isitandwonder:

gloriascott93:

There’s some great replies to that thread about John “choosing Mary” and whether it holds up to scrutiny or represents a inherent contradiction in the narrative.

As an aside, for me the Mary arc drives home for me that ACD dispatching Mary was a mark of realizing (even if out of something we might less generously call laziness or a lack of imagination) that he had created such a tight formula with his protagonists that Mary was a disruption that was easier doing away with than having to constantly accommodate.
It was easy for Moffat and Gatiss to characterize this as sexist and then “fix” it. But that remains for me itself not half as cut n dried as one might think.
I’ll not rehash old territory but: Moffat and Gatiss didn’t pick up on a very appealing feature of the stories – some seriously kick ass women clients and their parts in a series of gothic horrors. Who for their time were daily fighting to survive independently in a system built to ensure they didn’t have independence. There are some truly heroic women despite their victimization. COPP remains for me a marvel in this respect – I still feel a thrill of admiration every time she chooses to take the position even though she knows something weird is afoot. She has courage. She is not fearless. But she acts anyway. And she’s not the only one.
Kitty in the illustrious client is another personal favorite. These women feature throughout the short stories – SOLI and SPEC too: you are a woman, you know something is wrong and have reason to fear for your safety or even your life and you choose to walk back into the “lion’s den” despite your fear. For these women the danger of the domestic realm is a key element in the gothic sensibility of the canon.

The women in Mofftiss collective imagination are there all right but to my mind there is a quintessential “Gibson girl” spunk missing that ACD for all his era-conforming faults captures so brilliantly and often with incredible economy.

I remain resolute that they made a massive error in trying to redeem Mary. They didn’t earn it.
And I know this will probably make me a huge outlier but the more time passes the more I find their evolving backstory for Mrs Hudson ridiculous. Their version of her shifts from being a truth teller into something she doesn’t need to be and with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. The idea that ACD didn’t think Mrs H. had the capacity for bravery is ridiculous- had they not read EMPT? She becomes in BBC Sherlock then a parody. Her best lines are when she is pointing out the emotionally obvious. Why is her ability to care and forgive and always speak her own mind not enough? She’s like a mirror to Norbury. And alongside Mary and Eurus I can’t help but think they really just don’t get something about writing women. (A charge often made about Moffat I have in the past resisted.)
I love the canon because its 2 protagonists are amazing. The stories don’t need more heroes. But they are there. Women bucking against a system. Surviving.
In a contemporary setting so many of the women get pushed into extremes rather than sharing that same basic resilience. Molly in TAB is a shining but perhaps (because it’s set back in ACD’s era) telling exception to the rule. It was a stroke of genius to have her disguise herself as a man to reach her potential.

By having in Eurus their actual “Moriarty” [big bad] be a woman, Mary had then, I presume, in their mind to be a mere decoy villain, along too with Moriarty. (Despite him being such a cleverly drawn character that far exceeds his canon incarnation.)
Had they not created Eurus they could have followed through with Villian!Mary. And I stand by my longstanding pun:
John Watson was literally “sleeping with the enemy” and didn’t know it.
And that is where the perils faced by the canon heroines and the gothic aesthetic of fear become ripe for mining:
His domestic world away from 221b was primed for the deep gothic terror of the canon: you are not safe in the house that circumstances have made your home. You are trapped by circumstance in the place you *should* be safest. That is the scariest thing to Sherlock Holmes of canon. [See his incredible speech in COPP. TLDR: At least in the darkened foggy alleys of London someone might hear you scream.]
And in that “home” you will slowly realize something is wrong. The particular uncanny sensation of “unheimlich” is all through the canon. The veiled “sister” in SHOS or the absolute horrifying terror of DEVI, which is the terror captured in SPEC turned up to ninety.
What a missed opportunity. For John to slowly sense something is wrong but not understand why but separated from Sherlock realize he is isolated. For he and Sherlock to keep secrets from each other. For the audience to know Mary is dangerous and for there to be a cat and mouse game. To make John the Violet Hunter who despite fear walks into danger – a quality they share. THAT was the twist I wanted.
The Empty Hearse appeared it would deliver it and immediately snatched it away.
She was the domestic facade. What an incredibly clever piece of symbolism. But they didn’t follow through. They didn’t let John’s bravery run its course, only his loyalty to her which turns out to apparently not be misplaced at all. Confusing characterization of a man who doesn’t like his wife one minute and lifts her up as he one who taught him who he is is the next aside, why does that feel like a betrayal of canon and its women heroines?
Because in the world of ACD the home you find yourself in can be just as, if not more, scary than meeting a lunatic psychopath in an asylum. What thrills the reader is the idea that you are a prisoner in your own home and don’t realize the windows are locked not to keep out predators but to so as to keep you in until it’s all too late.
They missed one of the most deliciously satisfying threads of the canon. That deep unsettling and incredibly Victorian threat: that the truly ghastly is hidden in something as innocuous as some simple modifications to the ventilation. Or to put it in modern parlance: the call is coming from inside the house.
They had John right there with her and they missed it.
And so too lost is that Villain!Mary could have been meted justice by her own machinations (like being bitten by your own snake. Or mauled by your dog. Or attacked with oil of vitriol. Or trapped by the closing of a heavy stone trap door to a cellar.) What a thoroughly wasted opportunity.

God, you paint such a beautifully chilling picture of a suffocating, perilous chamber drama. This could have been so good if they’d just stuck to what they had set up – and what ACD had provided them with: an intense, intimate triangle. Even Lady Di has said that three make a marriage a bit crowded – so, there’s your suspense and tension. But instead of exploiting this menage a trois, they branched out with Eurus, Moriarty, Sherlock’s back story, Victor… it really got too crowded to keep up the excitement.