Mary Morstan

[Carol the Dabbler]

... as much as I like the sign of four I doubt it ties in correctly because if I remember right Mary dies before Moriarty 'dies'....

It's not as though Moftiss haven't been creative with the ACD stories before ....

 

 

... There's another case ... Sherlock proposes to a woman. ...

Are you thinking of "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton"? (I haven't read it yet, but it's been mentioned on several of the other speculation threads.) Apparently Sherlock proposes (or pretends to propose) to a woman in order to infiltrate the suspect's household. Or something like that.

[T.o.b.y]

About Mary dying: I haven't even met her yet, but by this time my faith in the show is so strong that I am sure I'll like her too well to want her to die on it. Besides, we've already seen John at Sherlock's grave site - if they have to do something like that for Mary it will be tragic overkill.

 

In the days of Arthur Conan Doyle, being widowed at Watson's age or sooner was pretty common. Nowadays, relationships end differently. I think the modern answer to the widower is the divorced spouse. So if they ever need to "get rid of" Mary (because the actress has other commitments or because they think they need it for the plot or whatever reason), they will probably have her divorce John and walk out.

 

P.S.: This has nothing to do with this topic, but I edit my posts a lot because of spelling mistakes. I do not live in an English-speaking country and my English is somewhat rusty from lack of use. So if anybody feels like correcting me in that department, go ahead, I'd be grateful...

[Carol the Dabbler]

I hope that Mary is around indefinitely, so that John has someone he can relate to on a one-to-one basis.  She needn't be a major factor in every episode, but I'd like to know that she's still around, for John's sake.

 

I haven't noticed any glitches in your English so far, T.o.b.y.  If you don't mind telling, is English a second language for you, or are you a native speaker who's simply out of practice?  (And if the latter, where ya from?)  But do feel free to ignore my nosiness!

 

[T.o.b.y]

I hope that Mary is around indefinitely, so that John has someone he can relate to on a one-to-one basis.  She needn't be a major factor in every episode, but I'd like to know that she's still around, for John's sake.

 

I haven't noticed any glitches in your English so far, T.o.b.y.  If you don't mind telling, is English a second language for you, or are you a native speaker who's simply out of practice?  (And if the latter, where ya from?)  But do feel free to ignore my nosiness!

 

Native speaker out of practice, to be precise actually bilingual German / English. Don't get to use my literal "mother tongue" much and am very happy to at least write in it here (may be one of the reasons why I am so prolific at the moment - that and serious insomnia :-)

[Carol the Dabbler]

Well, I hope that 1) the insomnia clears up, and 2) you stick around!

 

[T.o.b.y]

I hope that Mary is around indefinitely, so that John has someone he can relate to on a one-to-one basis.  She needn't be a major factor in every episode, but I'd like to know that she's still around, for John's sake.

 

Oh, I hope so too! But if she did have to leave for some reason, a divorce would be better than her death, don't you think? I mean, poor John. He probably would not get over the loss of a wife as easily as the Dr. Watson who only mentions "my sad bereavement" as part of a sentence about Holmes...

[Carol the Dabbler]

I suppose a divorce would be easier on John, in the sense that it might come as something of a relief (though the same can sometimes be said of the death of a loved one).  But hopefully it'll be neither.  People (including Amanda Abbington) keep describing Mary as "coming between" John and Sherlock, but from what little I've seen of Series 3 filming, it looks more like she's acting as something of a liaison, which should make for an interesting dynamic.

 

As for the original Doctor, I think there's a lot more to him than meets the eye in the stories.  He's clearly neither a braggart nor an exhibitionist, so who knows what was going on behind the scenes?  We would know far more about him if the stories had been told by Holmes or even by a disembodied narrator.  In the case of Mrs. Watson's death, we don't know how long it had been, possibly as long as three years, so the Doctor may well have already come to terms with it.  And even if not, he wouldn't be likely to parade his private sorrow in a public magazine.

 

[T.o.b.y]

Right as usual, Carol, right as usual... I just like to have a little fun at the expense of poor Dr. W. He sort of lends himself to affectionate ridicule. 

 

It sounds totally plausible that Mary will be a mediator for John and Sherlock, because I expect John won't want to talk in the beginning. He seems like the type who holds a grudge for a while. The "interesting dynamic" you mention is just what I hope for and I don't understand why a lot of people claim to "hate" her before they've even seen her. She won't "ruin" anything, she'll just provide more occasion for exactly the kind of interaction between the main characters that is so much fun to watch.

 

I wonder whether they'll play with the idea of John becoming jealous. After all, the Holmes in the books has a very strong affect on women and there have been hints that Sherlock "inherited" this potential. He's certainly sexy (like it or not Sherlock...). And if my fiancé turned out to have such an interesting friend, I would certainly try to get to know him.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I wonder whether they'll play with the idea of John becoming jealous. After all, the Holmes in the books has a very strong affect on women and there have been hints that Sherlock "inherited" this potential. He's certainly sexy (like it or not Sherlock...). And if my fiancé turned out to have such an interesting friend, I would certainly try to get to know him.

 

Well, there is this:

 

 

 

Just kidding!  That's Cumberbatch & Abbington, not Holmes & Morstan (note the real-life orange crowd-control barricade).

 

[T.o.b.y]

Nice pic! Hard to be fooled, though: that does not look like a Sherlockian hug, does it? You'd think he'd be more stiff...

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

And even in canon, even though the stories, except for one or two very late ones, are always Watson and Sherlock centric, Watson has at least three wives that Sherlockian/Holmesian scholars can trace. So having Mary around for awhile would take care of the perpetual weddings that Sherlock would have to put up with.

[T.o.b.y]

There are hints in the books that Watson might be something of a womanizer. At least he claims to have "experience of women which extends over many nations and three separate continents". But today you don't have to get married to every lover you find, so I think the string of girlfriends we've seen was supposed to represent the string of wives (which I have not been able to spot in the original yet, but then, there are some stories I haven't read).

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Isn't that "three continents" line something that Holmes says, though?  I can imagine that his idea of "experience" might be pretty tame, even by Victorian standards.

 

And as I understand it (which is admittedly not very well), Watson's multiple wives are not so much documented in the stories as inferred from them.  It's clear that he was married at least once, and that he was married to Mary Morstan (in a later story, he's talking to "my wife" and refers to how they met in The Sign of the Four).  Other than that, all that can be said for certain is that in some stories he has a rather generic wife, and in some stories he's back living at Baker Street, presumably single.  The key is the chronology, some of which is so difficult to pin down that it varies greatly from scholar to scholar.  Even the "bereavement" that Watson refers to in "The Empty House" could conceivably refer to the death of a parent or sibling.

 

Fox and T.o.b.y, I like your ideas!  It'd be a shame to lose a good character just because she's "supposed" to die.

 

[T.o.b.y]

Isn't that "three continents" line something that Holmes says, though?  I can imagine that his idea of "experience" might be pretty tame, even by Victorian standards.

 

Nope, it really is Watson that says it at the beginning of chapter 2 in "The Sign of Four":

 

"In an experience of women which extends over many nations and three separate continents, I have never looked upon a face which gave a clearer promise of a refined and sensitive nature."

(He's talking about Mary, who has just entered the room).

 

Doesn't mean it was not tame experience, of course. You can infer what you like, because the stories give us no further clues (or at least I haven't spotted any) about Watson's love life before or after Mary.

 

About the wives: If people who actually sat down and looked at the stories scientifically said Watson must have had at least 3, who am I to disagree? But seeing how careless Conan Doyle was about consistency in general, I wouldn't be surprised if he had only one wife in mind.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I've heard that "three continents" bit quoted many times, usually implying that Watson is something of a rogue with the ladies, but didn't recall seeing it in "The Sign of the Four" (which I actually have read).  Thanks!

 

OK, so it seems to be another case of people reading their own conclusions into a fairly innocuous sentence.  In the original context, Watson sounds to me more like a keen observer of human nature than a love 'em and leave 'em type.  (Not saying that he can't actually be the latter, just that this seems awfully thin evidence for it.)

 

I haven't yet read all of the stories, let alone subjected them to rigorous scrutiny, but some stories are almost impossible to date, other than they must have taken place before they were published.  Also, one cannot even assume that they took place in publishing order, because some stories are explicit flashbacks and Watson tells us that he's delayed telling other stories until after the death of someone who might otherwise have been embarrassed.  According to the notes in Baring-Gould's Annotated Sherlock Holmes, many Holmesians have assigned precise dates to the undated stories  -- but they tend to disagree with one another, sometimes in a fairly major way.  And I believe I've read that even some of Watson's dates are suspect (perhaps he changed them "in order to protect the innocent"?).  All of this presumably wreaks havoc with any attempt at a consensus chronology.

 

Of course, even if canon-Watson really was married three times, that doesn't say that Sherlock's John Watson has to follow suit.

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

Of course, even if canon-Watson really was married three times, that doesn't say that Sherlock's John Watson has to follow suit.

 

I should hope not! What an awful idea. Anyway, as I've said, "married" then is only "together" today, so he's already had plenty of "wives". And a bit of friendly advice, John: stick with Mary if you can. Because once Sherlock gets used to her, he won't give you half as much trouble as he did with the girls before her.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Yes, I think Sherlock may take a liking to her. 

 

[T.o.b.y]

Even if it wasn't a real liking, he would be bound to be more tolerant of somebody who's already a fixture. And people like Sherlock get used to things if you can hold out while they complain about them and not change anything.

[T.o.b.y]

... Though I'm not quite sure whether Mr. Holmes of the 19th century ever became entirely resigned to his friend's marriage. Because, for example, his biggest Diva stunt, "The Dying Detective", takes place during that time. And I do not understand why he couldn't have sent Mrs. Hudson directly to Culverton Smith - she certainly believed he was really ill and would have gotten the point across just as well as Watson. One of the police officers could have hidden in the room, too, if he thought he needed physical reinforcement. Instead, the good doctor has to be called away urgently from his home and let himself be locked up in Holmes' room for hours. Sorry, but all this simply reeks of "do you still care?" and  "am I still important?".

[Carol the Dabbler]

Or perhaps it reeks of "how shall I work Watson into the story"? 

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Or "if I can convince a real doctor, who is also a good friend, that I am dying, it will carry more weight with Smith."

[T.o.b.y]

Carol, Fox, I hereby dub you two "The Voices of Reason".

 

Me reading Conan Doyle produces a lot of over-interpretation, because I am generally most interested in character studies and psychology-driven plots and I bring that kind of view to his jumble of crime stories where the characters are just supposed to be facilitators of action.

 

I am sure that Doyle was totally innocent of any subtext. But what is funny is that it's there and it's also consistent enough that you can build up a case "against" him where Holmes is an egomaniac possessive Diva and Watson a dependent girl. (Oh no, did I just use the word "girl" to insult a man? I am so sorry.)

 

Of course, that aren't the only deductions you can make, far from it. There's a whole gold mine in those books concerning the main characters' personalities and I am sure the "Sherlock" writers had endless fun with that. It's ideal for an adaptation if you have so much to go on and at the same time don't have to worry over much that you are going against the author, because the author probably had no ideas of his own on the matter.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

That is why I love all the scholars out there who spend a good amount of their time researching the "greatest detective who never lived."  It's fun, it's fascinating, and you get all this background information, and if you pay attention to "Sherlock" and what is going on, you get a real sense that Moffat and Gatiss are true Sherlockian/Holmesians because they are delving deep into this research and really filling out this interpretation of theirs. It's thrilling and fires my own "need to know". I love buying the annotated versions of the books and just spending time delving into them.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I am sure that Doyle was totally innocent of any subtext. But what is funny is that it's there and it's also consistent enough that you can build up a case "against" him where Holmes is an egomaniac possessive Diva and Watson a dependent girl. (Oh no, did I just use the word "girl" to insult a man? I am so sorry.)

 

You also used a female noun to insult Holmes,    but stereotypes are stereotypes, so whatcha gonna do?

 

I suspect that the consistency of the characterizations has a lot to do with Conan Doyle's own personality.  After all, a fictional character (like a disguise) is always a self-portrait.

 

[T.o.b.y]

I am not sure that I should start getting ideas about Conan Doyle based on the Sherlock Holmes stories; it's bad enough what my brain comes up with when I think too hard about the characters...