlock in that matter (which I wouldn't like, because, as I said above, it doesn't sit well with me that suddenly they need this "support")

I think it's pretty clear that John tries to talk about this with Sherlock on the bench because Mary told him so. And yes, it's great to have someone who supports you when it comes to such matters and maybe even helps open your eyes here and there. But for me with Mary it's a thin line between support and manipulation, especially considering what we learn about her in HLV. Today she might talk John into doing something in a solely supportive way, tomorrow she might manipulate him into doing something for selfish reasons.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:35 am

So you don't like her being supportive towards helping Sherlock because she might be manipulating him into something else in the future?

And when it comes to manipulating people for selfish reasons, I think Sherlock is the top on that list and has been for ages before Mary was ever in the picture.

Last edited by Vhanja (March 13, 2015 9:36 am)

**Posted by mrshouse** March 13, 2015 9:39 am

For me it goes more in the direction of: where is the support in HLV? I've wondered that more than once and just don't get a satisfying answer. And again: why is support as a need for them stressed upon at all?

**Posted by SolarSystem** March 13, 2015 9:43 am

All I can say is: Considering everything I know about Mary at this point, I don't trust her as far as I can throw her. She has been lying to John about her true identity, she hasn't been cooperative in HLV when Sherlock found out about it.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:43 am

I'm not sure what kind of support is missing in HLV? Should Mary support John when he is snappy and impatient in the beginning of the episode? Or when her past has blown up and John doesn't speak with her for months? I am not sure what scene would require Mary's support in the way it was in TSoT?

I think support is a good thing, why shouldn't it be stressed?

**Posted by nakahara** March 13, 2015 9:45 am

Vhanja wrote:
And when it comes to manipulating people for selfish reasons, I think Sherlock is the top on that list and has been for ages before Mary was ever in the picture.

As an audience, I had never any problem with this side of Sherlock´s character because the story didn´t make it secret that Sherlock is like that + Sherlock was not praised, but criticised for this behaviour by his friends.

But Mary - she isn´t supposed to be like that, is she? She is supposed to be "nice", supportive and we are supposed to like her for that. That´s why it feels strangly imballanced when her behaviour has suddenly the manipulative traits in it.

Last edited by nakahara (March 13, 2015 9:46 am)

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:48 am

I think the main difference is that the reveal of Mary's past doesn't change how I view her before the reveal. Neither does it change her personality or make everything she hever said or done something to be questioned or doubted upon. All I see is someone who lied about her past, nothing else. Her reveal doesn't make her actions in TEH and TSoT any less supportive or loving for me.

**Posted by mrshouse** March 13, 2015 9:51 am

Don't get me wrong, support is a positive thing for sure. I just don't get at all why it is needed at all. I never felt that need in the books and never in other adaptions of the Holmes/Watson friendship. Let me give you another example. In the movies with Law and Downey we get a whole different kind of Mary Morstan. She is also clever and self-assured, but is quite annoyed by the closeness of the men and there are a couple of scenes where she is definitely not supportive. Butbutbut, that never really matters concerning their bond. The two of them get their stuff sorted. And everybody around them is wonderfully set around them, not between.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 9:59 am

I don't see the problem with the two of them having some support and a little nudge. Whether or not is has been done before is irrelevant for me. There is a lot of stuff in BBC Sherlock that hasn't been done before.

**Posted by mrshouse** March 13, 2015 10:02 am

No, I'm afraid you really get me wrong. It's not about support in earlier adaptations being done or not. I'm just not sure if this very relationship in novel and on screen is supposed to need it.
But that's also a bit matter of taste, apparently.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 10:09 am

I don't see why they shouldn't need it? Have any other adaptation, ACD included, dealt with the emotional impact of what the changes of marriage might entail to the extent that BBC Sherlock has? Also, seeing as this is set in modern times, they have to deal with this in today's society.

Last edited by Vhanja (March 13, 2015 10:09 am)

**Posted by SolarSystem** March 13, 2015 10:09 am

Vhanja wrote:
I think the main difference is that the reveal of Mary's past doesn't change how I view her before the reveal.

Same here. The difference is that from the very beginning I thought she just was too good to be true, and in HLV my suspicion was proven right.

**Posted by lil** March 13, 2015 11:26 am

So much written bout Mary lately - and I am still baffled by the liking and support she has..it seems not to matter at all what she did in the past , the huge lies she told , her planned murder of Magnussen and her assasination of Sherlock as a witness.
I seriously do wonder how any of this is balanced by anything else she may be...pretty..cute...funny. ..and the.. Magnusson deserved to die anyway... I find kind of shocking.....is there really no need for honesty or morality in modern society or relationships?
@I Agree@Solar..
IMO Marys behaviour toward John and Sherlock gets progressivly worse from episode to episode..its ambiguous deliberately...we think...oh was that funny/smart..or hmmm was that bitchy/nasty..and then when all is revealed...we think oh..yes it was nasty.

The Marys actions are all fine line...@look@Sherlock.... defeats the whole...turning Sherlock into a good man arc...does Sherlock just needs to learn to lie @fake it more thus putting on his own more pleasant facade...?.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 11:29 am

Yes, me having a nuanced opinion of Mary means that I have no need for morality or honesty in my relationships and my surroundings.

**Posted by Harriet** March 13, 2015 11:53 am

I wonder why you apply what nakahara said to your personal life, actually.

**Posted by Vhanja** March 13, 2015 12:00 pm

I didn't. It was related to what lil said. How she couldn't understand how anyone could like Mary - is there no need for honesty or morality in modern society and relationship? Not sure how else it was meant to come across other than an insinuation that if you happen to like Mary, you don't need those things.

**Posted by Harriet** March 13, 2015 12:03 pm

Sorry, it was lil, my mistake. Jjust wondering why you are so easily offended.