Mary Morstan

[Caya]

Interview with Amanda Abbington at the Hector and the Search for Happiness premiere:

 

 

Gifs for the slow of internet (not sure if we still got any since Carol's hooked up now but it can't hurt, I guess):

 

 

 

 

 

(source)

 

Of course, people have been known to lie about these things .

[Arcadia]

Thank you Martina! For some reason in the summer my internet connection is really sluggish, videos are almost impossible if they're over a minute long. So at least one person appreciates your effort!

[Carol the Dabbler]

Oh, dear --"I know how it happens" -- that sounds ominous!

 

[T.o.b.y]

Oh, dear --"I know how it happens" -- that sounds ominous!

 

It does indeed. Did I honestly just watch Ms Abbington admit that Mary is going to die? But... No! I like Mary (yes, I still do), and what about poor John, and... What's that supposed to mean, we know what happens to Mary? Even in the original, we don't know for sure that she died. Yeah, it is the most probable scenario judging by what Watson writes in The Empty House, but there's no proof or anything.

 

Oh...! I just hope that my theory of Mary's death being way too predictable for the writers to actually go through with it will be proven right, and that they'll put some kind of clever twist in the story that lets her survive.

 

Oh god, no, and what about the baby? You can't invent a completely uncalled-for infant and then plot to kill its mother! Where is a writer's sense of responsibility in that?

[Arcadia]

Maybe they'll fake her death. Gee, won't we all be surprised.

[sfmpco]

I do like the idea that someone said that since she was technically already dead that they could skip that death stuff, but as S4 is darker, that could be part of the darkness.  However, I can see that if she dies or is killed off, that SH having to deal with John's grief will help to humanize SH a little more, because he will have to step up emotionally to be the best friend John needs him to be.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Maybe they'll fake her death. Gee, won't we all be surprised.

 

 

... and little Gloria Scott Watson will fake her own death as well, I suppose.  Hey, they'll fit right in!

[sfmpco]

That thud you just heard was me dropping my head on the table again.

[T.o.b.y]

Maybe they'll fake her death. Gee, won't we all be surprised.

 

Noooooo! No more fake deaths! Okay, sooner than that, I'd rather she died for real - and that is saying a lot. (Although I have to admit, at this point, poor Mary is one of the characters I could better see go than others. I'll cry if she dies, but I won't stop watching. Now, if they laid a finger on Molly or Mrs Hudson, I'd turn absolutely monstrous!)

 

 

I do like the idea that someone said that since she was technically already dead that they could skip that death stuff, but as S4 is darker, that could be part of the darkness.  However, I can see that if she dies or is killed off, that SH having to deal with John's grief will help to humanize SH a little more, because he will have to step up emotionally to be the best friend John needs him to be.

 

Yes, seeing how Sherlock would handle that is the only possible advantage I can imagine from losing Mary. And a nasty part of me also wants to confront Sherlock with a grieving John face to face and really rub it in that this is what it looks like, this is what he did to his best friend himself not too long ago. Maybe then he'll finally understand what a godawful idea that suicide act was.

[Caya]

I was trying to hunt down the supposed quote from Mrs Abbington that she took this role because Mary would be dying in John's arms - I found a few statements that it originated in the Vow premiere Q&A, but no transcript includes it, so I assume that one is spurious. This would then be her first mention of her char's death. Her husband has talked about Mary's death being on the cards before as well, though.

 

However, this is at the premiere of Hector, a film starring the couple's good friend Simon Pegg. Who, iirc, at an interview about the upcoming Star Trek into Darkness off-handedly remarked how great Benedict Cumberbatch's performance as Gary Mitchell was, only to look chagrined to have let slip such a huge spoiler. It's entirely possible that Amanda Abbington felt inspired by his fibbing when she made the above statement .

[Arcadia]

These ARE actors, after all. They fib for a living.

[sherlockandjohn]

This is a little late in reference to the previous comments on this thread, but if Mofftiss have decided to kill Mary and maybe even the baby, they are not exactly the worst of writers, as it's hardly new to invent people and then kill them for drama's sake. And hasn't it been said that Doyle himself had Mary die in childbirth? Apparently, there's still some speculation about that, but anyway, it's not the worst I've heard of. Not saying I like it! But I can live with it.

 

I've really grown to appreciate the moral conflict around Mary's character. I find it both moving and interesting. Only just now, I've read this article by Wellingtongoose. There's a lot of depth to it in explaning Mary's and Sherlock's actions. Of course, the same could be said about certain metas which incriminate Mary. Some of them seem deep, but to be honest, an article like this one by loudest-subtext-in-television I don't even want to finish, because it seems to be built entirely on supposed subtext. If I can't trust anything said or shown in His Last Vow, why bother watching it? Subtext is great, but only if it fits with what's going on. Otherwise, we may as well call the content one big lie. How sad is that?!

 

Then there is this article by Sherlock Meta, which I read all of, and found very interesting. Sherlock Meta apparently feels that Mary is a bit of a villain, but has examined the evidence in His Last Vow and argues that Sherlock does seem to forgive Mary. The meta doesn't say, though, that Sherlock is right to do so, quite the contrary. It gives a solid argument in my book, but I still feel more warmly towards Mary, so I can't agree with everything.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for those links, S&J.  I had already read wellingtongoose's blog post, and found it very informative if not totally convincing.  The Sherlock Meta post strikes me as somewhat similar, though on the opposite side.  They both back up their statements very clearly, so that even though I may disagree with some of their conclusions, I don't dispute many of their observations.

 

As you say, though, loudest-subtext seems to be basing his/her conclusions on what could be true and on what s/he wants to see.  I don't find that sort of emotional presentation either helpful or convincing.  Like you, I find it hard to read.

 

In canon, Mary just sort of evaporates.  She's there (though generally in the background) for a number of stories (beginning with Sign of the Four), but then when Holmes returns from "the dead," he offers Watson his condolences on his [unspecified] "bereavement," and Mary is never mentioned again.  My personal real-life theory is that Conan Doyle had forgotten all about her in the intervening years, and originally wrote "Empty House" with no mention of her.  Then his editor/publisher said, "Hey, wait a minute, where's Watson's wife?" and Doyle stuck in that one sentence as a fix.

 

Please don't apologize for resurrecting a dormant thread -- it helps keep the forum active and interesting!

 

[T.o.b.y]

This is a little late in reference to the previous comments on this thread, but if Mofftiss have decided to kill Mary and maybe even the baby, they are not exactly the worst of writers, as it's hardly new to invent people and then kill them for drama's sake. And hasn't it been said that Doyle himself had Mary die in childbirth? Apparently, there's still some speculation about that, but anyway, it's not the worst I've heard of. Not saying I like it! But I can live with it.

 

I've really grown to appreciate the moral conflict around Mary's character. I find it both moving and interesting. Only just now, I've read this article by Wellingtongoose. There's a lot of depth to it in explaning Mary's and Sherlock's actions. Of course, the same could be said about certain metas which incriminate Mary. Some of them seem deep, but to be honest, an article like this one by loudest-subtext-in-television I don't even want to finish, because it seems to be built entirely on supposed subtext. If I can't trust anything said or shown in His Last Vow, why bother watching it? Subtext is great, but only if it fits with what's going on. Otherwise, we may as well call the content one big lie. How sad is that?!

 

Then there is this article by Sherlock Meta, which I read all of, and found very interesting. Sherlock Meta apparently feels that Mary is a bit of a villain, but has examined the evidence in His Last Vow and argues that Sherlock does seem to forgive Mary. The meta doesn't say, though, that Sherlock is right to do so, quite the contrary. It gives a solid argument in my book, but I still feel more warmly towards Mary, so I can't agree with everything.

 

Ooooh, goody, somebody has resumed the Mary debate! I had grown a bit wary of mentioning her, because some said they were tired of the subject, but inside her own thread, I am sure we can go on and on without really bothering anybody.

 

So. I just read all three metas and rather than pay detailed attention to each one, I'll just write down my own thoughts on the matter, because, hey, I'm self-centered and this is more fun.

 

Okay. So, first: Is Mary a villain?

I say no. Decidedly no. Mary is not a villain. She's neither evil, nor does she have evil intentions. She might be selfish, but I don't think a lot more so than any other normal human being. She was a professional killer. An assassin, trained by the CIA, a legitimate organization. So for her, I strongly suppose killing people is, or at least was once, a normal job. Just like for John being in a war zone and getting shot (maybe also shooing back) was a normal job. Her perspective will naturally be different than an "ordinary" person's, and so will her morals. I am not saying this is right. I am a pacifist, I don't even think being a soldier is right, even though I see why there is a (sad) necessity for them. My own job involves a lot of blood, vomit and other body fluids. The people these fluids come out of often cannot bear to look at them, while for me, they're just part of my working day. People adapt to their circumstances, and this means their sense of what is "normal" and also acceptable changes, too.

 

Why did Mary shoot Sherlock?

Because she didn't trust him to be on her side, she didn't think he could help her and she didn't even take into account the  possibility that if John found out about her, he'd continue to love her. She misjudged both men. She was also scared. That is hardly a crime. Of course shooting Sherlock was a crime. But it was not, in my mind, done with evil intent. She didn't shoot to hurt or kill, she shot to protect herself, and John, too (from the truth). Again, I do not think this is right. I'm just saying that for me, personally, it does not qualify as evil.

 

Why did Mary not kill Sherlock?

Because killing him wasn't her primary motivation. It was, as he said, to buy herself time, and probably also to show him how serious she was about keeping her secret from John and how far she was willing to go. I do think that Sherlock's death was a risk she was willing to take. That is decidedly not good. That borders on evil. But it's still not quite there. For me. Evil would be wanting to kill him for the sake of him being dead and making his friends grieve.

Sherlock's "surgery" explanation would be nonsense in our world. But his world is not ours. It has its own laws and rules. Within those, I think the theory is good enough.

 

Does Sherlock really forgive Mary?

Yes, because he was never really angry at her. Sherlock is not like other people. He doesn't even hate Moriarty, and look at what he did to him. I think Sherlock respects Mary. He appreciates her skills, her intelligence, her ruthlessness, and also that coldness and that overstepping of ordinary scruples that allows her to shoot him. It's how he'd like to be himself. I am not sure whether Sherlock really likes her. I don't think he ever had a fair chance of not liking her, because she is John's wife, and there was no other way to save his friendship with John than like her. (Try not getting along with your best friend's, or sibling's, partner. It's really bad for your friendship or family or whatever. I mean really bad.)

 

Why is it so important to Sherlock that John and Mary make up?

Because Mary is "like that", i.e. like Sherlock. If John can not take Mary back and forgive her, then that could mean he might never really take Sherlock back as a friend or truly forgive him, either. And if John can not accept Mary for the "psychopath" (in Moffat  and Gatiss terms) that she is, then maybe he will not appreciate Sherlock and his affection for Sherlock either.

Of course I do think Sherlock simply wants John to be happy. But he's nowhere near selfless enough for that to be his primary motivation. Sherlock is no more a saint than Mary is.

Also, for some reason, while he himself doesn't want one and sneers at them, the intactness of romantic relationships / marriages seems to be important to Sherlock, somehow. He has little use for "adulterers", and the way he says "affair" does not speak of the amused indulgence so many men seem to feel. In some ways, Sherlock is really still a child. He doesn't want his adopted family to fall apart. Not even if that family is dysfunctional as hell.

 

Do I like Mary?

Not really. I like how Ms Abbington plays her. I like her voice and her laugh, and I think she's funny and pretty. But she also grates on me, somehow. It's not the assassin thing. I'm cool with that by now. It's something else. Something about the way she treats Sherlock. Something about the way she is. I don't know. She's too... too something. I can't put my finger on it. But she certainly has her moments. I still love "come on husband, let's go" at the end of The Sign of Three. She was wonderful in that scene.

 

I'm still hoping we find out in series 4 that Mary is based on the original character John Douglas a.k.a John McMurdo a.k.a Birdy Edwards from the novel "The Valley of Fear", and that there is a connection between her and Moriarty. I think the way they set her up is just screaming for that. And I do so love the canon references.

 

 

In canon, Mary just sort of evaporates.  She's there (though generally in the background) for a number of stories (beginning with Sign of the Four), but then when Holmes returns from "the dead," he offers Watson his condolences on his [unspecified] "bereavement," and Mary is never mentioned again.  My personal real-life theory is that Conan Doyle had forgotten all about her in the intervening years, and originally wrote "Empty House" with no mention of her.  Then his editor/publisher said, "Hey, wait a minute, where's Watson's wife?" and Doyle stuck in that one sentence as a fix.

 

My impression has always been that Doyle had no interest whatsoever in Mary and just wrote her into "The Sign of the Four" because he thought it would make the book sell better (and possibly also to prevent any "indecent ideas" about the two men).

 

BBC Mary sure beats original Mary for individuality and interest. But then, she isn't really Mary, because in "our" version, Mary does not really exist. A.G.R.A. only stole her name, and we have no idea who she really is. I still can't wrap my mind around that. It's fascinating.

[Arcadia]

Yah, pretty much what Toby says goes for me too. Except that I really liked Mary right from the start, loved the way she treated both boys in TSo3, and hope to continue liking her (as much for John's sake as anything). Although she's got a lot to make up for after HLV.

 

I don't mind them killing her off someday, but to kill her off so soon after marrying John ... and presumably the child would have to go too ... that's just sooooo soap opera-ish. And bringing the child in to live with John and Sherlock is just too cutesy-pooh. Quite frankly, I have no ideas about how they're going to pull off John having a kid, unless they keep Mary around to look after it.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... I really liked Mary right from the start, loved the way she treated both boys in TSo3, and hope to continue liking her (as much for John's sake as anything). Although she's got a lot to make up for after HLV....

Yup.

[T.o.b.y]

Strangely enough, I mind Mary less after His Last Vow instead of more. What I do mind is the secret they chose for her (a CIA trained assassin? Really? A bit cheesy, isn't it?), and John's total denial, sorry, generous forgiveness.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I like her as well. How John resolves it is interesting. But he does seem to make it clear that she is on thin ice to a degree.

[Arcadia]

Yup, same here, silly plot device, making her an assassin. Too far over the top. Why not just make her a desperate but ordinary woman trying to get out from under Magnussen? Unless, (suddenly I hear Gatiss' voice) there is more to her story.....

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Yup, same here, silly plot device, making her an assassin. Too far over the top. Why not just make her a desperate but ordinary woman trying to get out from under Magnussen? Unless, (suddenly I hear Gatiss' voice) there is more to her story.....

Knowing Moftiss as we do, there's probably more to her story. How much will be spilled or just alluded to is up for debate.

[Schlauer Fuchs]

Yup, same here, silly plot device, making her an assassin. Too far over the top. Why not just make her a desperate but ordinary woman trying to get out from under Magnussen? Unless, (suddenly I hear Gatiss' voice) there is more to her story.....

 

There must be more to her story. I won't believe that she and John met by nothing but chance. She was sent to meet him and spy on him, find out if he knew anything about the (by that time) supposedly dead Sherlock. Only that she then really fell in love with him which of course wasn't originally part of her mission.

 

[Arcadia]

That's the theory I'm favoring right now too, it seems to fit better than some of the others. But it's not very "unexpected!!!!"

 

Of course, Mofatt's said "what happens to John and Sherlock" will be unexpected, not what "happened" or what happens to other people. So in fact the whole next series could be fairly predictable, except John and Sherlock both get hit by a bus halfway through.

[Schlauer Fuchs]

It would also be unexpected that nothing unexpected happens in S4.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

That's the theory I'm favoring right now too, it seems to fit better than some of the others. But it's not very "unexpected!!!!"

 

Of course, Mofatt's said "what happens to John and Sherlock" will be unexpected, not what "happened" or what happens to other people. So in fact the whole next series could be fairly predictable, except John and Sherlock both get hit by a bus halfway through.

It would also be unexpected that nothing unexpected happens in S4.

You mean the bus hit would actually happen this time unlike in TRF??? That would be unexpected.

 

I 2nd that Schlauer.

[sherlockandjohn]

In canon, Mary just sort of evaporates.  She's there (though generally in the background) for a number of stories (beginning with Sign of the Four), but then when Holmes returns from "the dead," he offers Watson his condolences on his [unspecified] "bereavement," and Mary is never mentioned again.  My personal real-life theory is that Conan Doyle had forgotten all about her in the intervening years, and originally wrote "Empty House" with no mention of her.  Then his editor/publisher said, "Hey, wait a minute, where's Watson's wife?" and Doyle stuck in that one sentence as a fix.

 

And thank you for clearing that up, Carol!

Wonder where I heard she dies in childbirth...?

 

 

Do I like Mary?

Not really. I like how Ms Abbington plays her. I like her voice and her laugh, and I think she's funny and pretty. But she also grates on me, somehow. It's not the assassin thing. I'm cool with that by now. It's something else. Something about the way she treats Sherlock. Something about the way she is. I don't know. She's too... too something.

 

I also don't see Mary as evil at all. Her willingness to sacrifice Sherlock's life to protect herself, if she had to, is cold and terrifying, but also terribly human. I think what gets to me, ultimately, is her behavior at the airfield. It does not sit right with me that she simply kisses and hugs Sherlock as if he hadn't just killed a man and given up his future for her and John. I realise she is a trained assasin, so it's likely that she wouldn't be appalled, but that's not really my problem. She doesn't seem to show much of any emotion in that scene. Mary is all calm and cool here.

 

Apart from that, she's just a little too sweet and wonderful for someone so calculating at the same time. It's very convincing, and that means she probably makes friends easily. But can they trust her? Apparently not.

 

Sherlock is not trustworthy either, of course, but his deceptions are for cases, not for himself.

 

I don't mind them killing her off someday, but to kill her off so soon after marrying John ... and presumably the child would have to go too ... that's just sooooo soap opera-ish. And bringing the child in to live with John and Sherlock is just too cutesy-pooh. Quite frankly, I have no ideas about how they're going to pull off John having a kid, unless they keep Mary around to look after it.

 

My thoughts exactly. But I'm sure there's some more or less unexpected twist in all of it.