Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Slithytove]

/>

I feel like I've undergone a bit of a shift in my attitude towards Mary, so for those of you who have read my posts and may be wondering 'why the fairly quick change'; here's my explanation:

 

My initial reactions were that of shock and severe dislike, not for Mary's past, but for her attitude and the fact that she shot Sherlock. I could easily believe that she wanted to leave her past life behind her. That part always seemed sincere to me, and still does. But I was appalled by her coldness and extremely selfish behavior in risking Sherlock's life to protect her marriage. I always believed she didn't want Sherlock dead, but she was willilng to risk it anyway. She then claims that John likes that dangerous part of her, thereby making John seem like a darker person. And John forgives her for shooting Sherlock; in fact he barely brings that point up - it's all about forgiving her past. And the 'surgery' explanation to Mary's shot was and is still hard to swallow.

 

However, it is my belief that the writers mean to establish Mary as a 'good' character with a questionable past that's still haunting her. She wants to leave the past behind her and has found happiness; a happiness that she is very possesive of. She is a trained killer, so the instinct to kill could be what makes her so cold, even with Sherlock. She will do anything to protect her happiness. It is messed up, I know, because how can a person be happy if she had killed her husband's best friend? However, she did not want to kill him; she likes Sherlock, as we've seen in TEH and TSoT.

 

I don't personally like Mary, and if this was real life I'd not be able to just sweep everything under the rug, but there are things I can accept in fiction - like Sherlock and John forgiving Mary, because I actually find it admirable that they would do so. And when they do, perhaps in time I can too. Plus, the whole story just makes for some very emotional and compelling scenes. It has certainly put me through the emotional wringer, for several reasons, though mainly because of how difficult it is to come to terms with Mary's deceit.

 

In some ways, I find it an amazing episode because of the depth of emotional drama - but it is not something I wish to see more often on Sherlock. I want it to be a fun, charming detective show, not action, or large drama, or dark characters (except for Sherlock; he's allowed to be a bit dark ).

You are more charitable than I am!

 

If you want to leave behind your past as a killer, you don't do it by murdering someone. (And she does murder Sherlock. He comes back to life on the operating by some miraculous force of will.) Sherlock has not harmed her. He simply witnessed her about to commit another crime. He even offers to help her solve whatever her problem might be, but she ruthlessly guns him down.

 

I agree she is protecting her newfound happiness. However, if you defend your own happiness by brutally hurting other people you are, fundamentally, a psychopath.

 

I don't find John and Sherlock's forgiveness admirable. For Sherlock, I think it is a bit sad, as it shows the depth of his psychological damage. For John, I think it is appalling. Sherlock thinks it is ok to be a violent psychopath. John knows it is not.

 

I like dark characters and I am fine with Mary being evil, but not with her being happily married to John Watson.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

/>

I feel like I've undergone a bit of a shift in my attitude towards Mary, so for those of you who have read my posts and may be wondering 'why the fairly quick change'; here's my explanation:

 

My initial reactions were that of shock and severe dislike, not for Mary's past, but for her attitude and the fact that she shot Sherlock. I could easily believe that she wanted to leave her past life behind her. That part always seemed sincere to me, and still does. But I was appalled by her coldness and extremely selfish behavior in risking Sherlock's life to protect her marriage. I always believed she didn't want Sherlock dead, but she was willilng to risk it anyway. She then claims that John likes that dangerous part of her, thereby making John seem like a darker person. And John forgives her for shooting Sherlock; in fact he barely brings that point up - it's all about forgiving her past. And the 'surgery' explanation to Mary's shot was and is still hard to swallow.

 

However, it is my belief that the writers mean to establish Mary as a 'good' character with a questionable past that's still haunting her. She wants to leave the past behind her and has found happiness; a happiness that she is very possesive of. She is a trained killer, so the instinct to kill could be what makes her so cold, even with Sherlock. She will do anything to protect her happiness. It is messed up, I know, because how can a person be happy if she had killed her husband's best friend? However, she did not want to kill him; she likes Sherlock, as we've seen in TEH and TSoT.

 

I don't personally like Mary, and if this was real life I'd not be able to just sweep everything under the rug, but there are things I can accept in fiction - like Sherlock and John forgiving Mary, because I actually find it admirable that they would do so. And when they do, perhaps in time I can too. Plus, the whole story just makes for some very emotional and compelling scenes. It has certainly put me through the emotional wringer, for several reasons, though mainly because of how difficult it is to come to terms with Mary's deceit.

 

In some ways, I find it an amazing episode because of the depth of emotional drama - but it is not something I wish to see more often on Sherlock. I want it to be a fun, charming detective show, not action, or large drama, or dark characters (except for Sherlock; he's allowed to be a bit dark ).

You are more charitable than I am!

 

If you want to leave behind your past as a killer, you don't do it by murdering someone. (And she does murder Sherlock. He comes back to life on the operating by some miraculous force of will.) Sherlock has not harmed her. He simply witnessed her about to commit another crime. He even offers to help her solve whatever her problem might be, but she ruthlessly guns him down.

 

I agree she is protecting her newfound happiness. However, if you defend your own happiness by brutally hurting other people you are, fundamentally, a psychopath.

 

I don't find John and Sherlock's forgiveness admirable. For Sherlock, I think it is a bit sad, as it shows the depth of his psychological damage. For John, I think it is appalling. Sherlock thinks it is ok to be a violent psychopath. John knows it is not.

 

I like dark characters and I am fine with Mary being evil, but not with her being happily married to John Watson.

 

 

Well... If this was real life, I'd react differently. I'd be pissed with Sherlock for shooting Magnussen, though I'd also be very moved by his sacrifice. I'd tell John that his wife should go into treatment. I'd ask John how he knows he can trust her when she almost killed Sherlock. But because this is fiction, and I really, really love Sherlock and John, I need to try to understand what the writers are doing - and, surprisingly, I now find that it might be possible, even though I did not think it was two days ago. They have tried to make a solid case on behalf of Mary, but because they are limited to 90 minutes of television, some things are left unresolved, left up to our imagination. With this in mind, I fill in the gaps with what I believe the writers are trying to convey - for example that John has been really angry with Mary for months, not just about her lies, but also about her shooting Sherlock, even though it's not spoken of during the forgiveness scene. But since Sherlock has forgiven her, John feels compelled to do the same. I also think of Mary; that she must be desparate to start a new life.

 

This doesn't mean I like all of the plot, but I do have to live with it. Some things will probably bother me for a very long time, though, but I choose not to focus on it and hope for better things for series 4.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

I think Mary is crazy and Sherlock knows that, but he wants to protect John and search for a way out for their future with the child.

 

It is possible that Sherlock also has the baby in mind, yes. We don't hear about it, but there are several plot holes in the story.

[KaeEm]

 

 

As you stated, Mary has given up her life as an assassin years before she met John and it seems that she really wanted to change and leave that life behind her. She became a nurse, a job where she's helping people, we've seen her being very nice and caring to her neighbour and given all the positive things Sherlock deduced about her in TEH, I think her will to change and make up for her past is actually genuine. And so is her love for John. Sherlock trusts her on that and I'm kind of willing to do so as well. 

 

 

Sorry for disappointing you, but there are many psychopaths among the so-called 'helping professionals' (nurses, doctors, social workers, etc.). They've chosen their job to watch people suffer in order to satisfy their sadistic needs. In another thread Fox (Bakerstreet_Irregular) reported his experience with such a nurse (sorry I can't remember which thread).  Mary is a psychopath and we all know that personality disorders cannot be 'healed'. She cannot change the very core of her personality and we've seen this when she shot Sherlock in cold blood and all the events afterwards (she visited Sherlock in hospital and threatened him etc.). Her love for John is simply egoistic and selfish, as other forum members already stated.

 

 

 

 

Mary could have had another choice: kill Magnussen and ask Sherlock not to tell John. This 'surgical shot' is BS in my opinion, Sherlock almost died. I wouldn't forgive that.

 

 

The problem with killing Magnussen was that Janine wasn't dead and Mary wasn't willing to kill her, too. We don't even know if the security guard was dead, Sherlock just said "who cares" if he's alive or not. Janine had let Sherlock into the flat and would certainly tell the police that he was in the flat at the time the murder happened (while it was highly unlikely that Magnuessen would have contacted the police for the stolen letters - that didn't even exist, I suppose - they surely would have been contacted after he was murdered). And I have no doubt the security footage of the entrance of the building would have shown the police that John had been with Sherlock. So shooting CAM would have led to John becoming a murder suspect - along with Sherlock. Certainly not what Mary wanted to happen. 

 

I'm not defending Mary for shooting Sherlock, that was a bad choice. But shooting Magnussen wasn't an option any more in that situation. 

 

 

Following your logic: why Janine didn't tell the police that Sherlock was shot by Mary Morstan? Because Janine didn't see her. Either because of the mask or Mary knocked her off from behind. 

After killing Magnussen Mary could have fled and Sherlock could have phone the police and tell them he found Magnussen dead. There was no weapon, so I don't think Sherlock or John would have become a murder suspect.

 

 

You're not disappointing me, no worries   I just chose to see things differently than you. And we just don't know if Mary is, indeed, a sociapath or a psychopath. I chose to believe she isn't and that her love for John isn't more selfish than love in general is (because, let's be honest, in real life, love hardly ever is as purely selfless as we'd like to believe).

 

I'm sure Janine didn't even know that anyone other than Sherlock and John ever entered the flat. Mary didn't come in through the main entrance, that's for sure, given her costume. Even if Sherlock had called the police, there would have been no guarantee of him and John not becoming suspects. It wouldn't be the first time that a murderer himself called the police to draw suspicion from himself. And as far as the absence of the murder weapon is concerned, with Janine (and the security guard) swearing that no one else could have entered the flat, the police would just assume that Sherlock and John had somehow got rid of the gun (for someone who faked his own death by jumping off a  rooftop the disappearence of a murder weapon must just seem peanuts). Probably there wouldn't have been enough proof for a conviction, but John would at least have become a murder suspect and mentioned as such in the papers which would have caused him a lot of trouble, privatley and professionally.

[Slithytove]

/>

 

 

 

/>

I feel like I've undergone a bit of a shift in my attitude towards Mary, so for those of you who have read my posts and may be wondering 'why the fairly quick change'; here's my explanation:

 

My initial reactions were that of shock and severe dislike, not for Mary's past, but for her attitude and the fact that she shot Sherlock. I could easily believe that she wanted to leave her past life behind her. That part always seemed sincere to me, and still does. But I was appalled by her coldness and extremely selfish behavior in risking Sherlock's life to protect her marriage. I always believed she didn't want Sherlock dead, but she was willilng to risk it anyway. She then claims that John likes that dangerous part of her, thereby making John seem like a darker person. And John forgives her for shooting Sherlock; in fact he barely brings that point up - it's all about forgiving her past. And the 'surgery' explanation to Mary's shot was and is still hard to swallow.

 

However, it is my belief that the writers mean to establish Mary as a 'good' character with a questionable past that's still haunting her. She wants to leave the past behind her and has found happiness; a happiness that she is very possesive of. She is a trained killer, so the instinct to kill could be what makes her so cold, even with Sherlock. She will do anything to protect her happiness. It is messed up, I know, because how can a person be happy if she had killed her husband's best friend? However, she did not want to kill him; she likes Sherlock, as we've seen in TEH and TSoT.

 

I don't personally like Mary, and if this was real life I'd not be able to just sweep everything under the rug, but there are things I can accept in fiction - like Sherlock and John forgiving Mary, because I actually find it admirable that they would do so. And when they do, perhaps in time I can too. Plus, the whole story just makes for some very emotional and compelling scenes. It has certainly put me through the emotional wringer, for several reasons, though mainly because of how difficult it is to come to terms with Mary's deceit.

 

In some ways, I find it an amazing episode because of the depth of emotional drama - but it is not something I wish to see more often on Sherlock. I want it to be a fun, charming detective show, not action, or large drama, or dark characters (except for Sherlock; he's allowed to be a bit dark ).

You are more charitable than I am!

 

If you want to leave behind your past as a killer, you don't do it by murdering someone. (And she does murder Sherlock. He comes back to life on the operating by some miraculous force of will.) Sherlock has not harmed her. He simply witnessed her about to commit another crime. He even offers to help her solve whatever her problem might be, but she ruthlessly guns him down.

 

I agree she is protecting her newfound happiness. However, if you defend your own happiness by brutally hurting other people you are, fundamentally, a psychopath.

 

I don't find John and Sherlock's forgiveness admirable. For Sherlock, I think it is a bit sad, as it shows the depth of his psychological damage. For John, I think it is appalling. Sherlock thinks it is ok to be a violent psychopath. John knows it is not.

 

I like dark characters and I am fine with Mary being evil, but not with her being happily married to John Watson.

Well... If this was real life, I'd react differently. I'd be pissed with Sherlock for shooting Magnussen, though I'd also be very moved by his sacrifice. I'd tell John that his wife should go into treatment. I'd ask John how he knows he can trust her when she almost killed Sherlock. But because this is fiction, and I really, really love Sherlock and John, I need to try to understand what the writers are doing - and, surprisingly, I now find that it might be possible, even though I did not think it was two days ago. They have tried to make a solid case on behalf of Mary, but because they are limited to 90 minutes of television, some things are left unresolved, left up to our imagination. With this in mind, I fill in the gaps with what I believe the writers are trying to convey - for example that John has been really angry with Mary for months, not just about her lies, but also about her shooting Sherlock, even though it's not spoken of during the forgiveness scene. But since Sherlock has forgiven her, John feels compelled to do the same. I also think of Mary; that she must be desparate to start a new life.

 

This doesn't mean I like all of the plot, but I do have to live with it. Some things will probably bother me for a very long time, though, but I choose not to focus on it and hope for better things for series 4.

Certainly I would be angry with Sherlock for shooting Magnussen. Unlike John's shooting of the cabbie, no-one's life was actually in danger, though Magnussen was obviously a loathsome creep and a danger to Mary because of her past. I would be particularly angry with him because he had ruined his own life with one extreme act.

 

We accept things, of course, in fiction that we would never tolerate in real life. For instance, I adore Sherlock but, in reality, I don't think I could bear him. However, I don't think that justifies the writers trying to foist something on us which just feels wrong - like the idea that anyone in their right mind would be able to come to terms with the fact that their wife was an assassin, without wanting to know the details.

 

"Darling, I was a hired killer."

"That's okay. Water under the bridge."

"And I shot your closest friend, nearly killing him, to shut him up."

"Well, he forgives you."

 

Even fiction seems to have some sort of internal credibility. Hopefully they will sort it out in the next series.

[leanne_maybe]

/>

 

 

 

 

 

As you stated, Mary has given up her life as an assassin years before she met John and it seems that she really wanted to change and leave that life behind her. She became a nurse, a job where she's helping people, we've seen her being very nice and caring to her neighbour and given all the positive things Sherlock deduced about her in TEH, I think her will to change and make up for her past is actually genuine. And so is her love for John. Sherlock trusts her on that and I'm kind of willing to do so as well.

 

Sorry for disappointing you, but there are many psychopaths among the so-called 'helping professionals' (nurses, doctors, social workers, etc.). They've chosen their job to watch people suffer in order to satisfy their sadistic needs. In another thread Fox (Bakerstreet_Irregular) reported his experience with such a nurse (sorry I can't remember which thread). Mary is a psychopath and we all know that personality disorders cannot be 'healed'. She cannot change the very core of her personality and we've seen this when she shot Sherlock in cold blood and all the events afterwards (she visited Sherlock in hospital and threatened him etc.). Her love for John is simply egoistic and selfish, as other forum members already stated.

 

 

/>

 

 

Mary could have had another choice: kill Magnussen and ask Sherlock not to tell John. This 'surgical shot' is BS in my opinion, Sherlock almost died. I wouldn't forgive that.

 

The problem with killing Magnussen was that Janine wasn't dead and Mary wasn't willing to kill her, too. We don't even know if the security guard was dead, Sherlock just said "who cares" if he's alive or not. Janine had let Sherlock into the flat and would certainly tell the police that he was in the flat at the time the murder happened (while it was highly unlikely that Magnuessen would have contacted the police for the stolen letters - that didn't even exist, I suppose - they surely would have been contacted after he was murdered). And I have no doubt the security footage of the entrance of the building would have shown the police that John had been with Sherlock. So shooting CAM would have led to John becoming a murder suspect - along with Sherlock. Certainly not what Mary wanted to happen.

 

I'm not defending Mary for shooting Sherlock, that was a bad choice. But shooting Magnussen wasn't an option any more in that situation.

Following your logic: why Janine didn't tell the police that Sherlock was shot by Mary Morstan? Because Janine didn't see her. Either because of the mask or Mary knocked her off from behind.

After killing Magnussen Mary could have fled and Sherlock could have phone the police and tell them he found Magnussen dead. There was no weapon, so I don't think Sherlock or John would have become a murder suspect.

You're not disappointing me, no worries I just chose to see things differently than you. And we just don't know if Mary is, indeed, a sociapath or a psychopath. I chose to believe she isn't and that her love for John isn't more selfish than love in general is (because, let's be honest, in real life, love hardly ever is as purely selfless as we'd like to believe).

 

I'm sure Janine didn't even know that anyone other than Sherlock and John ever entered the flat. Mary didn't come in through the main entrance, that's for sure, given her costume. Even if Sherlock had called the police, there would have been no guarantee of him and John not becoming suspects. It wouldn't be the first time that a murderer himself called the police to draw suspicion from himself. And as far as the absence of the murder weapon is concerned, with Janine (and the security guard) swearing that no one else could have entered the flat, the police would just assume that Sherlock and John had somehow got rid of the gun (for someone who faked his own death by jumping off a rooftop the disappearence of a murder weapon must just seem peanuts). Probably there wouldn't have been enough proof for a conviction, but John would at least have become a murder suspect and mentioned as such in the papers which would have caused him a lot of trouble, privatley and professionally.

But if Janine didn't know someone else had entered the flat,who did she think had knocked her out? Obviously at the time she wouldn't be aware, but after she would know, so would she suspect Sherlock and John? It didn't appear she did, so she must have thought there was someone else in the flat.

[KaeEm]

But if Janine didn't know someone else had entered the flat,who did she think had knocked her out? Obviously at the time she wouldn't be aware, but after she would know, so would she suspect Sherlock and John? It didn't appear she did, so she must have thought there was someone else in the flat.

 

 

It's not unusual that a blow to the head goes along with a - short term - memory loss. I suppose Janine would remember letting Sherlock into the elevator and just assume that - due to the blow to her had - she didn't remember him (or John) knocking her out after he entered the flat.

[leanne_maybe]

/>

 

But if Janine didn't know someone else had entered the flat,who did she think had knocked her out? Obviously at the time she wouldn't be aware, but after she would know, so would she suspect Sherlock and John? It didn't appear she did, so she must have thought there was someone else in the flat.

 

It's not unusual that a blow to the head goes along with a - short term - memory loss. I suppose Janine would remember letting Sherlock into the elevator and just assume that - due to the blow to her had - she didn't remember him (or John) knocking her out after he entered the flat.

I would agree that it's perfectly logical she would think Sherlock or John did it and she didn't remember, but she doesn't seem to think they did - she knows Sherlock has been shot, I suppose, but why wouldn't she suspect John? She knows she's only let 2 of them in and one of them is shot. She has to suspect John or conclude that there was someone else in there.

[Earendil]

 

I'm sure Janine didn't even know that anyone other than Sherlock and John ever entered the flat. Mary didn't come in through the main entrance, that's for sure, given her costume. Even if Sherlock had called the police, there would have been no guarantee of him and John not becoming suspects. It wouldn't be the first time that a murderer himself called the police to draw suspicion from himself. And as far as the absence of the murder weapon is concerned, with Janine (and the security guard) swearing that no one else could have entered the flat, the police would just assume that Sherlock and John had somehow got rid of the gun (for someone who faked his own death by jumping off a  rooftop the disappearence of a murder weapon must just seem peanuts). Probably there wouldn't have been enough proof for a conviction, but John would at least have become a murder suspect and mentioned as such in the papers which would have caused him a lot of trouble, privatley and professionally.

 

 

In this show Police=Lestrade. He fully trusts Sherlock and John and never ever would think that either or both of them murdered Magnussen.* Sherlock has seen the way Mary came in so he could explain to Lestrade that the killer entered and left that way.

 

*Well, after the ending of HLV he definitely changed his mind.

[Loekie]

 

 

 

 

/> But since Sherlock has forgiven her, John feels compelled to do the same.

 

I agree with this theory.

 

 

[KaeEm]

 

/>

But if Janine didn't know someone else had entered the flat,who did she think had knocked her out? Obviously at the time she wouldn't be aware, but after she would know, so would she suspect Sherlock and John? It didn't appear she did, so she must have thought there was someone else in the flat.

It's not unusual that a blow to the head goes along with a - short term - memory loss. I suppose Janine would remember letting Sherlock into the elevator and just assume that - due to the blow to her had - she didn't remember him (or John) knocking her out after he entered the flat.

I would agree that it's perfectly logical she would think Sherlock or John did it and she didn't remember, but she doesn't seem to think they did - she knows Sherlock has been shot, I suppose, but why wouldn't she suspect John? She knows she's only let 2 of them in and one of them is shot. She has to suspect John or conclude that there was someone else in there.

 

 

My assumptions quoted above are all based on the scenario of what would have happened if Mary had shot Magnussen. She didn't, so Magnuessen himself was there to tell Janine that it wasn't John who had shot Sherlock and that there was another intruder.

[Sherlock_luvr]

Sorry do drag the topic on, but I don't quite understand why Mary should be expected to be so terribly repentant about her past. Do we think Sherlock should suffer for shooting Magnussen? Do we think John should have gone to prison for killing the cabbie in A Study in Pink? No. At least I don't.

 

Doesn't Mary at Baker St say something like "people like Magnussen should be killed - that's why there's people like me?" This is pretty much the definition of "good" and "evil" in my eyes: Villains exist to make the people who kill them heroes instead of murderers. While in real life, killing is never justified, in fiction, you can just give a person the "evil" label and after that, anything goes. So by the rules of fiction, Mary is really not to be blamed for slaying dragons in her own little way... (Of course we don't know if that is all she did. We know almost nothing about her past, really. And considering how dumb I think the whole "assassin" angle is, I don't really want to know. I'm with John here: throw it into the fire and just focus on Mary Watson, whom I have come to like a lot. The less said about this silly business in future, the better.)

 

It's not her past that I care so much about. Everyone has a past that they don't want someone to know about - or at least all good, three dimensional characters do. It's the present and John so quickly forgiving Mary for deliberately shooting his best friend to keep him from finding out that is just not believable to me.

 

John heard her tell Sherlock (and she had a gun in her hand - again) that she would do anything to keep him from finding out because she would lose him. I know John is naive but, really? Really?!

 

I'm hoping there is something else in play here that we just aren't privy to and will be revealed in Series 4.

[KaeEm]

 

 

 

In this show Police=Lestrade. He fully trusts Sherlock and John and never ever would think that either or both of them murdered Magnussen.* Sherlock has seen the way Mary came in so he could explain to Lestrade that the killer entered and left that way.

 

*Well, after the ending of HLV he definitely changed his mind.

 

 

 Yes, he definitly had to change his mind there!

As we've seen in TRF, Lestrade actually has bosses. In such a high profile murder case there would be no way one police officer alone could decide who was believable and who not and if a case has to come to court or not. But I have to admit that by pointing out the way Mary had come into the flat, Sherlock would have convinced any jury that there had been an intruder and he and John would have been found "not guilty". But I don't think that Sherlock and John would have been free of suspiscion. Considering how much the press likes such scandal stories, there would always have stayed a suspicion that John and Sherlock had somehow been involved in the murder, even if they weren't convicted.

[T.o.b.y]

It's not her past that I care so much about. Everyone has a past that they don't want someone to know about - or at least all good, three dimensional characters do. It's the present and John so quickly forgiving Mary for deliberately shooting his best friend to keep him from finding out that is just not believable to me.

 

John heard her tell Sherlock (and she had a gun in her hand - again) that she would do anything to keep him from finding out because she would lose him. I know John is naive but, really? Really?!

 

Well, John never seemed really upset by the fact that she shot Sherlock. What he seemed to care about the most was that she lied to him about who she was, that he felt their entire relationship and marriage had been fake. Also, he seemed pretty disturbed by the realization that there was no way after all he could live a normal life and find peace, he just isn't made that way. He had hoped he'd "moved on", as he says in The Empty Hearse, which I assumed meant moving on from danger and chaos to a happy, stable, sane civilian life - personified by that beautiful, caring, kind, funny woman he (thought he'd) found. And then he discovers he's fallen in love with a killer, he's addicted to danger and darkness and he is so unsettled by having to face that, there doesn't seem to be any concern left in him for the fact that Sherlock almost died. Besides, Sherlock does his best to explain away that part, claiming Mary actually saved his life and urging John on to forgive her and accept both her and himself (I mean John himself here) for what they are.

 

The thing is, I think John loves Mary. As in really loves her. And love is blind and drives people to make choices that can seem downright insane to other people.

 

(It is interesting, though, that John does not seem willing to accept Mary for what she was, only what he thinks she is now or what he wants her to be. Should make for an interesting marriage in the future...)

 

[KaeEm]

 

 

It's not her past that I care so much about. Everyone has a past that they don't want someone to know about - or at least all good, three dimensional characters do. It's the present and John so quickly forgiving Mary for deliberately shooting his best friend to keep him from finding out that is just not believable to me.

 

 

So it bothers you that John forgave Mary "too quickly". I just wonder: How long do you think would have been appropriate?

 

We know it had taken him several months to even talk to Mary again, so what timespan would have been appropriate for you? Half a year, one year, ten years? But take into consicerdation that there's a baby on the way and he had to somehow get along with Mary just for the sake of this innocent child AND that Sherlock had been convincing him to forgive Mary for months (at least we can assume that, because in all the scenes we got to see Sherlock didn't do anything but try and convince John to give Mary a second chance). It's unfortunate that we don't know what happened between John and Sherlock during the months leading up to Christmas, but Sherlock had clearly set his mind upon bringing John and Mary together again. And we know how good Sherlock is at getting John to do what he wants . . .

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Just a thought or two about how "normal" Sherlock's parents appear, maybe not so much. Mummy Holmes is also a genius. Her mind runs to numbers. Everything is supposed to be ordered, logical, dependable and predictable. Children, especially boys, are anything but. Especially one as active and inquisitive as Sherlock must have been. She may not have been able to cope very well, nor may she have been very nurturing, could have been the strict one. The disciplinarian.   It is Mr. Holmes that seems to be the "softer" one, for a better word. He liked music....humming? But Mummy felt compelled to discourage it...even though it was in a intimate way.

 

  Perhaps it was from Mr. Holmes that Sherlock got his love of music. Affection didn't seem to run rampant in the family. Only one family pet? One's who loss effected Sherlock so deeply? Mycroft had to learn that axiom from somewhere. "All lives end. All hearts are broken. Caring is not an advantage, Sherlock."

[wildwoodflower]

Sorry do drag the topic on, but I don't quite understand why Mary should be expected to be so terribly repentant about her past. Do we think Sherlock should suffer for shooting Magnussen? Do we think John should have gone to prison for killing the cabbie in A Study in Pink? No. At least I don't.

 

Doesn't Mary at Baker St say something like "people like Magnussen should be killed - that's why there's people like me?" This is pretty much the definition of "good" and "evil" in my eyes: Villains exist to make the people who kill them heroes instead of murderers. While in real life, killing is never justified, in fiction, you can just give a person the "evil" label and after that, anything goes. So by the rules of fiction, Mary is really not to be blamed for slaying dragons in her own little way... (Of course we don't know if that is all she did. We know almost nothing about her past, really. And considering how dumb I think the whole "assassin" angle is, I don't really want to know. I'm with John here: throw it into the fire and just focus on Mary Watson, whom I have come to like a lot. The less said about this silly business in future, the better.)

 

Well, typically, as I've noticed on many of the forums in many fandoms (especially those in which the leads are men that fans have slashed together) female characters are often villified for doing exactly the same things the male characters do. Female character is then gotten rid of or punished (in fanfiction usually, but often in the fiction itself) so that the two men can return to the business of being soul mates bound for all eternity.  It's a storytelling problem. I'm sort of pissed off that they made Mary this person because there is no way for her to escape the fate of being sacrificed or sacrifing herself in order to redeem herself. It's kind of annoying. Maybe if more women got the chance to write for television we'd get some different choices for characters. All characters. We sure as hell wouldn't get the tired old trope of the man whose wife/girlfriend/family/child was murdered as motivation and justification for deception, secretiveness, emotional withdrawal, and brooding. It's boring. Sherlock has neatly stayed away from it, even subverted the trope by making John Watson addicted to the adrenelin high of danger in action. But Elementary went there right away (and subverted the trope later).

 

I'm going on and on and I'm sure no one really wants to engage in meta discussions of gender politics in media. Carry on:-)

[T.o.b.y]

 

I'm going on and on and I'm sure no one really wants to engage in meta discussions of gender politics in media. Carry on:-)

 

Oh, don't be so sure about that - I find discussing gender politics quite interesting, I'm only afraid I'm not well enough informed to make any really qualified arguments.

 

I think it's not just the fans who are judging Mary by different standards as the men. I found that scene at Baker St quite hard to watch. As intrigued as I was by John's struggle with the fact that he is a danger addict, I found the way he treated Mary very humiliating. The scene at Sherlock's parents' house also casts John in the role of the magnanimous old-time hero who forgives a woman her "trespasses" (back then usually of a sexual nature) and "takes her back". The way they had her tear up and fall into his arms nearly made me sick, to be honest. And I do not find John's behavior as chivalrous as I am sure it was supposed to appear. All he did was decide he couldn't accept who she truly is, not all of her, so he just chose to ignore it and restore the fantasy he got married to. Great going, Dr Watson. If this was real life, their marriage would be doomed. Thank goodness it's fiction, where I hope they will still be very happy.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  Not everything is hearts and flowers in the Watson household yet. That was the first time they had really spoken to each other in at least a month. John tells her that he is still really pissed at her, and that it would probably come out at times. But. there is a child on the way. Most of us know real life situations in which the husband and wife have a horrible relationship but "we stay together for the children's sake."  A really...really bad idea, because it can and does scar the selfsame children. But, it happens.

[T.o.b.y]

  Not everything is hearts and flowers in the Watson household yet. That was the first time they had really spoken to each other in at least a month. John tells her that he is still really pissed at her, and that it would probably come out at times. But. there is a child on the way. Most of us know real life situations in which the husband and wife have a horrible relationship but "we stay together for the children's sake."  A really...really bad idea, because it can and does scar the selfsame children. But, it happens.

 

Oh, I don't think they are staying together for the sake of the child or that that was the reason why John wanted her back. I think they just really love each other. John is clearly head over heels for her and she certainly was willing to go to considerable lengths not to loose him. It's a bit of an amour fou. Funny, I don't find it all that romantic. A bit disturbing, actually. Interesting. I wonder where the story will go with them. My best bet is nowhere. The past will stay burned and they will go back to just being Mr and Mrs Watson, with occasional "funny" flippant remarks and quibbles about what happened in His Last Vow.

 

[wildwoodflower]

  Not everything is hearts and flowers in the Watson household yet. That was the first time they had really spoken to each other in at least a month. John tells her that he is still really pissed at her, and that it would probably come out at times. But. there is a child on the way. Most of us know real life situations in which the husband and wife have a horrible relationship but "we stay together for the children's sake."  A really...really bad idea, because it can and does scar the selfsame children. But, it happens.

 

Right, and when she got teary eyed and clutched him it may well have been in gratitude because she may be a former "wetworks engineer" but having a baby by yourself is hard yo. I was going with that as motivating factor for her grateful reaction (even though I am, in principle, in complete agreement with T.O.B.Y. on the matter of double standards there). I was left by my husband when our son was two months old and I don't wish it on anyone -  even fictional people. 

 

[T.o.b.y]

I wish we had gotten or would get a bit more of Mary's view of things. What memories does she have? What drove her to being a professional killer? Did she see herself as a "dragon slayer", who killed those the law could not reach? Or was it just a job? Was she forced into it or did she choose it? Did she change her identity out of necessity or was she sick and tired of her old life and really wanted a more "mundane" existence? Is she really bored, as Sherlock claimed (judging from himself, probably) or was she perfectly happy with her humdrum life until Magnussen ruined it?

 

None of these questions will ever be answered, I am afraid. Mary still seems like no more than a plot device to me. The actress really does her best, but she has been given precious little opportunity to really explore her character. Which is maybe why a lot of people find it hard to like, let alone sympathize with her.

 

As for "the two men can return to the business of being soul mates bound for all eternity", I'm all for that, I just don't see why it would require the loss of Mary. John could very well be Sherlock's best friend and Mary's loving husband - that part has worked out fine so far. The focus would not have to shift away from the two men either to give us more insight into Mary. Look at how well they portray Molly, and she has even less screen time and certainly doesn't interfere with the friendship I think we all love, even though she has almost no connection to John at all.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

 

Well, John never seemed really upset by the fact that she shot Sherlock. What he seemed to care about the most was that she lied to him about who she was, that he felt their entire relationship and marriage had been fake. Also, he seemed pretty disturbed by the realization that there was no way after all he could live a normal life and find peace, he just isn't made that way. He had hoped he'd "moved on", as he says in The Empty Hearse, which I assumed meant moving on from danger and chaos to a happy, stable, sane civilian life - personified by that beautiful, caring, kind, funny woman he (thought he'd) found. And then he discovers he's fallen in love with a killer, he's addicted to danger and darkness and he is so unsettled by having to face that, there doesn't seem to be any concern left in him for the fact that Sherlock almost died. Besides, Sherlock does his best to explain away that part, claiming Mary actually saved his life and urging John on to forgive her and accept both her and himself (I mean John himself here) for what they are.

 

 

You are brilliant! Really, I think you are onto something here. Part of my insides are churning at the idea that John is not more upset about Mary having shot Sherlock, but I think you have a point. Actually, two points For one, John has to face the unsettling reality of who he is, and who Mary is. Secondly, Sherlock, who was the one who'd been shot, forgives Mary and nudges John to do the same. So John has enough on his plate as it is. I think it's hard to stomach, because it removes the focus from the Sherlock/John friendship to the John/Mary romance.

 

And I understand John, because when he got furious and kicked that chair over, I wanted to do the same on his behalf. I was angry with both Mary and Sherlock at that moment, and found it really hard to accept the fact that John is, in fact, 'addicted to a certain lifestyle' - abnormally attracted to danger. I still find it hard. It's another thing that's hard to stomach, but I get it, I do. Everything Sherlock says about John makes sense.

 

For me, it all comes down to this: I can understand John's and Sherlock's actions a lot better now than two days ago, but the episode did present both men quite a bit darker than usual - especially John. This journey into darker character traits does not sit all that well with me. Though a part of me finds it compelling, I also find myself crying a bit inside; like I've lost something of John that I loved. Well, well... Hopefully series 4 will bring about brighter times for me!

[T.o.b.y]

 

This journey into darker character traits does not sit all that well with me. Though a part of me finds it compelling, I also find myself crying a bit inside; like I've lost something of John that I loved. Well, well... Hopefully series 4 will bring about brighter times for me!

 

Oh, poor you. It is always hard to discover an interpretation of a character that one has grown quite fond of is not entirely accurate or that the character has been developed in ways that don't fit it. But if you look back on the earlier episodes, I think you'll find that the hints were all there. I have always thought of John as just as "damaged" as his best friend, in his own quiet way, but then, I am rather drawn to darkness. I also appreciate the wide range of tone this show manages, from comedy to romance to psycho thriller drama and back again. It's a fun ride and they've managed to make it all hold together somehow.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

The scene at Sherlock's parents' house also casts John in the role of the magnanimous old-time hero who forgives a woman her "trespasses" (back then usually of a sexual nature) and "takes her back". The way they had her tear up and fall into his arms nearly made me sick, to be honest. And I do not find John's behavior as chivalrous as I am sure it was supposed to appear. All he did was decide he couldn't accept who she truly is, not all of her, so he just chose to ignore it and restore the fantasy he got married to. Great going, Dr Watson. If this was real life, their marriage would be doomed. Thank goodness it's fiction, where I hope they will still be very happy.

 

 

I found it moving that John decided that her past didn't matter to him, just their future together. Mary seemed very relieved and moved about it. So, yes, I think it's true that John's actions were meant to be chivalrous. And I'll buy it.