Naming the baby

 (Sherlock meta by notagarroter)

Q: Mary told John she gets to name their baby. Maybe he already suggested Sherlock and Mary vetoed it? That's why he's trying to play it off?

A: I assume this is a response to my earlier meta, Sherlock Is Actually a Girl’s Name.

What you suggest is possible, but… I don’t see any evidence for it on the show. Why would Mary veto the name? And why wouldn’t John just tell Sherlock that, if it were the case? It’s not that I can’t imagine plausible answers to these questions, it’s just that they aren’t in the show – it would be pure speculation.

It’s true that there is a scene in this very episode where John asks Mary for naming rights to the baby and is denied. So it’s not unreasonable to point to this as an explanation for why John laughs off Sherlock’s proposal in the tarmac scene – maybe John has no say in naming the baby.

But let’s look again at the dialogue between John and Mary.

image

JOHN: I choose the baby’s name.
MARY: Not a chance.
JOHN: Okay.

I’d say there’s more than one possible interpretation of this exchange. (Please indulge me in a bit of sarcastic hyperbole here.) Some fans read John’s line to mean, “I want a fair and equal part in raising our child,” and they read Mary’s response to John as meaning, “I hate you and am basically evil, and am therefore denying you any parental role at all. Also btw the baby isn’t yours, and I’m probably not even human, but an odious abomination released from the depths of hell for the sole purpose of thwarting pure, true, holy love such as that between you and Sherlock.” :P

There is another possible reading, however. Given the context of their relationship, and assuming neither person is angel or demon, but are complex, imperfect humans, we might conclude that what John means is, “I’m still really angry about your deception, so as payback, I’m demanding the right to name our child without consulting you at all, because I know that will hurt you.”

To which Mary quite reasonably responds, “Not a chance, we will name the baby together, and we both retain veto-rights over truly objectionable names. Your anger is fair, but it’s no reason to let our kid go through life with a name like Horsefeathers McMonkey just to spite me.” And John agrees to this.

If we assume the second scenario is more likely than the first, then the polite, grown-up response to Sherlock would have been, “I’ll talk to Mary about it.” Of course John shouldn’t unilaterally decide on a name without discussing it with the kid’s mother, but Sherlock wasn’t demanding a yes or no on the spot – he was just offering his name up as a suggestion. And given the precise situation (Sherlock sacrificing his freedom and possibly his life for their well-being), it seems likely to me that Mary would have agreed.

As it happens, I don’t believe Mary is the reason for John’s refusal to name the baby after Sherlock. I’m more inclined to believe (as many have suggested) that John simply isn’t comfortable with the larger implications, i.e. that Sherlock isn’t coming back (supposedly). It’s an emotionally-charged situation, and John isn’t handling it well. He is giggling and joking and relying on humor to get him through a difficult conversation, just as he did at the scene of his own murder. Sherlock, for his part, knows that’s all John is capable of at the moment, so he’s playing along with it.

Also it’s worth noting that Sherlock’s line (“That’s the whole of it, if you’re looking for baby names”) is a clear call-back to ASiB, when John offers up his whole name as a sardonic commentary on Sherlock and Irene’s flirting. Since the original line was a joke (albeit with an emotionally-charged undercurrent), it’s not surprising that John assumes Sherlock also intends the same line in a joking way. And I think Sherlock sort of does intend John to read it that way – he’s deliberately trying to keep the conversation light, and avoiding the kind of sentimentality that would make both of them uncomfortable.

But he’s not cracking just *any* joke. It’s my contention that Sherlock intends a serious undercurrent to his little joke – he brings up the baby names lightly, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t sincerely important to him. My best guess is that, however John reacts in the moment, Sherlock hopes that in a couple of weeks, when the baby is born and Sherlock has disappeared, John will think back on this conversation and reconsider whether he might want to honor his friend in this way.

[...]

Sherlock and The Social Dots

 (Sherlock meta by bassfanimation)

I keep seeing people continue to fight over Sherlock and the meaning of Eurus’ tests so I wanted to write a little thing on it. I’m doing this with a wrist brace on and heinous fibro-turd pain, so forgive any misspellings.

The way I have personally absorbed Sherlock and the meaning of Eurus’s tests is that it’s about Sherlock as an empty person. He is an incomplete picture until he begins connecting the dots that are his social connections and even more importantly, his emotions. Let’s look at his relationships one by one and I’ll explain.

Dot 1: Greg Lestrade 

Lestrade represents respect for authority. In fact, he is the only real authority figure in the series. He’s Sherlock’s ‘boss’ in a way. Bosses need people they employ to be reliable, respectful, and trustworthy. Sherlock treating his boss/mentor like crap, making fun of his intelligence and skirting around him at every chance he gets is terribly disrespectful. Sherlock is childish and arrogant and disregards Lestrade in most cases, even refusing to acknowledge his name. We’ve all had those bosses when we were young that we didn’t respect, so we act like spoiled brats about it even though those people probably have way more experience than we do. They have earned their position via the rout of hard work and being reliable and respectful. By the end of the series, however, Sherlock shows us he has resolved the issue of his respect for Lestrade by politely asking him, by name, a first for the entire series, to please take care of his brother. Sherlock is no longer a bratty child and he has connected the social dot of respect.

Dot 2: John Watson 

John represents friendship, pure and simple. John is literally the “replacement” for Victor, Sherlock’s best friend who was killed when he was very, very little. That left Sherlock as the empty shell that we see at the start of the series. The loss of his friend at such a young age meant that he essentially shut down the part of him that he felt could even have friends. He rejected the idea of personal connections with other people entirely, so that he wouldn’t suffer loss again. John, through all their trials and tragedies, has now healed that wound for Sherlock. Even more, John as Sherlock’s friend, has helped him connect all the other dots. He walked with him step by step to do it. Without John’s companionship, Sherlock would still be empty. John’s maturity helped Sherlock grow up and be the man he was supposed to be, had he not suffered such a terribly traumatic event in his youth.

One other thing John represents is family, brotherhood to be specific. Mycroft was very cold to Sherlock in their youth, even though it’s obvious it wasn’t always that way. In the family videos we are shown, Sherlock absolutely loves his brother. It isn’t until later, after Victor, that he feels so alone. It’s obvious Sherlock loved Victor just like a brother, like the brother he really needed but was taken from him. Sherlock says John is “family” in The Final Problem, and he means it. It also shows just how much emotion Sherlock has. His love is that strong. His friend was his brother, a part of his own blood, even if they wren’t born as brothers.

Dot 3: Mrs. Hudson 

Mrs Hudson represents a parent’s love. It’s clear that Sherlock has a very strained relationship with his parents. He doesn’t hate them, but he doesn’t appear to believe that they care for him. They’re not around when he is still basically a child in a grown man’s body. He has cut them off in his mind. Maybe they weren’t there for him in the past so he continues to believe they’re not there for him now. Meanwhile, Mrs. Hudson dotes on Sherlock, brings him tea and food and generally ‘takes care’ of him. She’s kind but not a pushover. She’s also led a life that is about as tumultuous as you can get, which I think appeals to Sherlock. He always surrounds himself with people who aren’t “regular” people. Mrs. Hudson holds enough action and adventure in her life that she appeals to Sherlock, and she is also loving and sweet to boot. Mrs. Hudson is the connected parental dot for Sherlock.

Dot 4: Irene Adler 

Irene Adler represents sexuality. What’s even better is that Irene represents fluid sexuality, and more importantly, the rejection of labels. Regardless of how everyone has interpreted this, when you get down to the simplicity of it, it is simply about rejection of boxing one’s self in. Sherlock’s box was his own making, his image as the “higher power” that Irene pointed out. Irene’s own box was her sexuality. Both of these people had discovered during the episode that their boxes weren’t taped shut all the way. There was wiggle room. Back to the sexuality part, Irene awakened Sherlock sexually. The entirety of A Scandal in Belgravia was loaded with sexuality, from Sherlock being naked and looking extraordinarily dashing, to the very naked Irene appearing to completely disrupt his logical thinking power. It’s as close to canon as one can get that Sherlock did sleep with Irene after Karachi (judging by Eurus’s reaction to his violin song for her). Sex and intimacy was something Sherlock had very much refrained from in his life and Irene connected that dot for him.

Dot 5: Molly Hooper 

Molly represents authentic love, or “romantic entanglement” as Sherlock puts it. Everything about Molly and Sherlock’s interaction falls in line with how everyday romantic relationships blossom. They began just like kids, with Molly having a crush and Sherlock being a jerk to her, ignoring her, or thwarting her attempts to date other men. As they grow together, they begin to close the gap between them. Molly earns Sherlock’s complete trust, which was monumentally difficult for her to do considering Sherlock’s fear of connecting with people too closely. Molly loves Sherlock through his best times and his worst times, unconditionally, even though he doesn’t appear to return her feelings. From small things we’re shown, however, it feels as if Sherlock does feel something for Molly, but he has compartmentalized it and buried it as deep as he can underground out of fear. Eurus’s test is what forced Sherlock to dig up that box, that box he’d put his heart in and covered it underneath the earth. Eurus forces that box open, and connects the dot of romantic love for Sherlock.

Dot 6: Mary Watson 

Mary represents, I think, coming to terms with one’s self, and the different shades of the self. She represents acceptance. Mary connected with and accepted Sherlock instantly because they were the same. They both came from dangerous lives, they are both morally gray, and they both have a need to be accepted for who they are, the good and the bad. Mary was in many ways, a reflection of Sherlock’s own duality. I think Mary made him question things about himself (no not sexually), and I think she also taught him how much he is worth as a person. She showed him that even though you are this person you’ve constructed out of your own pain, you don’t have to live just as that person. You can have anything you desire and still be you. You can live with shades of yourself, and those around you who truly love you will accept you as that. They will love you for the good that you are, and forgive you for the bad that you are. Mary connected the dots of acceptance for Sherlock.

Dot 7: Jim Moriarty 

Jim represented fear. He represented who Sherlock would have been, had he not had some form of love and connection in his life. He was a madman, a true sociopath. He showed Sherlock what it really would be like if he was who he said he was. We learn very quickly, however, what Moriarty already knew. Sherlock can never be like him because he does have a huge capacity for love. He’s hidden it, denied it, but it is there. Anywhere Moriarty appeared, it caused great fear in Sherlock. Even after his death, Moriarty was in Sherlock’s mind, chained up in a padded room like a some kind of caged monster. As much as Sherlock tried to be like him, he really feared becoming that. He also feared that Moriarty would be the undoing of his friends and family, forever a threat to their lives. Moriarty was an endless threat to Sherlock, an endless fear of madness and murder. Jim connected the dot of fear, true fear, for Sherlock.

Dot 8: Mycroft Holmes 

I admit this one’s tough. I feel Mycroft represents weakness. For all the power Mycroft wields in the government, he’s very fearful of being out in the world. He keeps people as distant as he can manage and still be a part of functioning society. He also did a terrible thing and locked up his little sister and lied to his family about it because he feared confronting it. All along in the series, we see Mycroft chastise Sherlock for things like having friends, being close to people, tangling with psychopaths, etc. Mycroft is a very soft, fearful person, which makes his nickname The Ice Man sort of ironic. Its not that he doesn’t care, he’s just far too soft to care. We see his softness demonstrated with Sherlock, time and time again. He cares so much for his little brother and fears so much for him that he constantly keeps watch on him. Mycroft also tried to help Sherlock by proxy, using John as a means to help Sherlock heal his wounds. In the end, Sherlock comes to realize his brother isn’t a bad person, and that he loves him deeply. In fact, he loves his little brother enough to die for him so that he won’t be left like he was as a child, without his best friend. I think Mycroft regrets being as weak as he is, because he didn’t do more to help his siblings. It just required too much care, and he wasn’t able to fulfill that. In the end, it is Sherlock who is the stronger of them, and he is stronger because of his connected dots. The last dot is connect by Mycroft, and that is Sherlock understanding that he is capable of protecting the weak, that he is stronger thanks to his mind, heart, and soul now being complete.

_____________

That’s about all. I only included the major characters here, the ones we see almost every episode. I’ve already talked a bit about how Eurus forces Sherlock to confront trauma, so she represents that last little bit which Sherlock needs to connect everything together. She wasn’t a dot, so much as the one who helped him see the entire picture he’d made. Also, Rosie helps Sherlock in her own way, as Sherlock now has this capacity to care for the smallest of people: children. Rosie is a teeny, tiny, adorable dot.

I mostly wrote this because I had wanted to for a while, but also because some people are still arguing about the 'I Love You' scene. They’re missing the forest in favor of the leaves. The bigger picture is pretty clear on what everyone’s purposes were in the show, and how they affected Sherlock as a man. To become a great man, he needed to be a complete man. All these connected dots make him that man.

John really cares about Sherlock in s4

 (Sherlock meta by Ivy Blossom)

Q: [...] are there any particular moments in Series 4 that suggest or demonstrate to you that John really loves and/or genuinely cares about Sherlock? I guess secondarily, how do you read Sherlock putting off rescuing John from that well until after he dealt with Eurus In TFP?

A: Any particular moments? It’s hard to pick, it’s kind of infused through the whole thing, but okay, I’ll do my best.

In The Six Thatchers, John should be deliriously happy. He’s got what he wanted: the normal life with a job, a wife, and a new daughter, but he’s also got Sherlock, who is as committed to maintaining this careful and potentially awkward balance as he is. They still solve crimes together, and Mary and Rosie aren’t an obstruction. In fact, sometimes they join in! John’s devotion to Sherlock is pretty obvious from that alone, but Sherlock’s special place in John’s life is underscored by John asking him to be Rosie’s godfather.

John should be happy, but he’s not. He’s never managed to get over what Mary did and who she really is. His happy life with wife and baby is a lie. As his trust in Mary continues to decline, his trust in Sherlock never waivers. John and Sherlock confront threats together as a team while Mary lies, drugs Sherlock, and scarpers. Sherlock, weird, rude, and difficult, is John’s stable rock, and Mary does not look good in comparison.

After Mary dies, John blames Sherlock and cuts him off. I’d suggest that this is more indicative of how much John cares about Sherlock than otherwise. Not only because he thought Sherlock was a superhero who could could genuinely protect Mary and Rosie from everything forever, but because, as we later learn, the reason why John pushes Sherlock away stems primarily from his own self-loathing. John betrayed Mary, and his guilt and despair at not being able to live up to Mary’s, Sherlock’s, and his own expectations leads him to push away the things he loves most, including his daughter and his life with Sherlock. This is underscored by his goodbye scene in the hospital, where he leaves his cane as a silent final message: you saved me, I didn’t deserve it, and here I betray you. 

We’ve had Sherlock’s mind palace for a while, which is a wonderful way to see what’s actually going on in his head. In The Lying Detective, we finally get the equivalent for John: Mary. Hallucinated Mary isn’t a ghost or even a memory, she’s the honest part of John. And she adores Sherlock. She talks about him constantly. She watches him mid-deduction with love and delight. She recognizes that Sherlock knows John, understands him completely, but John disagrees. Sherlock can’t possibly know how worthless John is; like Mary, Sherlock believes he is a good, moral man, and John knows that they’re both wrong. The voice in his head says: Sherlock may be a monster, but he’s my monster. 

The most dramatic indicator of how John feels about Sherlock is his confession and breakdown at the end of The Lying Detective. This is the first time John has been completely honest in this entire story. John hides his feelings constantly, he lies about them, even to himself. And in this scene he nearly does it again, he nearly walks away. Had he done so, I believe his relationship with Sherlock would have been essentially over. He would have grown more and more distant and dishonest until their connection was entirely lost. But out of love and faith, he finally, finally makes a different choice. He chooses to be brutally honest and vulnerable. He cries, but does not turn away. He lets Sherlock hold him. No one has or ever will be this close to John.

Sherlock does not put off rescuing John in The Final Problem. From the moment he realizes that John is in danger, all Sherlock does is try to save him. The problem is that the solution is Eurus. We know that he can’t rescue John without her intervention because he was unable to the first time; the puzzle is too complex for him, it will always be too complex for him. The mistake he made all his life was thinking that intelligence was the answer. When he was a boy he didn’t have the resources to do what he does now: he recognizes that it’s sentiment that will save John, not brainpower. He’s got sentiment in his tool belt now, and that’s because of John. John made him feel and taught him to be a loving and feeling person, and that’s what allows him to triumph over his much more brilliant sister in the end.

Mary's Attitude in The Christmas Forgiveness Scene 

 (Sherlock meta by incurablylazydevil, theoklahomos and theleftpill)

incurablylazydevil:

 How do people watch that ‘oooh we’re doing conversation today it really is christmas’ scene and go ‘look how sweet and snarky Mary is, what a nice character’ while i’m sitting here trying to calm down my gag reflex?

theoklahomos:

SAME it’s like bitch you killed literally the most important person in your husband’s life and that was just the cherry atop the massive shit sundae you’ve served him up and now - now! - you have the nerve to act like HE’S being unreasonable for not having spoken to your bitch ass for a few months what the actual fuck Mary is horrible!

theleftpill:

I hold the opinion that people who react this way to the Christmas/Forgiveness scene have never been in a mature, respectful relationship. Those who have understand that 1. she’s not sweet and snarky - she’s scared and frustrated, and 2. because she might very well have reason to “act like HE’S being unreasonable”. The way they interact with each other tells us a great deal about what’s happened in the last few months without actually seeing it. “We’re doing conversation today?”: how many times has Mary tried to talk to John, to make things right, to correct the mistakes she’s made, and John has completely shut her down? “Months of silence, and we’re gonna do this now?” Her frustration and anger radiate off the screen; this is something she’s tried to work out before and has been completely rejected, but instead gets ambushed at a strangers’ home by her silent husband. Wouldn’t you be a little pissed off?

We have no idea what John has put Mary through for the last few months. We do know John has a nasty temper and we know he’s a complete dickhead sometimes. So maybe Mary has a reason to be snarky and angry and in pain and flat-out terrified when her husband finally approaches her. Yes she shot Sherlock but this moment isn’t about him; it’s about their relationship. About her secrets and his forgiveness. And yes, in a healthy relationship, it is possible to forgive.

Things aren’t so fanfic-black-and-white when you’re dealing with another real-life person. Sometimes you don’t like the person you’re in love with. Your partner can get angry, can get sad, can get frustrated with you and in a healthy relationship, you realize that maybe they have a reason to feel that way. John & Mary embody this dynamic beautifully in this scene, and it’s one of the reasons I love it so much, how utterly real their relationship is, and how much is revealed about their relationship in their exchanges. In this moment, I don’t see Mary as “nice”; I see her terrified. I see her protecting her heart by being defensive and sharp. And in a real relationship, that’s allowed.

And that complexity makes me curious to see what happens next.

On Irene, Molly, And Mary...

 (Sherlock meta by throughtheparadox)

 Ah, these women! What more can I say? I love them and it’s the very reason why I feel like I needed to talk about them, especially in light of “recent events.”

[...]

Molly Hooper 

For someone who was intended to be a side character (since she was not a part of the ACD canon), Molly stood out because even before anyone else (even Lestrade who thought that Sherlock was a great, but not good, man in S1) saw the detective’s capacity for good, she was already there, admiring him. I honestly don’t think it was just his brilliance or his amazing cheekbones that captivated her, but it was the belief that Sherlock is something more than he what he leads on. He had his eccentricities, but she was able to look past that.

And if there’s one thing that I found compelling about her, it’s her character development. She didn’t dwell on her unrequited love, she wasn’t a martyr, she dated other people (shoutout to Jim from IT), she called out Sherlock for being an arse during that Christmas (ASiB), and by season 3 and 4, she became an all around BAMF.

So I don’t understand why I’ve seen people calling her weak. Because I personally believe that loving someone does not prevent you from being a strong and independent person. Molly never changed her ways for Sherlock. Sure, she swiped lipstick that one time, or she dressed up that Christmas, but it was to boost her own confidence. She knows that Sherlock doesn’t notice these things in a ‘I want to impress him’ kind of level, so I personally believe she was doing those things because she wants to – not for him, but for herself.

And seeing her in The Final Problem hurt me like hell. She looked like she was having a rough day, and then Sherlock just pops in a request like that – it was disheartening to watch. But Molly Hooper handled it like a boss. Even if it hurts, she was in control of herself. She was angry, she didn’t want to be treated like a toy – she wanted him to know that saying those words are not and should not be easy. Even in pain and distress, she was able to teach Sherlock Holmes a lesson.

So if that makes her weak, then they should change the definition of the word in the dictionary, because there’s a huge amount of courage in there.

P.S. To be fair, Sherlock did say ‘I love you’ twice. Now, I’m an Adlock shipper, but so far, Sherlolly shippers had that dramatic Anderson-imagination kiss and two ‘I love you’s so cheers to y’all!

Irene Adler 

[Queen!] I just love this woman.

Personally, I fell in love with the idea of Adlock ever since I first read A Scandal In Bohemia. I never liked my ships to be ‘canon’ in a way that they’ll run off into the sunset and be all cheesy, and that’s why Sherlock and Irene’s dynamic resonated with me so much. I do blame them for developing my now logical and complicated approach on the subject of love, but I digress.

There has been a lot of criticism about the modern adaptations of Irene Adler, but I will simply focus on the BBC one for this post. Irene was, and still is, being reprimanded for being a dominatrix, but to me, it just made sense. Her initial role was to distract Sherlock and to lure him into unfamiliar territory, but sex isn’t the element that became the foundation of their relationship – it was their instant intellectual connection.

And this is also the very reason why we’re not dismissing Irene or Sherlock’s sexuality in shipping them, contrary to the common criticisms of these pairing. Even if Irene is a dominatrix, sex isn’t really what they are about. I know I’ve stressed this many times, but Sherlock admitted that he is captivated by Irene (”Craving the distraction of the game, I sympathise entirely…” his words, not mine) and Irene was also very much smitten with Sherlock, so it may not be romance (or whatever it is that normal people do), but they are indeed attracted to each other in a very complex level that I think even they don’t understand. To add to this, we already have an entire discourse regarding Irene being “gay” etc. etc. which I think makes her even more amazing because she’s like f*ck all your stereotypes, I’m going to swing all ways possible and be badass at it and I can’t… I just can’t deal with that point even anymore… She is more than that frickin’ label, for God’s sake.

Anyway, another commentary about Irene that pisses me off the most is the one about her being weak – again, similar to Molly’s. She didn’t ask for Sherlock to rescue her, and he absolutely didn’t beat her. In fact, he broke almost every single one of his personal rules when it came to her: flew thousands of miles to get to her, kept her Vertu (”If she’d left him, he would keep it. People do. Sentiment.”), thinks about her out of the blue, the TEXTING, and I could go on and on and on…. And she did make Sherlock “I haven’t begged in my life” Holmes beg twice in the most mundane, interesting, and sentimental way possible: “But I will have the camera phone.” “Please.”

This is a woman who can get by on her own, who has managed to stay alive despite the circumstance that she’s constantly on the run, and she is her own person, whether or not she has crossed paths with Sherlock Holmes.

So to put this in full-circle, I’ll just say it again: QUEEN!

Mary Watson 

I never really appreciated Mary’s character in the ACD canon because she was barely even there. It wasn’t even explicit if she died or not, but there was a line that expressed Watson’s bereavement, leading to that conclusion in the books.

Frankly, just like Irene, I’ve been waiting for her character to make an appearance, and was almost settled by the idea that she might have been replaced with Sarah (John’s girlfriend in S1), but I still had my hopes up. So when she arrived in Season 3, imagine my excitement.

But it wasn’t until that scene in The Empty Hearse where she was obviously amused by Sherlock that made me love her. Now, just a quick segue, I’ve always hated Sally Donovan because she was cruel to Sherlock and she didn’t really seem to have a redemption arc unlike Anderson. She was a representation of the world that treats Sherlock Holmes as an outsider. And Mary wasn’t like that at all. She was accepting and understanding, and unlike the common cause of hatred towards her, she wasn’t keeping Sherlock and John apart. In fact, she was trying so hard to assure them that things are not going to change – that they would still be Sherlock Holmes and John Watson.

Then we discover that she’s not as she seems, that she has secrets, and it explained why she cared for Sherlock– it’s because broken people try to fix other broken people through each other’s company. She was willing to compromise anything, she was greedy to not let John know, she was desperate which led to her shooting Sherlock – overall, her character has dimension. She’s not a bad or good, she has her own demons that she’s trying to overcome. When Sherlock told John that “you chose her”, it felt haunting because it resonates to our own horrors – we attract what we seek. And to me, it’s what made Mary – BBC’s Mary – a brilliant character.

These are just a few reasons why I can’t accept any hate towards these characters, their roles in relation to Sherlock and John, or even hate addressed to the people who adore them.

Overall, these three women were introduced to us in a sequence that also relates to Sherlock’s own development: Molly signified the value of trust, respect, and regard for his life; Irene embodied incredible wit, surrendering to the whims of sentiment, and finding a remarkable connection; and Mary provided the feeling of warmth, acceptance, and the balance between danger and redemption.

And again, dear haters, this is why they matter.

The Purpose of Minor Characters 

(Sherlock meta by Ivy Blossom and blameitontheillustrator) 

Ivy Blossom:

There are two things any minor/supporting character has to do: they either through some means cause regression or growth in the protagonist, or they are or create or clear away an obstacle that advances the plot. Often they do both of these things.

This is the case for any minor character. If they don’t do these things, the story does not require them, and they should be axed.

There is a lot of criticism in media about the lot of female characters. There aren’t enough female protagonists, which is a problem and that is something we should keep complaining about. Since most protagonists are men, that leaves most of the women in fiction as minor or supporting characters, which means they are always either a catalyst for main (male) character development, or they are present to advance the plot, or both.

There is nothing inherently wrong with useful minor characters. The part that’s wrong is institutional, that women are so often only minor characters, and therefore usually supporting a man’s story. But that’s not a fault in any particular story, that’s the fault of the story-making industry. We need more female protagonists, and we need them now. 

What we should demand for all supporting women in fiction is that they have their own, human and coherent motives for the things they do to advance the plot. They must have their own character and their own lives that intersect with the protagonists, and they must do things for reasons that make sense for them in light of their character and context.

Minor female characters can, in no particular order: suffer, sacrifice themselves, die, live, cause murder and mayhem, make dinner, throw dinner at the progtagonist, etc. There is no wrong action they can take, or no wrong action taken against them, as long as what they do, and what happens to them, is clearly part of a larger coherent arc of their own. Their stories have to make sense.

That said, there’s no reason why minor female characters shouldn’t be as complicated any another. Female characters can be contradictory, confused, sometimes wrong, sometimes awkward, as long as they are still living a coherent and explicable life of their own. They can love the wrong people, forgive the wrong people, try to become something they aren’t. They can be strong, they can be weak, they can be too tired to notice what’s going on around them. They can make bad decisions that benefit the protagonist, as long as someone thought through why she would do something like that and restricts her actions to things that are in keeping with her character and her circumstances. It doesn’t have to be a good reason, but someone has to think about what the reason is.

Asking for minor female characters that neither help transform the protagonist nor influence the plot is asking for female characters who will get cut from the script at the first opportunity. If the only good woman in fiction isn’t there at all, we have a whole other problem.

blameitontheillustrator:

I agree wholeheartedly, but if this is regarding Sherlock, then I think it misses the point. The criticism that I’ve seen the most is precisely regarding the lack of internal coherence regarding the female characters, especially Mary. Mary is unequivocally portrayed as a villain in His Last Vow. Not only does she shoot the protagonist, but she threatens him again as soon as he wakes up. She claims that she has done things that would make her John Watson fall out of love with her. But in TST, all that is gone. It’s left unexplored. Apparently, the worst thing on Mary’s resume is her failure to rescue British hostages. This story does not make sense. Not in light of the character, not in light of the context.

Of course Mary’s role was always to further the plot and the protagonists’ development. But they made her a villain, and then chickened out.

Ivy Blossom:

You say Mary is unequivocally portrayed as a villain in His Last Vow. “Unequivocally” suggests that there is no point in the story where that perspective is questioned or debated, and yet there is a lengthy and important scene in His Last Vow where Sherlock tells John, and us, that she can be trusted, and explains his reasoning. He is unsurprisingly right in his assessment of a criminal, and we become, like Donovan or Anderson, his incredulous audience. And it turns out that John feels the same way we do, that Sherlock must be wrong, that his explanation is unconvincing and cannot be true, that a person like Mary cannot have shot Sherlock and be worthy of our trust at the same time. Doing bad things while trying to be a good person is John’s struggle in this series as well, and Mary is a dramatic example of it.

I liked that a lot about Mary’s arc. I expected her to be a villain as well, but they turned the tables on us in a way I find very pleasing. She is a villain by trade, she absolutely is, but she wants to be different, she wants to be a different person, the person John thought she was. She tries but often fails.

I’m very surprised that you feel that Mary’s past is left unexplored in TST. Mary’s past is the subject of TST. Not her entire past, only a snippet of it. But we don’t get any character’s complete past history, let alone a supporting character’s. Why do you think what we see in TST is the worst thing Mary’s done? They never suggest that. It’s fairly easy to imagine that there was much more in her past that brought her to the point of having the skills she has and the clients she had. I don’t get the sense that it’s the worst thing she’s done; It’s just the one that comes back to bite her in the end. A secretary. Not the worst thing, the most overlooked and mundane thing, really.

Another thing that is not “all gone” in TST: Mary was right. Knowing about Mary’s past does cause John’s heart to waver. He used to like Mary. She predicts that her real self would break John and make him not love her anymore, and she is proven pretty much right in TST. I wouldn’t say that he stops loving her completely, but he’s certainly heading down a pretty dark path in that regard. Do you think that marriage would have survived?

Mary does indeed shoot the protagonist in HLV; and she threatens him afterwards, twice. She doesn’t stop doing that sort of thing in TST. When she feels threatened, she lashes out and does terrible things. She knocks Sherlock out to get the usb drive and to keep him from following her, which is at least a step up from shooting him, but still. That shows us a lot about the side of herself that she’s trying to bury. Mary has some very bad instincts that she’s not great at controlling.

I don’t think it’s chickening out to not make her villain. I think her story mirrors John’s and Sherlock’s in an interesting way. They are all constructions of their past experiences and decisions, they all do things they aren’t proud of, but their better selves can shine through all of these failures and foibles, and it’s worth it to keep trying.

This story makes sense to me, though I can see it does not to you. Obviously these things are subjective. I have my own criticisms of this series (conveniently finding DVDs not just once, but twice, for instance), but Mary’s story arc is not one of them.

Is there a “seeming desperation to sanctify Mary” in this story?

 (Sherlock meta by Ivy Blossom as a resopnse to this post by archipelagoarchaea)

Is there a “seeming desperation to sanctify Mary” in this story? Mary is very explicitly no saint. She repeatedly does things that we and John find unforgivable. She does it in S3, and she does it a few more times in S4. If they’d wanted her sanctified, I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t have written her chloroforming Sherlock and running off on John and Rosie.

You say that Mary’s flaws are “treated like cute little quirks”. Mary’s flaws result in you disliking and distrusting her, and also result in John disliking and distrusting her. John feels what you feel. That’s a consequence, and it’s not a small one. It doesn’t look unintentional to me.

Do you think Mary emotionally manipulates John into wanting to be a hero? John wants to be a hero from the moment we meet him. Mary didn’t invent that version of John, John did. Mary is the mother of John’s child and has just died thinking better of him than she should have, and given that he’d been quietly cheating on her, I’m not sure what you expect John to think. “She thought I was better than I am” seems about on point.

It’s true Mary’s sacrificial death isn’t a redemption, and that’s a really good point. One selfless act doesn’t fix all the things she did or turn her into someone else, but it does complicate who John thought she was capable of being. Mary is always trying to be “out of character”. Her instincts tend to be bad, but she’s committed to trying to make good choices. Mary is not entirely one or the other, and she leaves the story partway through her own redemption, leaving John with a lot of guilt and questions that will never be answered.

You say “If Mary were so important, so great at showing John and Sherlock how to understand each other, their relationship would have been better after she was introduced, not worse. That’s basic logic.” Story complications (which is what every non-protagonist character in a story is) should not resolve the main story line. Mary is not there to improve the relationship between John and Sherlock. She’s there to threaten it in some way, create a situation that modifies the status quo, and then push them to another level. That is every minor character’s job, and specifically Mary’s.

Mary is the catalyst that pushes John back to Sherlock in the first place, and then the force that nearly separates them forever. The experience of life-changing loss and grief forces John to display the full range of who he is, and to see that Sherlock is capable of understanding all of him and accepting him. Mary’s death, more so than necessarily Mary herself, brings them back into alignment, and closer and more honest than they had ever been.

I don’t know why you want Mary to be the “truly caring [and] insightful” one. It sounds to me like you’re wishing that Mary was the one who deserved John’s love and devotion, not Sherlock. As you say, Mary was wrong about what John was capable of; John gives up and abandons Sherlock when he was in danger, though Mary thought he would never give up. Mary is wrong about how heroic John can be, but Sherlock predicts where John is likely to give up and counts on it. Sherlock does not judge John for that failure. What does that tell you? Who’s the truly caring and insightful one by the end of this story? Who’s the one who actually knows who John is and loves him for it? Who’s the sanctified hero?

You say: the story needs to show, not tell. So what does all this show?

Mary Ruined BBC Sherlock For Me

 (Sherlock meta by archipelagoarchaea)

The seeming desperation to sanctify Mary as the patroness of BBC's Sherlock was monstrously unfair to Sherlock and John, the actual heart of the show.

Sherlock’s flaws are treated like flaws, and largely dealt with over the course of his arc. Mary’s flaws are treated like cute little quirks. Such a spunky woman! Sherlock writes a long, sweet love letter to John that was explicitly tailored to his genuine strengths and weaknesses as a human being. John finds this uninspiring and promptly forgets about it despite crying over it. Mary spits out a bunch of emotionally manipulative tripe under duress, and this apparently makes John want to be “what she saw in him.” Sherlock makes blatant, loving sacrifices for John, and these are brushed under the rug like plot devices while Mary is lionized for her textbook abusive possessiveness. Sherlock goes through a long, intense, and sometimes cruel redemption arc for a horrific mistake he made with good intentions, while Mary is redeemed for literal attempted murder and never-ending lies through crying, and whines about minor consequences. Her out-of-character sacrificial death isn’t treated as the redemption (which would have a neutral result and would have come before John taking her back), but as currency to buy John and Sherlock’s unending worship. John’s devotion and need and love are swept to the side as reasons for Sherlock to live, never explicitly addressed, but Mary’s sacrifice is placed on a pedestal. There’s an entire episode (two, really) about Sherlock’s world and heart revolving around John, and his willingness to go to hell for him, but we’re still told Mary’s the hero of it.

If Mary were so important, so great at showing John and Sherlock how to understand each other, their relationship would have been better after she was introduced, not worse. That’s basic logic. There wouldn’t have been a month of separation in which she complained about how much John missed Sherlock. There wouldn’t have been Sherlock’s uncertainty about his place in their lives. John would have recognized that Sherlock was being stupid and self-sacrificing, and that he didn’t have to settle for a lying assassin and Sherlock would have seen that John wasn’t happy with a lying assassin (or even a passive-aggressive nurse) and offered him an open home. In fact, post-Mary they seem to know less about each other, at least until John and Sherlock finally hit rock bottom in The Lying Detective and have to remake each other.

A truly caring, insightful Mary should have told John that she was responsible for her own actions, that Sherlock had done far too much for her already. Instead she left a note telling Sherlock to emotionally regress and go torture himself so John could play hero—and it didn’t even work. Her “love letter” canonically contributes to John’s breakdown by connecting his self-worth to an unrealistic standard of behavior (that is, unconditional loyalty and forgiveness—exactly what Mary acted bitterly entitled to). You could even read John’s horrific treatment of Sherlock as projection: he punishes Sherlock for not living up to an impossible standard of perfection because he thinks he needs to be punished for the same thing. It’s Sherlock who has the insight to heal John by telling him he’s allowed to be human, and that he wasn’t a bad person for wanting to cheat (though they gloss over why his need to cheat was sympathetic, i.e. the fact that Mary was a terrible and abusive wife). Yet instead of following this theme to it’s natural conclusion and rejecting Mary as an influence over their emotional lives, she’s treated as the hero of the storyline and elevated to narrator and posthumous counselor.

In the principle of “show, don’t tell,” Mary’s supposed goodness for our protagonists utterly, utterly fails to deliver.

And for the show to privilege Mary so blatantly when, objectively speaking, John and Sherlock’s relationship was so much more loving and more transformative, is heteronormative. For them to give Mary explicit, textual ownership over John and Sherlock’s relationship—a relationship that predates her introduction by years—is grossly heteronormative and arguably sexist. To need her approval for their implicit romance… I’m not sure I can begin to describe how much that disgusts me. Making John and Sherlock’s romantic feelings explicit would deal with the queer-baiting issue, but not with this.

The only way I can take any pleasure in this treatment of Mary, at all, is to treat it as a metaphor. With Mary as the avatar of heteronormativity and heterosexual privilege, the show’s worship of any sign of basic decency and sanctification of Mary for a non-existent redemption arc after nothing but “mental cruelty” become an apt metaphor for the way queer people are expected to behave when thrown crumbs of human rights. It’s only as caricature that her arc has any value. But I’m no longer sure that’s intentional.

If they’d written this series under duress with explicit orders to make Mary/John more important than Sherlock/John, to put Mary on a pedestal, and to avoid explicit Johnlock, then this result is exactly what I’d expect. Subtextually, Mary is still a villain with all the villainous parallels (e.g. Lady Carmichael and her abusive husband). Subtextually, John and Sherlock are still in love. Narratively, John and Sherlock are given all the real effort and development even while Mary hovers over their shoulders and intrudes on their love like a voyeur. Yet somehow, the explicit textual story is completely contrary to the subtext.

This was the moment they should have turned subtext into text, the moment the proverbial iron was hot, yet they failed to follow through. They teed up canon Johnlock and delivered Saint Mary the Undeveloped instead. Why? It baffles me. I can’t imagine they were censored, for surely they’d be loudly complaining about that. Did Moffat and Gatiss really grow up daydreaming about Mary the martyred matchmaker and Eurus the grand… whatever? Are they really so blind they can’t see the striking resemblance between their Mary and half their villains? Are women so unreal to them, they don’t require actual consequences or meaningful motivations? Are they so deluded, they can’t see the vast superiority of John and Sherlock’s romance to any other in the show? It’s the strangest thing, and the series suffered badly for it.

They could have made something great, something memorable, something historic, something that would be talked about in a truly positive way. Even if they hadn’t originally planned it, the opportunity was golden. And instead they did… this. It’s so utterly foolish. I am honestly baffled. It’s still possible they’ll do something explicit with John and Sherlock in S5, but their failure to capitalize on the perfect setup in S4 makes that look far more doubtful than before.

And what gets me is that there was so much good about this season. I actually enjoy a lot of the camp and ridiculousness many people dislike. I enjoy convoluted plot lines and don’t mind the occasional plot hole, easily plugged with a head canon. I enjoy high romance and heightened emotions. Set aside the appalling relationship dynamics and The Lying Detective is a very clever, fun episode with a beautiful ending. But I can’t watch S4, and possibly S3, because Mary is so very very horrible, and I’m still told I’m supposed to love her.

It’s like someone made your very favorite dessert, but you’re not allowed to taste it unless you sit next to your abusive ex and listen to them talk about how much you owe them. Sure, it might be the best dessert in the world, carefully and lovingly crafted by a master chef, but it’s still not worth it.

I don’t think anyone is crazy for holding out hope that there’s something more clever going on here. If they do make more Sherlock, and they actually fix this and the queer-baiting issue, then I’ll watch it. Maybe even love it. But I’m not holding my breath, anymore.

Mary and Molly

 (Sherlock meta sherlocklock)

 In my head, I see a link between the scene in which John beats up Sherlock and the scene in which Sherlock beats up the coffin. Both have been trying to keep it together, but their love just overflows and comes out in violence.

There is a link between John and Mary’s relationship and Sherlock and Molly’s, I think. Both Mary and Molly push their respective partners to be the best versions of themselves. Both really see their partners for what they are. Both never fail to call their partners on their shit.

My friend once asked, “Well, is Molly good enough for Sherlock?” And people say, “Molly is too quiet, she’s just a plot device to be a love interest.” But I love Molly Hooper. Because she is quiet. She is soft spoken. And with a single glance or a small phrase she can make an intellectual asshole (I love you Sherlock but you are or at least used to be an asshole) apologize. She’s made him apologize…twice. And Mary does the same with John…remember the graveyard scene in The Abominable Bride with Mary?

“I’m taking Mary home.”

“?”

“Mary’s taking me home.”

“Better.”

(those quotes aren’t verbatim, but that’s the general idea)

THAT is why I ship Sherlolly. Because she is one of the few that can make Sherlock attempt to be a better guy, like Mary does with John. As much as I ADORE Irene, I think that was more based on sex than on actual emotion (though honestly, if this had ended with Irene walking through the door, I would have been happy too).

But you know what? Molly is unique. She is good enough. And now, the whole world can see it. Thank you Motfiss. Thank you so much.

Mary & John 

 (Sherlock meta by thelonelybrilliance)

There was something quite tragic and yet beautiful that Mary died without knowing that John slipped.

This isn’t to say that I’m happy John slipped, or that I think it was a small deal. I do think he was remorseful. I do think he is human.

John has more trust issues with his spouse than most people, and he’s done a really remarkable job of swallowing it down. He loves (loved! GAH MY HEART) Mary VERY MUCH. But new fatherhood is tough, and feeling on the outs from two of the most important people in his life from an intellectual/plotting standpoint–that can be difficult. All of this made it not OOC for me that John would get a little close to a dangerous line.

But. He pulled back. He pulled back and he was sorry and remembered that he loved his crazy little family and his adorable, dangerous, inscrutable wife with her little lace-up sneakers and her assassin’s past. And he wanted to tell her–he wanted to apologize. He wasn’t going to sweep it under the rug.

And then she died. I can only imagine that on top of everything else–all of John’s other insurmountable grief, he feels guilt. But Mary was a very different person than John was. In a way, I think (with the exception that surely she was sad to leave behind John and Rosie) Mary was content when she was dying. She had her shot, her crystalline perfect moment with a man she loved more than anything, even if she couldn’t stay because her past would always catch up with her.

So Mary knew she was always going to die. And Mary got to die looking at her perfect husband–a good man, a faithful man, who, yes, isn’t perfect, and yes, toyed with a possibility of indiscretion, but that doesn’t change who John Watson is and it didn’t distract her in that last moment from seeing who he was.

When Mary says "Who you really are doesn't matter"

 (Sherlock meta by Ivy Blossom)

Q: [...] How do you read Mary's presiding over the last minutes of The Final Problem in that context, saying that who Sherlock and John 'really' are doesn't matter and only their adventures do...?

A: This is how I read the sort of unfortunately-worded “it doesn’t matter who you really are” line:

The theme of Sherlock as an entire four series arc is that Sherlock both is and isn’t what he says he is. He isn’t a sociopath, but he is a brilliant consulting detective who solves crimes for fun. Sherlock’s actual self, the one he himself didn’t entirely understand until the end, is not what the legend suggests that he is, but that doesn’t matter. Sherlock is actually a loving and sweet man, deeply and probably permanently traumatized by the events of his childhood. His greatness isn’t impaired by the fact that he’s the product of tragedy, that his desire to solve puzzles and crimes is a psychological wound that he picks at and worries endlessly, or that he can see through others but couldn’t see into himself. That’s not something he’s going to show off to the world, and not really something he wants people to know. That’s private, and that’s okay. He’s allowed his privacy. His greatness and his legend isn’t impaired by the fact that it’s a little bit fake. Because it’s fake in a way that is still actually true.

And we learned in this series that the same is true for John. He too isn’t what he appears to be. He’s a war hero, a moral compass, the angel on Sherlock’s shoulder, but he is capable of great cruelty, betrayal, and violence. Like Sherlock, John is permanently broken. To Sherlock, he is a conductor of light, the person who leads him to do the right thing. John is capable of profoundly failing on the moral front, but again, it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t detract from what he’s capable of. He still is what he is, he conducts light all the same. In spite of the failures that demonstrate how much John is as much of a fake as Sherlock is, it’s him who transforms Sherlock into a good man he is capable of being, and it’s John who brings him peace. Even mired in the depths of his faults, John makes Sherlock better.

I’m not bothered by Mary narrating this, personally. Here’s what: a final narration can’t be John, and it can’t be Sherlock. It’s about them, not about just Sherlock, and that needs to be one step removed. It can’t be a conversation between them, either. I feel like we got the last of the frank conversations between Sherlock and John in The Lying Detective, and every other intimate conversation they have is going to be behind closed doors.

Someone had to narrate it. It’s an echo of Mycroft’s narration of what might become of them at the end of A Study in Pink. I suppose it could have been Mycroft again at the end. Mary threw herself into a bullet; I guess that final narration helps explain why she did that, why John being with Sherlock was so important. It’s because the legend is the two of them in a scruffy flat, ready to help the desperate, the unloved, the persecuted, now and always. She saw that, and she helps them to see that. And so they are.

People in Sherlock's life and what they taught him

 (Sherlock meta by o0katiekins0o)

I think about his draw to Irene and later Mary, how they are both people like him. They show him that people like them can make their way in the world. That there are places in life for them and, by extension, him.

Irene taught him romantic love was possible for him. Mary taught him family was possible for him. And Euros taught him that, not only were those things POSSIBLE, but they were things he actually had and was at risk of losing completely.

It almost felt like envy “Like always, you have everything and I have nothing.” She taught him what it truly meant to be alone. And no, it did not protect her.

A final character swerve is with Mary

 (Sherlock meta by marsdaydream)

A final character swerve is with Mary. She is primed to be an excellent villain. In “The Empty Hearse,” she uses the exact same phrase on John that Charles Magnussen later would: “You should have that on a t-shirt.” Since the universe rarely offers such coincidence, it seems an omen. When we learn that she is actually a trained assassin who chooses to shoot Sherlock in the chest instead of simply talking to him, she ups the stakes. Then, in “The Abominable Bride,” we get the suggestion that she’s secretly working for Mycroft and might have other shady dealings yet to be revealed.

“The Six Thatchers” drags Mary’s AGRA past to the forefront. When the betrayal of her team resurfaces for her, she drugs Sherlock and goes on the run again, not giving her husband more than a note of good-bye. Bizarrely, though, we are to believe that Mary redeems herself with her leap in front of Sherlock. Good as it may have been, with that single act, she becomes an elevated martyr; she abruptly turns from self-serving stealth agent to self-sacrificing saint. There is no arc to the redemption. We do not get to see her lay a path to forgiveness, change her ways through her consistent behavior, earn our love. She simply “gave herself permission to have an ordinary life,” and when that didn’t seem to work out, she took off, not wanting John and Sherlock “hanging off her gun arm,” only returning when she’s tracked down by the duo and the other surviving member of her team. Despite this, taking the bullet in the aquarium wiped her slate clean.

It is even more difficult to swallow that Mary then becomes the voice that instructs John and Sherlock how to behave. Mary never seemed to treat John with much respect, let alone to know the inner workings of John’s heart; Sherlock is the one who loves John more than anyone (if we take the fact that he never once considers shooting John over Mycroft in “The Final Problem”) and can predict John’s behavior weeks out, so why is Mary the one offering the infomercial on how John operates internally? It is believable for Mrs. Hudson to throw the boys back together—she’s lived with them, cares for them as her own sons, and truly wants them to be happy. But Mary has not fairly achieved that right.

And Mary certainly did not earn the last word of the series in which she blithely informs John and Sherlock that she knows “who you really are…but who you really are doesn’t matter.” In a show that has billed itself not as a detective story, but as a story about a detective, how could that ever be true? If she tells them (and the audience) to focus only on the adventures and not the men behind the myth, then we all will have missed the very point of this entire show.

Does John really love Mary?

 (Sherlock Meta by Ivy Blossom and sussexbound)

Question: hello, sorry for showing up on your doorstep all out the sudden, i don't know if you take asks or not, if not then i apologize. but if you do, there's something I'd like to ask because I always value your insight on Sherlock. See, many people insist that John doesn't love Mary at all and even claim he never did which is driving me nuts, because taking into consideration human emotional complexity and the bbc canon, I disagree. And you know John so well, I'd love to see your perspective on this.

Ivy Blossom: 

Well hello there, stranger, standing here on my doorstep! Please, come on in!

First off: I love the idea that I know John well. He drops by the library from time to time, we go for a pint, I help him with his blog. I’m his sister’s ex, but he and I got along better than either of us did with her, so.

I can’t imagine a version of this story where John doesn’t love Mary. We’re at a point, here after we’ve seen The Six Thatchers but nothing more, where there is a clear suggestion that John is cheating on Mary, and many are shocked and appalled by this. How could ethical, moral-compass John do such a thing? Well: how could ethical, moral-compass John marry someone he never felt any love for? I don’t think he would, and I don’t think he did. John definitely loves Mary.

I think it’s safe to say, in the context of this story, that John and Sherlock are soulmates. They were built with a piece missing in the shape of the other, and each of them become their best and most whole selves when they’re together. This is true no matter who else enters either of their lives, no matter how much either of them loves anyone else. This core construction is permanent and unconditional. It’s practically biological. They don’t even have to like it or want it; it just is. John (or Sherlock!) loving anyone else cannot lessen the reality of this connection, and the foundational bond between Sherlock and John doesn’t lessen the love they feel for other people. Complicate it? Certainly. It may even make it impossible for either of them to properly commit to anyone else. But love isn’t a zero sum game even at the worst of times.

There is no question in my mind that John loves Mary. He loves the version of her that she wants to be. John gets restless in his marriage before Mary shoots Sherlock and her secrets start to spill out, but that’s not a statement on how much John loves her. No one but Sherlock can fill the gap in John that Sherlock fills. He certainly loves her while she can’t.

If John knew Mary’s whole past, if he had known her before she became Mary Morstan, would he have loved her? Mary tells us he wouldn’t, and it seems she’s right. John is having a hard time accepting the lies Mary tells. He doesn’t like her behaviour or her choices when her past self creeps back. Would he have found his way through his anger and feelings of betrayal and committed fully to his marriage again? Possibly. He isn’t ready to give up on her entirely.



married Mary’s fantasy version of herself rather than her reality, and sometimes reality seeps in. John no longer trusts Mary, and that’s difficult terrain for love. But I don’t think John stopped loving her by the end of The Six Thatchers. He is angry with her, and disappointed, but he still loves her.

Barring any rug-pulling details that force us to change our understanding of her death, perhaps Mary has demonstrated that she was capable of reshaping herself to be the Mary Watson she wanted to be. She might have genuinely become exactly who she pretended to be. And John would have loved her.

sussexbound:

I feel like the ‘Miss Me’ video, with the “Go to Hell, Sherlock” message was meant to be a rug pull indicating that her sacrifice was probably not as selfless as it appeared.

But that being said, I agree with the rest of this. Of course John loved her once, or at least the woman he thought she was. He would never have married someone he didn’t love. And I do think his apology in HLV was sincere, and I do think that he wanted to try to make it work, because he thought it was what he should do (they were about to have a child together, for one), he thought he could do, and Sherlock was feeding him the surgery story and acting like all was forgiven.

I felt like John was feeling horribly torn all the way through TST, and part of his anger at Sherlock at the end, is really more guilt and anger at himself. He was straying with bus lady, his heart was still tied so much to Sherlock, and that love is always there, always in the background of everything. He was feeling unappreciated and shut out by both Sherlock and Mary who seemed to have their own little friendship which mostly excluded him.

When he was out with Sherlock, he shut his phone off, tried to ignore Mary, because he valued the Sherlock time, and clearly felt like she was butting-in, in some ways. But she was his wife, and he should want to spend time with her, shouldn’t he? And he had a new baby he loved, and should be there for. And Sherlock and Mary got along, which was–good.

And then Mary just ran off, and he and Sherlock had a plan, they put a tracer on her AGRA drive, and then they just let her run, for weeks at least, before they went and got her. Why? Maybe they just cherished the time together, and dragged it out? And by the time they got there John wasn’t even sure if he liked Mary any more, which is sad. And yet, when they got home, he was still trying to make it work (even though he was drinking again).

John was just being torn in so many different directions. I get exhausted just thinking about it. I feel for him in TST, I really do. It’s a very difficult place to be in, and now, with everything that’s happened, he has a tough road ahead, and some very difficult decisions to make.

Why does Mary not recognize Sherlock?

 (Sherlock Meta by Ivy Blossom)

It seems odd to me that Mary does not recognize Sherlock when he shows up at the restaurant in The Empty Hearse. 

If she is secretly employed by Moriarty, or is Moriarty, or is in any way related to Moriarty and his various and nefarious enterprises, either as an assassin, a colleague, a family member, or whatever, surely she would recognize Sherlock right off. If her purpose in lying to John and staying close to him is in any way related to Moriarty’s plans for Sherlock, she definitely should have.

If she is none of these things, and is merely a secret contract assassin with no ties nor interest in Sherlock Holmes whatsoever, it’s still odd hat she didn’t recognize him, given a) Sherlock’s notoriety, combined with b) her boyfriend’s past and his current status as Sherlock’s mourning best friend. She’s surely seen pictures of him. How did she not recognize him?

If she did recognize him for either of these very reasonable reasons, but chose to pretend she did not recognize him when John did in the restaurant in The Empty Hearse, what purpose could it possibly serve?

Why on earth did Sherlock investigate Mary's guests and Mary's ex-boyfriend but not Mary herself? 

(Sherlock Meta by beejohnlocked and ivyblossom)

Anonymous asked: 

Why on earth did Sherlock investigate Mary's guests (I assume Archie was one of hers since John never acknowledged him) and Mary's ex-boyfriend but not Mary herself? He found out about her stolen identity and that she'd been on the run for five years pretty quickly after getting shot, so it must not have been that hard to find information on her. He plans every detail of the wedding and studies David's Twitter habits but doesn't once think of at least googling her like he did Sholto?

beejohnlocked:

Oh nonny, there are so many possible answers to this question. I’ll take a stab at it and give my personal reading of the situation.

I think Sherlock had a huge blind spot when it came to Mary for no other reason than she was John’s chosen person. Sherlock came back from a two year absence in John’s life, after killing himself in front of John, and Mary had already been in the picture for several months. To say Sherlock feels immense guilt over what he did I think is an understatement. You see it in the way that he goes above and beyond as John’s best man and in the way he treats everyone around him more kindly. When he left, he hurt John badly. It doesn’t matter if John forgives him or not because he isn’t over it and Sherlock knows this. In some ways, it’s a simple case of “shoot-the-messenger” syndrome. Look at what happens in TGG when Sherlock to deuces that Moriarty is gay. Molly blames SHERLOCK for spoiling everything. And keep in mind, Molly wasn’t even serious about Jim. Now let’s look at the situation in TEH. John is engaged to marry this woman. If Sherlock brings up the misgivings he has about her, it’s possible, (even likely given John’s state of mind at the time), that John will get angry at him about it, especially given Sherlock’s track record of rudely picking up on the personal business/flaws of others.

That being said, this idea that Sherlock was “slow” as Mary puts it, I don’t believe for a minute. Sherlock knew there was something off about Mary. But he didn’t know what it was, and John chose her to be with, and I think Sherlock decided to give her the benefit of whatever doubt he had for John’s sake. We saw Sherlock notice about the skip code, and we saw him notice about Mary knowing Sholto’s room. He knows that a lot of people don’t like her. He deduced that she is a liar. So this idea that Sherlock doesn’t realize that there’s something off about Mary is incorrect as far as I’m concerned. For example, if you look at something like the David situation, to me it shows that Sherlock doesn’t trust Mary either. If Mary had an ex-boyfriend hung up on her but had no interest in anything happening between them I think Sherlock could trust her to take care of herself where David is concerned. He certainly would not feel the need to downgrade David’s relationship with Mary and make it so that he can only see Mary when John is there to supervise. If Sherlock trusted Mary, he wouldn’t have to worry about what would happen with David and Mary alone, would he? But it is a concern for him, which means that Sherlock doesn’t completely trust her.

Sherlock is focusing on the things that he can control. He can’t control John and the fact that he’s chosen to marry this woman. But he CAN control David and get him to back the hell off.

As for why Sherlock didn’t investigate Mary, he knows that there is likely something to find, something less than good. Given that Sherlock just spent two years keeping something huge from John and feeling guilty about it, if he knew for sure that there was something bad about Mary he knows he would have to tell John. I think Sherlock is just hoping that whatever is in Mary’s past isn’t too bad and just leaving it as it is and choosing to believe that she loves John and will do right by him. Blissful ignorance as it were. Thanks!

If anyone has anything to add, or if you disagree, feel free to respond!!

ivyblossom:

Interesting. I think Mary was right; Sherlock was “slow” to figure her out.

Sherlock didn’t think there was anything off about Mary, as far as we can tell. He thinks he can see what she is, and he accepts the evidence of his senses. We see his deductions about her; they were overwhelmingly normal and upfront. The secret tattoo, her political leanings, the fact that she bakes. Public things, private things, all right there and obvious to Sherlock. Everything he sees is reasonable, rational, logical, and normal, making her seem to be exactly what she says she is.

He knows that she’s a liar. But what’s that mean? Everybody lies. Is that something to suggest that her whole identity is false? Everything Sherlock can see about her is 100% harmless and normal, even her secrets. Even the fact that she lies. John lies, too. What he doesn’t know is that the deductions he’s making about Mary are themselves based on lies.

Mary make herself appear to be exactly what she wants people to think she is, not only in what she says, but in the expression on her face, what she wears, how she holds herself, and what she chooses to say. She is a master actor, perfectly method. She is very good at taking on a new identity and making it so close to real that it nearly becomes so. She was good enough to fool Sherlock, and Sherlock was fooled.

I’m sure Sherlock did investigate Mary. He found out what everyone in John’s family thinks of her. He knows about her ex-boyfriend, their interactions. You don’t get to the ex-boyfriend without stalking Mary. To complicate things further, he likes her. He doesn’t like a lot of people, but he likes Mary. And she likes him. She’s a friend. He thought they understood each other and cared about each other. Liking her helped him to ignore things he shouldn’t have.

It wasn’t belated research that revealed Mary to Sherlock. It was new evidence.

Sherlock doesn’t know how wrong he is about Mary until the moment that she shoots him. He steps forward when she tells him not to; the person he’s certain Mary is wouldn’t pull the trigger when a friend is offering to help her. But he’s wrong. That bullet is the evidence that he doesn’t know Mary at all.

Understanding that resets Sherlock’s sensor. He combs back over his interactions with her to see what he’s missed. It’s inner research, not a google search.

If the internet could uncover Mary’s secrets, killing Magnussen wouldn’t have done much good. Sherlock only learns what he knows about Mary accidentally threatening her, and then by verifying what he guesses to be true through testing her and asking her directly. In other words, the “slow” way.

The Manipulation by Mary Morstan

 (Sherlock Meta by welovethebeekeeper)

It struck me that from the beginning there was something fishy about Mary.



Mary pretends not to recognise Sherlock. Even if we look at Mary here without knowledge of her past as revealed later in HLV, Mary is not believable. Let’s say she is an ex assassin, running from that life, assuming a new identity as a nurse and just happens to fall for one of the doctors in the practice. She supports her new boyfriend through his grief from losing his best friend, even pays respect at said dead friends grave. Who amongst us would NOT have googled Sherlock Holmes? It’s what we do when we enter a new relationship, we have a need to know about that person. Especially an issue which is badly affecting our new partner. Plus we have the fact that dead best friend was famous. OK, wow, photos and news reports are available. It’s not like Sherlock is any run of the mill looking dude here; he is damn unique, you wouldn’t forget that face in a hurry. Plus there is innuendo concerning your new boyfriend and his dead best friend; hints of a gay romance, enough to put any new girlfriend’s gaydar into operation. Yet when dead best friend arrives as a waiter at your table one evening, and your boyfriend is having an emotional crisis on the other side of that table, you look at the waiter and don’t know who this is? We know Mary is a smart cookie, observant, and yet she struggles to recognise the man before her? Fishy.



Then Mary suprizingly takes Sherlock’s side in the ensueing fight between Sherlock and John. She is not outraged that her boyfriend has been duped, hurt, manipulated, oh no, Mary begins to support Sherlock. By the time we reach the kebab shop we have John feeling alone, with Mary and Sherlock in some weird union of sorts.



Mary is acting as if John is behaving outrageously, she is giving Sherlock signals that she is agreeing with him, lulling him into a sense of simpatico.

Outside the kebab shop Mary choses to remain with Sherlock while John goes to flag a cab. She offers Sherlock help in bringing John around and back to Sherlock. She KNOWS exactly how to work Sherlock.



And how to work John.



The next we see is Mary teasing John about meeting Sherlock again, in a way that is filled with some vague sexual tease. Mary sounds like she is talking to a girl friend here about seeing a guy that the friend is interested in. It is almost as if Mary is using the sexual tension John feels for Sherlock to move him as a chess piece on the board. Move him into position.



Mary easily outwits both these men and by the time we see her ensconced in 221B, she has won. She has both men exactly where she needs them to be, in fact Mary is relishing her role, flaunting her power of observation and manipulation. The scene is demeaning towards the men and disturbing in it’s blatant power dynamic; a third party has moved in to the world of Sherlock and John and utterly destroyed the very heart of who they are. No wonder we get the image of a ‘horned devil’ at scene end.



Finally the coup de grâce, the wedding. Mary keeps on twisting that knife into Sherlock’s heart, and is openly gleeful about the effect she is having on him. Sherlock tries to strike back, his best man’s speech is a triumph of a love letter to John, he undergoes a life changing self revelation in the midst of it, he summons John back to him in several ways, he almost pulls off a ‘hail Mary pass’. But then Mary brings out the big guns, her secret plan for a wedding gift to Sherlock; she allows Sherlock to deduce her pregnancy. Check mate.

Looking at Mary from a non-Johnlock perspective, I can admire her skill and planning, what I cannot see is a woman in love. It is only in HLV when her need for John surfaces that I finally see true emotion in the character. Her desperation to keep John and her fake life is Mary’s defining emotion, and it is selfish, reckless and rings very true. It is the only real emotion I believe we see from Mary in S3. Everything else reads as manipulation toward a goal, as CAM says she is a very clever, very bad girl. I can admire that from a distance. As a Johnlocker I just need John to start fighting, not Sherlock, John. Because by the end of HLV John knows he’s been played, John knows he made the wrong choice, John needs to sort this.

“Mary Watson” isn’t good enough 

 (Sherlock Meta by Ivy Blossom)

The only thing I wanted out of Mary Morstan in Sherlock is that, if John is going to betray her or abandon her, which I think he arguably does in the original stories, (though it’s never framed that way, of course) that Mary return the favour with at least equal force.

What is clear already in His Last Vow is that John is not happy in his very new marriage. He’s having nightmares. His tremour has returned (but not yet the limp). He on the verge of bolting, keeping his things as close to packed as he can. He hasn’t seen Sherlock for a month, and a month is far too long, as far as John’s concerned.

In The Empty Hearse, Mary is delighted by John’s fixation on Sherlock. She teases him about it, encourages their relationship. She appeared to be completely unthreatened by it. By His Last Vow, John has worn through her last nerve. When we see Mary comforting her neighbour in her sitting room early in the morning, she is pretty much fed up with John’s whining, and I don’t blame her. They are both chafing inside that relationship. It’s a holding pattern for both of them.

Both of them find a release valve, and it’s the same one. Mary asks Sherlock to take John out and run him, which should appease John for a while and will give her the freedom to stop playing happy housewife. She needs to go take care of the business that has been plaguing her. As Sherlock notes, there must have been a part of her that had been missing that.

Mary and John both have the same problem at the opening of His Last Vow. They’re bored. And they’re bored for the same reason: they’re both trying to be ordinary.

When John asks Mary if “Mary Watson” is good enough for her, she says yes, but I think she’s wrong. It’s not good enough. It names and shapes one part of her persona, one that is arguably completely false. It shuts out the rest of her quite deliberately. John doesn’t even want to know about it. He doesn’t want to hear about it, and he doesn’t even want it named.

I think that’s a tragedy. I’ll be honest with you, I love the little peek into the rest of Mary’s character. She’s tremendous.

She’s cold-blooded, cruel, impatient, rude, conniving, ruthless, and manipulative. She’s at least as observant as the Holmeses. She’s smarter than John, and quite possibly smarter than Sherlock. When Wiggins poses as a beggar she dismisses him loudly and impatiently, but gives him money anyway, in spite of being in the middle of something quite important. She believes in social justice. She’s psychopath who voted lib dem. She’ll probably vote labour next time around. She bakes her own bread, can tell when Sherlock is fibbing, and can shoot a hole in a spinning coin. And killing (presumably) bad guys on a freelance basis is what she does for a living. She’s not ashamed of it. She’s proud of it. It’s not a stretch to say she probably enjoys it.

While her “Mary Watson” persona is demonstrably a lie, there is likely some truth to it (as there inevitably would be). I’m not sure what to think about her feelings about John (too complicated to judge at the moment, I’m afraid), but it’s clear that she likes Sherlock. While it wasn’t even close to enough to stop her from putting a bullet in his chest, I think they were genuinely friends. Unlike Sherlock, feelings don’t get in Mary’s way.

Is “Mary Watson” good enough? No. It can’t be. Neither she nor John can go back to their ordinary life as if none of this happened and be happy, which appears to be the plan. It didn’t work the first time, even before Mary shot Sherlock and her secrets spilled out. I can’t imagine a baby will make it any better.

When “Mary Watson” breaks apart and the real AGRA steps out, it will be spectacular.