Mary Morstan

[Caya]

But "well" isn't exactly a quantifiable metric, unfortunately . For instance, personally I'd find a lot of words for that "surgery" plotline but I assure you that "well" isn't among them :P. And while it's certainly hard to follow the wishes of such a diverse crowd of fans, not listening to reviews at all never goes well.

 

I'm with T.o.b.y here. Most likely that the fandom will shift somewhat, the part of the fandom that was disappointed too much by S3 leaving, while others who weren't too interested in S1 and S2 join the gang.

[sittything]

And that "surgery" comparison doesn't bother me in the least.     Even here we have fairly diverse ideas about what is good and what is a bit not good.  And we don't even agree/disagree with the same people consistently on this forum regarding the show, at least I don't.  I might disagree with Caya on the surgery bit, but I know we've agreed on other things. Trying to please everyone is a futile endeavor.

 

ETA:  Also, while I didn't like S3 as well as S2 (my fav), S3 was still very good to me.  Certainly wouldn't put me off the show.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Then there's me.  Apparently I'm not too picky.  I don't mind the "surgery" answer.  I like the show and essentially all the episodes.  There might be bits and pieces (of the show and their interviews) that make me go but not enough for me to say goodbye anytime soon.  I'm excited to see what they attempt next not apprehensive like some although I do kind of understand where those people are coming from since they, for the most part, explained their reasoning.

[Arcadia]

I don't know if S3, specifically, has made Sherlock more popular. I think it's more likely that word of the series in general is simply spreading. I do know that more of my acquaintances are aware of it now than even a year ago -- largely due to Benedict & Martin's sudden surge in visibility. But of those people I know, only one is even half as obsessed about the show as I am. The rest go "oh, I liked that show" and move on. They have no stake in how the characters evolve or whether one or the other survives, or even if the show continues.

 

So, no, if I were Moftiss, I wouldn't be THAT worried about those who demand that the show go in a certain direction or they will turn their backs on it. For one thing, those folks don't agree on what that direction should be, so it would be impossible to please all of them anyway. And for another .... there's just not enough of them. Sorry, but it's true. Most viewers will simply be happy to see another series and enjoy it for the two weeks it is on, then move on to other things. The fun for them will be in seeing what new rabbits the Moftisses pull out of their hats, not in rolling up loose ends.

 

It's kind of sad when something that "belongs" to a small group of fans goes mainstream. I was into anime well before most Americans had even heard of it; as it became increasingly well known, it became less and less fascinating to me. The type of shows that pleased the largest number of people (Dragonball? REALLY????) have no interest for me. It's hard to sit there and watch something that's so personal to you become the pet of a larger, and inevitably less discriminating community. But that's what popularity is; I don't begrudge it to the creators, as much as I might wish to keep their creation for myself. They worked hard for it, they deserve to reap the rewards.

 

Fortunately for me, the only expectation I really have is that there will be a Series 4, and Ben and Martin will be in it. Everything else, I can and have let go (not that I don't have preferences! :D ) So I'll be pretty shattered if S4 doesn't happen, but the actual storyline ... huh. Bring it on, Moftiss, whatever it is, I can take it! (But please don't kill Molly. )

[BlackButterfly]

I suppose the people ( like me ) that have problems with HLV come over as a bit moany about a programme we are fans of which probably isn't really totally acurate.For myself I could wax lyrical non stop for hours on E01-E08 and every aspect of it .(so much so my gf made me join a forum and banned Sh chatter from the house! )

Such a brilliant , subtle , under stated , clever , witty , and yes ridiculous series that made a good attempt at plausable and, that for once treated the audience like intelligent beings is a rare find ; so I think it's more a mourning the loss of all that in HLV -for far too much in your face implausible spoon fed BS.

 

No doubt the writers think series three was a huge success because of the large amount of controversy and chatter it has created..and don't really care what a small group of people may say on forums , as they see it , we are not the audience - the regular / casual viewer that doesn't think too much on it is.

 

There is a large part of me that finds the whole..oh John hooked up with a psycho serial killer assasin nurse while Sherlock was away..whoopsies.....darkly hilarious! And wouldn't mind at all , if only they get back to Subtly @ Quality @ Clever.

Hopefully by S04 end , HLV will all just be hilarious momentary blip on the whole.

[Arcadia]

Or, they think it's a huge success because of the numbers of people who have watched it and the number of awards that it's been nominated for. I genuinely believe they don't know the controversy it's created ... because the controversy is so contained within a small group of people. In the larger scheme of things, there really is no controversy. But hey, that's really neither here nor there.
 
I've done a bit of moaning myself about HLV .... I figure that's what the forum is for .... but I reject the idea that the creators must do what I want or I'll take all my toys and go home in a pout. (Even though, I may, in fact, do just that if I don't like S4!  ) I guess it's because I'm a creator myself ... I appreciate some input, but at a certain point it's no one's business but my own what I create. So I'm rather sympathetic to other creators who are under fire for doing what they are supposed to do. Not liking the product is one thing; berating the creators for making it is something else. I'm probably taking it too personally, I'm sure Moftiss are big boys who can take care of themselves. ;)

 

By the way, what does w/e mean? I googled it but didn't find any answer that seemed to apply to Mary. Just curious.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Arcadia,

It's their show! But if they ruin S4 by keeping Mary (a self-confessed assassin for hire) alive, then this one will have to go and kow- tow to every family member and friend she coerced into voting for the last BAFTA Radio Times award, since it required actual e-mail addresses, apologise most profoundly for her lack of insight and ultimately turn her back on their flights of fancy! ( now, why did I start speaking like Julius Caesar, using the third person when referring to myself? ) Delusions of grandeur! Have a :sherlock2: since the curls will also be gone by S4!

[Caya]

It's absolutely their show and I don't think anybody contests that Moftiss have the right to take it in whatever direction they want, and be it Sherlock getting tired of that whole consulting detective business and joining a travelling circus as a stage magician. Just like any of us has the right to declare themselves done with the series at that point and stop watching (though, all things being equal, I think I'd prefer the circus to Mary :P). I don't think any of this was ever in any doubt.

 

And Urban Dictionary (careful, link is only partially safe for work, and the dictionary has some definitely unsafe definitions, generally speaking, so use with caution) has w/e as whatever.

[T.o.b.y]

I'm just fascinated by the choices the writers made for the character of Mary. If I could sit down with them and have an honest, in-depth discussion about the series, I would ask where the heck they got the idea to do that with her. I'm not criticizing them, necessarily, it's just a complete mystery to me how they went from "angelic" Mary Morstan in "The Sign of the Four" to crack-shot A.G.R.A.

 

For me, a lot of the enjoyment I get from Sherlock comes from comparing it to the original and witnessing what an incredibly clever and insightful adaptation it is. Before series 3, they really did stick pretty close the the original - well, the spirit of the original. And then they took off. There is really nothing at all in the books that gives me as much as the hint of an idea that Mrs Watson might be a former agent turned criminal living under an assumed name. Nil, nada, nothing. So why did they write her this way? Why, why, why? And why did they think it would be a great idea to have her shoot Sherlock in the chest? WTF? Where did that come from?

 

To clarify: I don't really have a problem with this departure from "canon". It's fine, I'm just intrigued by it and wonder why they chose this storyline. Who came up with it, and why did they find it appealing?

 

If I had to describe the Mary in this version in one word, it would be "ambiguous". On the one hand, they took pains to make her appear really nice, really likable and a perfect match for John (more perfect than he knows in the beginning! :D) Even Sherlock likes her - likes her so well, in fact, that his affection comes across as a little forced. On the other hand, in His Last Vow, they gave the audience way more than a chance to hate her. It's not enough that she's revealed to be a completely different person who sold John a big fat whopping lie, no, she has to shoot and nearly kill our hero in cold blood. Wow. Way to make a character unpopular, guys! Then they back-paddle and have Sherlock defend her and John take her back.

 

My overall impression is still that she's supposed to be one of the good guys and I'm supposed to like her, but I'm not the least bit surprised that a lot of people wrote her character off as a villain and the rest seem to feel the need to make excuses for her or point out that we just don't know enough about her yet to pass any kind of judgment. If I wrote a story and I wanted my audience to sympathize with a character, I would never, ever write her like they did Mary.

 

Actually, I am delighted with the direction they took. I detest "perfect" characters, and Mary as she appeared in the first two episodes of series 3 was getting on my nerves, just like the original character did. I'm much happier with the psycho killer parading as a compassionate nurse. And I'm thrilled that they dared to do this to a character who was on unstable footing with the audience anyway. I thought they were playing it safe and making her sort of unassailable and when it turned out they weren't, because apparently they don't give a damn and just write ahead what they want, I was very happy.

 

As long as this is the spirit that goes into the scripts, I think the show will be good. It might not be everybody's cup of tea, and it will probably shock, offend and disappoint people, but it will continue to be fresh, original, fun material. I hope.

[Inge l-w]

Dear TOBY, in a weird, twisted way, THIS "Mary" represents the Agra treasure itself, as far as Dr Watson is concerned, family happiness within his grasp one minute, lying at the bottom of the Thames as his shattered dream of domestic bliss in the next! She is definitely an allegory, an allusion to ACD (The Sign of Four) as well as Johnathan Small with his evil dart-shooting partner rolled into one! Mr Moffat must have jumped with glee when he first thought of the plot twist, like his avatar, Sherlock!

Edited June 4, 2015 by Inge l-w

[Arcadia]

And Urban Dictionary (careful, link is only partially safe for work, and the dictionary has some definitely unsafe definitions, generally speaking, so use with caution) has w/e as whatever.

Oooooh, Urban Dictionary, that place is scary! According to them, ALL words are just a euphemism for the same thing ... :D

 

I actually saw that definition, just wasn't sure it was the right one. So "onto the next w/e" means "on to the next whatever" ? Okay, I guess I can see that.

[T.o.b.y]

I've been thinking too much again...

 

Why is it that so many people dislike Mary so much?

 

Yes, she is a frighteningly good actress and liar. Yes, she kept a few very important truths about herself from John and, one might argue, abused his trust. She has so good a grip on her emotions that it's at present unclear what her real feelings are. She has an impressive skillset and she can and will kill people if she thinks it is necessary. She takes matters into her own hands instead of calling in official authorities. She's a morally murky figure.

 

But: all of this could be said about Sherlock himself, and the last time I checked, we all loved him. It is equally true about Irene Adler, and the only complaints I have read regarding her were how she should have had a clearer victory over Sherlock in the end and that some viewers found her job and nudity unpalatable.

 

Much worse things apply to Moriary, yet he has a lot of fans.

 

So what is it about Mary that provokes such a negative reaction?

 

I don't know. All I can say is that I feel it as well. I can't make up my mind about her. I like her sometimes and other times I don't. There's something about her that bothers me, too. But what? And why?

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Okay, I'm going wwwaaaayyyyy out on a limb here. But I think the negative reaction to Mary is because she came between John and Sherlock. Broke up the dynamic duo. Forced John to leave Baker Street. One thing Mofftis said early on that yeah, they could have written it that way, but they thought of it of being the lazy way out. Also it is canon that John did marry and leave Baker Street and more then once. But you saw the shippers reaction on Tumblr and the xxx rated John/Sherlock fanfiction. That is my take on it anyway.

 

  I like Mary. In the original story Holmes liked Mary, paying her rare compliment. Saying she might even be an asset to his and Watson's work. But it's canon that she dies, so we will see.

[Arcadia]

Well, if you're way out on a limb, Fox, I'm way out there with you.

 

That doesn't mean that's everyone's reason for disliking her; I can think of a number of other reasons (she shot Sherlock!) but based on what I've read in other places, that's the primary reason. She threatens whatever idea they have of what John and Sherlock's relationship should be.

 

I liked her a lot, until this preposterous "assassin" backstory popped up. Now she's just a plot device! Most of the other characters seem so real to me, it's odd to have one that doesn't. I don't really feel anything for her one way or the other as a result; mostly I'm just waiting to see if they turn her back into a real girl or not. If they don't ... what a waste of a good actress.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Arcadia, we have had a discussion about Mary and Sherlock's motives in the TEH thread, so you can see that there are pertinent reasons why she is disliked. Manipulative, able to fool even Sherlock Holmes several times, taking over from the get-go "Yes, I agree I'm the best thing that could have happened to you", interjecting her observations during their first serious talk, taking over as hostess at the very end of TEH, ordering Sherlock, not just John, about :"You will be there, Sherlock", as he fiddles uncomfortably with things on his desk. She was never meant to be likeable!,

[Arcadia]

Are you describing Mary or Sherlock? :D I don't suppose Sherlock's ever dared to take over as hostess, but he's certainly "guilty" of the rest of those dastardly things! No wonder everyone finds him so unlikeable...

[T.o.b.y]

Are you describing Mary or Sherlock? :D I don't suppose Sherlock's ever dared to take over as hostess, but he's certainly "guilty" of the rest of those dastardly things! No wonder everyone finds him so unlikeable...

 

Well, yeah, that was kind of my point. Sherlock is just as bad as Mary in many ways, yet we love him while some people only liked her as long as she appeared to be Miss Pretty Sunshine, and many never liked her at all.

 

Originally, I also thought this was mostly due to viewers being emotionally invested in the relationship between Sherlock and John. But Mary didn't really get "between" them, did she? The script went out of its way to ensure that if anything, she was a unifying factor (even though we never did witness her "talking John round", and frankly, I don't think she ever made good on that promise). It's not Mary who is responsible for John no longer living at Baker St and being reluctant at first to resume his friendship with Sherlock, that is entirely Sherlock's own fault for going along with Mycroft's brilliant little plan to trick John into believing he had committed suicide and leaving him to mourn for two years.

 

Also, do people really believe that if Mary weren't around, Sherlock and John would become a romantic couple? Forget it. That is never going to happen, not in this version of the story, anyway. If Mary weren't around, John would be dating again (and probably getting his girlfriend's pets and hobbies mixed up). Actually, as a plot device, Mary makes the story even more about the relationship between the guys. Without Mary, we would not have had Sherlock as a best man, nor John asking Sherlock to be best man. We wouldn't have had the stag night, either. Sherlock and John's friendship gets a lot more attention than John and Mary's marriage, or even the weird bond between Mary and Sherlock himself.

 

Besides, it's not just Sherlock / John shippers who dislike her, not from what I have read. Or do we think that everyone who doesn't like Mary secretly wishes the boys would get together and just hasn't admitted that to themselves yet? I'm not willing to put myself in that category...

 

She does kind of boss Sherlock around. Her behavior towards him bothers me. But it doesn't seem to bother Sherlock himself at all, and besides, how else should she deal with him? If she deferred to him, he wouldn't respect her. He only started noticing Molly and taking her seriously when she began standing up to him.

 

I don't know why I have conflicted feelings about her or what bugs me. Maybe she's just too hard to empathize with because right now, we have absolutely no clue what her real feelings, hopes and wishes are. We need to get to know her better. Hopefully next series.

 

[Inge l-w]

Dear Arcadia, always pleased to see you amused! Mary cannot be described as a "host" , perhaps I should have made that "host person" to be politically correct. So sorry about that.

And anyone who has read the original stories is aware of Mr Holmes' s foibles and quirkiness. The "puzzle solver" and the "drama queen" combined in an extremely intelligent social misfit. BUT, as the main character, likeable exactly DUE TO those character traits. The times he turfs Dr Watson out of bed to follow him on a case are double-digit, so is his complete disregard for the doctor's comfort and convenience during their escapades, like mealtimes, for example.

[Caya]

Er, she killed Sherlock and is as of yet unrepentant about it - that's all it takes for me. And thank you, thank you, T.o.b.y, for dispelling that nonsense that everyone who dislikes her must be an out or closeted Johnlock shipper - never been, likely never will be, and for the record I liked her just fine as of Sign. But Vow, in my eyes, turned her into a villain, and in contrast to Moriarty she's a villain who gets away with it and who we're supposed to root for. Not gonna happen, at least not in my case.

[Caya]

Okay, after quietly foaming at my keyboard for half an hour it occurred to me that I should maybe try and explain why that "oh, you're just a disappointed shipper" makes me so mad:

 

Because it dismisses any criticism one might have about Mary out of hand.

 

She killed Sherlock. She lied to John, the man she supposedly loves. She endangered everyone by her deception.

 

Doesn't matter - if you dislike her, you're just mad that your boat has been sunk. None of the reasons you state can possibly be valid, you're just an irrational shipper.

 

If you like Mary, more power to you - it's beyond me how you possibly could, but I'm happy for you. But please at least consider that I might have a rational reason for disagreeing.

[Arcadia]

Also, do people really believe that if Mary weren't around, Sherlock and John would become a romantic couple?

Yes, they really do. I don't know how many of them, or what percentage of the fandom they represent; but they most assuredly do.

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

Also, do people really believe that if Mary weren't around, Sherlock and John would become a romantic couple?

Yes, they really do. I don't know how many of them, or what percentage of the fandom they represent; but they most assuredly do.

 

 

But... that's... hard to grasp. For me. I mean, they weren't together before Mary. John had Sarah, and then other other girlfriends. Sherlock was "married to his work" and seemed very keen on keeping it that way. It is true that I thought wow, if John ever wants a serious relationship, he'll have to form it while Sherlock is off somewhere on his own, but just the fact that Sherlock's presence is an obstacle to John keeping a girlfriend doesn't mean that in the absence of a girlfriend or wife, the boys would be together. I just don't see the logic there. But I don't have to understand everything, do I...

[Arcadia]

I don't get it either, but evidently it's all in the subtext ... and some of the arguments for it are pretty convincing, imo, if you're in the right mood.

[Van Buren Supernova]

Why is it that so many people dislike Mary so much?

 

Er, she killed Sherlock and is as of yet unrepentant about it - that's all it takes for me. And thank you, thank you, T.o.b.y, for dispelling that nonsense that everyone who dislikes her must be an out or closeted Johnlock shipper - never been, likely never will be, and for the record I liked her just fine as of Sign. But Vow, in my eyes, turned her into a villain, and in contrast to Moriarty she's a villain who gets away with it and who we're supposed to root for. Not gonna happen, at least not in my case.

 

 

Definitely not closeted Johnlock shipper.., I don't think for one second that Mary comes in between Sherlock and John.

In fact, in this area, she is the best spouse one can ever have, who encourages John to hang out with Sherlock and treats him as an individual with their own space and friends (one thing that I oppose the most is people losing their individuality after they get married, they have to do everything together, go everywhere together, all friends are mutual.. that is when I compare marriage with murder..).

 

What makes Mary hated is of course, she shoots Sherlock.

But for me, the reason is not the moment itself, but everything behind that, imho, her love for John is incredibly selfish.

 

Again, all love are selfish. Even when you worry or mourn about your loved ones, there is a big chunk of selfishness there.

Yes, I believe she really loves John, but what Mary does, everything, is for herself. Everything, from shooting Sherlock, to threatening and hunt him down. What is most unforgivable to me, she is probably the only person who witnesses how devastated John was when Sherlock was 'dead', yet she tries to kill Sherlock again.

Well, I don't buy surgery explanation, even when Sherlock says so (I think it's because he wants to believe it. Maybe I read too much into it, but in good writing, nobody is always reliable narrator all the time), he came back from dead not because it's 'surgery' shot, but because he is worried about John being with Mary. Why? She tries to kill him, and certainly will do everything else to ensure everything goes her way and that alarms him.

 

I don't get it either, but evidently it's all in the subtext ... and some of the arguments for it are pretty convincing, imo, if you're in the right mood.

Yes, some actually make sense.

But I have to roll my eyes to the back of my head and roll them back again for the so called subtexts some point out regarding the stag night drunk and vomit scene. That is is so bloody arghhhh.. (I don't have the slow head banging emoticon)..

[T.o.b.y]

I actually believe the "surgery" explanation. Yes, yes, I know, it makes no sense in the real world, but if we start holding the Sherlock stories to real life standards, they almost all fall apart.

 

If Mary really had wanted to kill Sherlock, he would have been dead. I don't believe that even in Sherlock-land, people can make "surgical" gunshot wounds, but I do think that she wanted to give him a chance to survive. She couldn't know that it would work. He could have died anyway, she was definitely deliberately taking that risk - and for a moment there, he was actually dead. But she could have made sure he didn't even get to fight death. And she didn't.

 

Her main goal was not to kill Sherlock, but to buy herself time. And if he survived, she probably thought she'd be in a much better position for negotiating with him - after all, she had proven to him that she was willing and able to go through with any threat she might make. She underestimated his courage and his loyalty to John. (The latter isn't surprising - after all, it was she who was there for John after Sherlock pulled his little fake-suicide stunt).

 

She really didn't want to kill him. But she did put her own concerns first, even before his life if need be. That's pretty... wow. Yeah, that's selfish, definitely. Only I wonder whether in her shoes, I would be any better.

 

When it comes to her relationship with John, I feel very sorry for Mary. Here's this guy, who I am dead sure she is really very much in love with. Who knows how much (or how little) love she has had in her life before. And he loves her back - but that love is conditional and based on false premises. John did not fall in love with the real Mary, he fell in love with a persona she adopted to live undercover in England, a role that may or may not be like the "real" her, but is still nontheless a role. Now, of course it was wrong of her to pursue that relationship and to even get married without so much as hinting at the truth. But who knows. Maybe Mary genuinely wanted to leave her past behind and start over. Maybe she really believes in herself as Mary Morstan, maybe she thinks that she has become her. And anyway, if it's the only love she's got, I can understand her doing anything in her power to hold onto it. "Love is a much more viscous motivator" - didn't Sherlock say that to the cabbie in A Study in Pink? (I will never get over how unusual and ambiguous the portrayal of love is in this series).

 

So Mary marries John and is happy for the time being. But she must live in constant fear that all she has built for herself will fall apart, because she is convinced that if John knew the truth about her and her past, he would not love her any more. And as she herself says, there is nothing in the world she would not do to stop that from happening. Love is not always good, or leads people to do good. But it sure is powerful, and as a reason for why Mary makes the choices she makes, I find it utterly believable. I've read many interpretations where people claim Mary is just an ice-cold killer who loves nobody, but if that were true, the story would make no sense at all to me.

 

And in the end, Mary was right. John doesn't want to know her real name, doesn't want to confront himself with her past. He just wants his wife back. Notice how in His Last Vow, Mary is by both men repeatedly addressed as "Mrs Watson". As if that's the only role in which they will accept her. Her real personality, her past life and loves and mistakes and possibly trauma - all irrelevant. Nobody wants to know about that. She's just supposed to fall sobbing into her husband's arms and soon give birth to his child, and that's that. Sometimes, I fully understand why people have accused Steve Moffat of being a misogynist.

 

To be fair, though, Mary doesn't seem to want to share anything about her past with either John or Sherlock. She seems perfectly willing to be Mrs Watson and nothing but that, and if it had been up to her, they would have never known there was anything more to her. But because her stated reason for this is that otherwise, she would loose John's love, I still find that sad and I still feel intensely sorry for her. And angry at John. Gosh, he makes me so angry in His Last Vow. Even Sherlock behaves better towards Mary - and he's supposed to be the unfeeling sociopath who has no time for women.

 

But Mary is a killer! Why do I take her side?

 

Because this is fiction. I've said this again and again, but I'll say it once more, because it's so important to me: In real life, I am a pacifist and I am against all violence. All of it. If it were up to me, we'd put all weapons (especially guns) in a big container and blast it far, far into space where there is absolutely no other civilization who will use them. But in fiction, the rules are different. I love Sherlock, and I love John, but they are killers too. John was a soldier for crying out loud, he says himself that he killed people. Chances are good that he killed more people than Mary. "But they were other soldiers!" - so what? They were human beings! And don't tell me there never are any civilian deaths in war. Chances are good that Mary's victims were much worse people than the average enlisted (perhaps by force) man in uniform John would have killed, especially if she limited her activities to the likes of Magnussen.

 

If John refused to take Mary back on the grounds that she has blood on her hands, it would be very, very hypocritical of him. Not that we have any evidence that is his reason. He seems much more concerned with her dishonesty than her former profession, and I understand that. But again, if she had told him the truth, I doubt they would ever have gotten married, because he really doesn't seem ready to accept her as anything but what he wanted her to be, a wife and mother and helpmate nurse. Adventures are for him and Sherlock. She's supposed to provide him with normality. Well, too bad buddy.

 

If this were the real world, their marriage would be doomed. But since I'm not supposed to be mad at John, since I'm supposed to applaud him for being magnanimous and forgiving and she seems happy enough to swoon away in his manly arms, maybe they'll work things through and be just as happy as anybody can be who is friends with Sherlock Holmes. I sure hope so. And I hope that the audience at least will eventually get to know the real Mary, and learn about her story, and then we can make up our own minds about her. Because at present, we know nothing, really.