mathildalocks

[mathildalocks]

The chemistry between Holmes and Watson is canon and BBC Sherlock cannot say a damn word about this.

“As an institution I was like the violin, the shag tobacco, the old black pipe, the index books, and others perhaps less excusable. When it was a case of active work and a comrade was needed upon whose nerve he could place some reliance, my role was obvious. But apart from this I had uses. I was a whetstone for his mind. I stimulated him.”

—

John Watson about Sherlock Holmes, from The Adventure of the Creeping Man  (via mathildalocks)

Regarding the canon debate going on today: the direct quote shows us  what buddies are for each other, air to their lungs, pleasure to their mind, other things perhaps less excusable….violin, pipe, tobacco, anything and everything that makes Sherlock Holmes is in John Watson. The drunk rizzla game on the show is a deep deep projection of these types of passages, I am you and you are me. Everything I can tell about you also in a way defines me despite the fact that we are completely different in our social personas.

Above is how ACD wrote this, openly. He made John say he was the institution, the comrade, the nourishment for Sherlock’s soul and the stimulant for his brain basically everything and anything he needed in this life. Here you are fretting over the possibility of this being translated into physical intimacy and of course at the same time fretting over us; highly intelligent, well-read, creative women and some men, enjoying that possibility. Dude, they don’t even need it at this point, ACD wrote one of the best romances ever. The guy was reading Pride and Prejudice while writing The Final Problem; the same guy who you think was a technical, medical expert.  (Evidence here)

also it’s dirty

(via arthurconandoyle)

“He stroked me and I sang; I rested on his lips and he inhaled me. He thumbed through me as needed, I got into his veins and made him high. When he needed a strong and fearless partner I knew what to do, but even when I didn’t, he needed me. He sharpened his mind on me. I stimulated him.”

Just sayin’.

(via ivyblossom)

As I said on this general subject long ago now, the story of how we became human is fundamentally a story about love, no matter how you choose to define it. To talk about what Watson means to Holmes, you simply must talk about his humanity, the things that make him who he is as a character, that humanize him (and Holmes needs it)– without Watson to immortalize him yet also ground him in humane particulars, Holmes is just a man who has an obscure hobby. As John le Carre wrote, Watson is extraordinary and more importantly, he’s *necessary* for Holmes’ appeal, for “when he is alone, he is only half the fellow he becomes the moment faithful Watson takes back the tale”.

Is not that I’m not vulnerable to this, or I don’t feel the warmth and passionate intensity with which Conan Doyle sometimes portrayed them. That Romantic, even Gothic ideal of soulmates who complete one another– that’s the stuff I love most about the discourse about pure love that we saw in English literature around the beginning of the 19th century. This is absolutely an aspect of the same conceptual thread we see explored in Bronte’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ or Oscar Wilde’s tragic fairy tales, such as the one about the nightingale. Quite striking to see these ideals mentioned in any account of masculine Victorian rationalism, though I’ll note that this is also Watson’s POV. He romanticizes what he can. It’s said in sweeping and typically sentimental Victorian prose, but he’s essentially saying he thinks of his role in Holmes’ life as that of a indispensable tool, a trusted object of daily use. This is not only where we get that ‘I’m you’ in TSoT but Sherlock’s proclamation that John is his ‘conductor of light’ in THOB, as well. No matter how you slice of, Watson is necessary for Holmes to exist, and he knew it. In Conan Doyle’s stories, the presence of one essentially created the need for the other. That was, broadly speaking, their function. Sherlock thinks John wants him to be ‘Sherlock Holmes’, the detective in the funny hat, and so he is: that remains the dynamic.

I think it’s definitely true that they don’t need it; Holmes and Watson are tied on such a deep and abstract level (of pure narrative compulsion) that romance is beside the point. Their story is already epically Romantic, if not romantic. Like Achilles and Patroclus equal the Trojan War, much more than Paris and Helen herself, the hero’s story is driven entirely by the shadow of the other. And our Patroclus knows his place in history– in this case, he wrote the story. I just think it took more than a hundred years to make their narrative only humanly romantic: just about Sherlock and John. Two people whose grand ideas about each other often serve to blind them and keep them apart; two people who’re wrong about why the other needs them, after all.

(via mild-lunacy)

Great addition by @mild-lunacy and the humanizing arc of epic romance! They can’t function without each other. After all #sherlockholmeslives #johnwatsonlives

(via mathildalocks)

Bringing this ACD baby back for broken hearts.

[mathildalocks]

“As an institution I was like the violin, the shag tobacco, the old black pipe, the index books, and others perhaps less excusable. When it was a case of active work and a comrade was needed upon whose nerve he could place some reliance, my role was obvious. But apart from this I had uses. I was a whetstone for his mind. I stimulated him.”

—

John Watson about Sherlock Holmes, from The Adventure of the Creeping Man  (via mathildalocks)

Regarding the canon debate going on today: the direct quote shows us  what buddies are for each other, air to their lungs, pleasure to their mind, other things perhaps less excusable….violin, pipe, tobacco, anything and everything that makes Sherlock Holmes is in John Watson. The drunk rizzla game on the show is a deep deep projection of these types of passages, I am you and you are me. Everything I can tell about you also in a way defines me despite the fact that we are completely different in our social personas.

Above is how ACD wrote this, openly. He made John say he was the institution, the comrade, the nourishment for Sherlock’s soul and the stimulant for his brain basically everything and anything he needed in this life. Here you are fretting over the possibility of this being translated into physical intimacy and of course at the same time fretting over us; highly intelligent, well-read, creative women and some men, enjoying that possibility. Dude, they don’t even need it at this point, ACD wrote one of the best romances ever. The guy was reading Pride and Prejudice while writing The Final Problem; the same guy who you think was a technical, medical expert.  (Evidence here)

also it’s dirty

(via arthurconandoyle)

“He stroked me and I sang; I rested on his lips and he inhaled me. He thumbed through me as needed, I got into his veins and made him high. When he needed a strong and fearless partner I knew what to do, but even when I didn’t, he needed me. He sharpened his mind on me. I stimulated him.”

Just sayin’.

(via ivyblossom)

As I said on this general subject long ago now, the story of how we became human is fundamentally a story about love, no matter how you choose to define it. To talk about what Watson means to Holmes, you simply must talk about his humanity, the things that make him who he is as a character, that humanize him (and Holmes needs it)– without Watson to immortalize him yet also ground him in humane particulars, Holmes is just a man who has an obscure hobby. As John le Carre wrote, Watson is extraordinary and more importantly, he’s *necessary* for Holmes’ appeal, for “when he is alone, he is only half the fellow he becomes the moment faithful Watson takes back the tale”.

Is not that I’m not vulnerable to this, or I don’t feel the warmth and passionate intensity with which Conan Doyle sometimes portrayed them. That Romantic, even Gothic ideal of soulmates who complete one another– that’s the stuff I love most about the discourse about pure love that we saw in English literature around the beginning of the 19th century. This is absolutely an aspect of the same conceptual thread we see explored in Bronte’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ or Oscar Wilde’s tragic fairy tales, such as the one about the nightingale. Quite striking to see these ideals mentioned in any account of masculine Victorian rationalism, though I’ll note that this is also Watson’s POV. He romanticizes what he can. It’s said in sweeping and typically sentimental Victorian prose, but he’s essentially saying he thinks of his role in Holmes’ life as that of a indispensable tool, a trusted object of daily use. This is not only where we get that ‘I’m you’ in TSoT but Sherlock’s proclamation that John is his ‘conductor of light’ in THOB, as well. No matter how you slice of, Watson is necessary for Holmes to exist, and he knew it. In Conan Doyle’s stories, the presence of one essentially created the need for the other. That was, broadly speaking, their function. Sherlock thinks John wants him to be ‘Sherlock Holmes’, the detective in the funny hat, and so he is: that remains the dynamic.

I think it’s definitely true that they don’t need it; Holmes and Watson are tied on such a deep and abstract level (of pure narrative compulsion) that romance is beside the point. Their story is already epically Romantic, if not romantic. Like Achilles and Patroclus equal the Trojan War, much more than Paris and Helen herself, the hero’s story is driven entirely by the shadow of the other. And our Patroclus knows his place in history– in this case, he wrote the story. I just think it took more than a hundred years to make their narrative only humanly romantic: just about Sherlock and John. Two people whose grand ideas about each other often serve to blind them and keep them apart; two people who’re wrong about why the other needs them, after all.

(via mild-lunacy)

Great addition by @mild-lunacy and the humanizing arc of epic romance! They can’t function without each other. After all #sherlockholmeslives #johnwatsonlives

(via mathildalocks)

Bringing this ACD baby back for broken hearts.

[mathildalocks]

With this, I think I am completely ready to move onto a new adaptation.

This did it for me. I do not want to see versions similar to BBC Sherlock. I want to see new adaptations of the source material, brave ones if they can be. But not another maladaptation which destroys the core of this duo.

This is unfair.

“Dr Watson (or a more pleasant friend.)” I hate what they’ve done to Watson’s character. It’s inappropriate for the original character, and disrespectful to Martin.

I cannot believe that the showrunners have let this go, insulting a fine actor. Although I’m not really surprised, given how they trashed his character in S4.

[mathildalocks]

Almost a year later, here is what I think of about the demise of our beloved show Sherlock.

I am happy that things are coming out these days. Martin's comment on Call me by Your Name is a very timely arrival. It proves one more thing that we were certain of all along. BBC's Sherlock is a missed opportunity in portraying a unique romance. A story of two people who fall for each other regardless of their sexualities, their notions and perceptions of love affairs. Two people that simply belong together. Two actors who have the convincing chemistry to make film making history. They missed it.

Their place was taken and opportunity was taken by another beautiful story very soon after that. This is the reason behind Sherlock fandom's interest in Call Me By Your Name. It could have been you but it was wasted. And Martin Freeman is very well aware of it.

[mathildalocks]

This ^ ^

BBC Sherlock IS NOT a ‘modernization’ of ACD Sherlock Holmes

You know what. I’m mad at ‘the british tv channel that shall not be named’ (but will be named here anyway). 

I am. I am absolutely infuriated.

They went through Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories and saw the gay of the books… they knew how much it kept popping up in different adaptations of the stories (that is NOT a coincidence).  They saw the homosexual subtext that existed in Canon enough to put it in the show— then proceeded to make a JOKE out of it! A JOKE. They saw the gay that existed in CANON Sherlock Holmes books, added it to the show, and then proceeded to LAUGH IT OFF (beyond livid over this one).  

They also systematically went through each and every character from the canon stories and proceeded to dismantle them into the abuse normalizing problematic characters they are by season 4 (and insanely misogynistic where some are concerned).  And they put in -just enough- from canon to go “See these are them! These are the characters from the books” when they AREN’T. They simply ARE NOT. 

BBC Sherlock IS NOT reflective of ACD’s Sherlock Holmes Canon Characters.

AT ALL

Any Sherlockian who has read the books can hold them up to the show and show how basically all that televised fanfic version is— is a fanfic. It is NOTHING AT ALL like Canon and that isn’t just because they put it in the modern era.  They did NOT ‘modernize” the stories.  They made a DIFFERENT AU Modern Fanfic and then used names and references from the books.  BBC Sherlock itself has COMPLETELY DIFFERENT story and characters.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

You notice that the first two seasons were pretty good. That is because in those seasons there was more in the show that was reflective of what was in the stories— but they kept going further and further into the woods with adding in more of their own original content and writing until season 4 which was basically 99% all their own stories and based around original characters. It is NOT reflective of the past Sherlock Holmes stories AT ALL.

Molly - Original character 

Eurus - Original character

Mary Morstan - Original Character

“What’s that?” you say, “No that can’t be true! Mary married John from the books”. 

Yes. A character by the name of Mary Morstan married John from the books but you better believe it is not the ‘Assassin who works for the CIA’ that Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss wrote.  And even the aspects of Mary that WAS from the books -was not featured or used in the ‘Sherlock’ show-.  In fact she was separated that much further from the true Mary Morstan from the books considering that wasn’t even the character’s original name as they took it from someone else.  

Everything about the Mary Morstan that Moffat and Gatiss wrote is original content. Thus, -despite- the fact that she has the same name, it is still an original character even if they took a name from the book and slapped it on that original character.

I would argue that taking book names and slapping them on origional characters is a common theme with Mofftiss too.  Write a character with a different personality, background and storyline, find a name from the books to use for that character and then slap it on.  Nevermind the personality and characterisation of that character is a bare shadow of what the character by the same name in the books has and is like. 

(()@*$)(*%@>> IRENE ADLER… see this thread for an entire rant about THAT gutting and character destruction.)

They rely on the fact that most people have never seen or read the books.  That way they can lie and allude that ‘oh yeah sure these are the characters from the books, this is basically the story” when, No. NO THEY ARE NOT.

And most people have not read the books and do not realize how MUCH Sherlock and John (especially from season 4) are IN NO WAY AT ALL like Holmes and Watson from the books.  Not at ALL.  There are HUGE glaring differences.  One of them being that Watson is -very- devoted to Holmes, even AFTER the fall, and would kick S4 John’s arse up one way and down the next if he saw him lay even a finger on Sherlock Holmes.

Oh and then there is Sherlock Holmes himself!  Sherlock is deconstructed to be in a victimized role and that is -never pointed out-.  It is never said “hay, maybe this is not all entirely his fault and people should be apologizing for their own roles in issue too.”  No. He is abused and harangued constantly and yet it is all still painted as his fault and he -accepts- that!  He is verbally cast as a selfish unfeeling character, while at the same time we know he is not because in the show Sherlock shows a LOT of feeling for those around him.  He is constantly beaten down and everything is blamed on him with absolutely no recognition to the huge amount of effort he puts in for others or how others are also at fault for the issues that happen in the show.

In the the end we are left with a abusive John Watson and a Sherlock Holmes that I half wonder has some version of stockholm syndrome with how he constantly accepts the blame for everything despite some things obviously being the fault of unapologetic and abusive people surrounding him.  That is not them.  That is NOT the protective healer/guardian Dr. Watson or the thoughtful and curious Sherlock Holmes from the books.

-BBC Sherlock isn’t the books. It just isn’t. It isn’t the stories or the characters.  It is NOT ACD’s Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson… and BBC is NOT, in any way shape or form, a ‘modernization’ of the stories.  It is just another fanfic in a sea of fanfics, with a new world and characters.  It simply happened to be a very popular one for a while.

Moving on…

Beyond all that anger and fury— I love the fanfic and the fandom.

Because reading fanfic that people write, just off of BBC and without the author’s having read the true canon stories… that’s it… that’s them. Somehow despite Mofftiss attempt at systematic gutting of the characters through the seasons, the fandom had clung and kept the original idea that was shown.  They took the original understanding of the characters from the books that was reflected in the first few episodes, and kept it.  Kept it despite what was done to those characters and how they were twisted in later seasons and I love that.

I could totally see the canon Holmes/Watson characters doing many things that are done through fanfic.  I could.  Because ignoring S4 Sherlock and John…. the ones from prior seasons that sherlock fans envision are closer.   The dynamic reflected in some of the best fanfic out there, that’s them. Thats them from the true canon.  That dynamic of caring so much about each other and the sweetness they have towards each other.  That is totally Holmes and Watson from the books and it is fantastic.  

The fans really are better writers than the two guys who made a televised show and tried to ruin it with the last season (Intentionally or unintentionally).

No matter what those two men do to their one televised fanfic of a show, the fandom has a great grasp of what the characters are like.  So many fanfics reflect the dynamic that Holmes and Watson have from the books far better than Mofftiss ever did… I love that even with different characters, and through a different lense, the true dynamic of Holmes and Watson is alive and nothing… NOTHING that BBC ever does to try to backtrack and erase it will ever change that.  

Oh and because Sherlock Holmes is a work created by SOMEBODY ELSE that was made years before BBC ever even existed, they have absolutely no legal right or claim on the Sherlock Holmes character -at all- (and they HATE that). Theirs is just a fanfic same as everyone else’s and ANYONE’S writing of Sherlock Holmes is just as legitimate as BBC’s (they know that and can’t stand it. They -wish- they owned Sherlock but they DON’T).  As popular as it may have been, theirs is only one adaptation in a sea of HUNDREDS of other adaptations. More came before them and more adaptations other than ‘sherlock’ will be made afterwards too.

Johnlock is ACD Canon.  

There is meta and analysis showing where the original Canon characters of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John watson was written as gay by Sir. Arthur Conan Doyle.  The meta is out there.  Johnlock is Real.  

Sherlock Holmes and John Watson are over 130 years old.

The Sherlockian fandom has been around for almost as long.  Johnlocked Sherlockians have existed long before BBC ever did (though it did not used to go by that name). Johnlock is real, the story lives on and one adaptation isn’t going to change that or stop the fandom. 

By the way, to find your local Sherlockian sociaty, please check this website: http://www.sherlocktron.com/#Listings_of_Sherlock_Holmes_Societies

SHERLOCKIANS RULE. Especially Johnlocked Sherlockians.

I love everyone in this room.

Thank you.

[mathildalocks]

For the love of ACD canon Irene Adler, the woman who beats Sherlock Holmes.

Irene already fell for Sherlock and lost to him because of that. They did it back in S2. But sure, Mofftiss totally respect ACD's canon, yeah. Sarcasm.

It’s it kind of sad that the original canon had a much more feminist version of Irene than Mofftiss do?

Give me badass canon Irene any day. But yeah, that’s right. Her “love” for a man she didn’t even really know ruined her good judgment and caused her to need to be saved while on her knees by that man. And her last though was texting Sherlock? You’re telling me that she didn’t have a closer relationship with Kate and maybe want to text her instead? Blah, don’t get me started Nonny :-P

[mathildalocks]

God bless Granada series!

Why they take Mary Watson out of the Granada series? It’s not like she had to be in episode. What was the reasoning behind her not being there?

well, this is the explanation David Stuart Davies gives in Bending the Willow: 

“It was decided, for example, that Watson would not have a wife or a Mary Morstan romance and that any chronologies which attempted to place the stories in certain years or a articular period of Holmes’s life would be ignored. To the serious Sherlockian scholar this may have seemed radical or even drastic; but one must remember that what Michael Cox and the team were dealing with was a popular drama series dedicated to bringing the essence of Sherlock Holmes to the television screen for millions of viewers, not a slavish, scholarly, and pedestrian re-telling of the tales.”

this is what Michael Cox says also in Bending the Willow:

“We are not doing the marriage. Miss Morstan walks out of Watson’s life at the end. However, I do feel sorry for Dr. Watson in particularly. There’s a lovely actresses playing Mary- Jenny Seagrove- and one could well see Watson fall in love with her. On the other hand I think that the great strength of all the stories is the relationship between Holmes and Watson is simply one of the greatest friendships in literature. And it doesn’t quite work if there’s a wife around the corner. My theory is that Doyle rather regretted marrying Watson off.”

aaaand according to Jeremy Brett (in the book Starring Sherlock Holmes: A Century of the Master Detective on Screen by David Stuart Davies, I think)

The character of Mary Morstan was removed from the stories in which she originally features: nothing ought to get in between Holmes and Watson. She would have got in the way. Watson was more in love with Holmes - in a pure sense - than he could have been with a woman.

[mathildalocks]

Mofftiss didn’t start johnlock they just exploited it

Let’s get this straight; Mofftiss came to the project as experts in Sherlock Holmes history. They knew all the components of Doyle’s Holmesian universe plus the subsequent myths, theories and pastiche that grew from the original stories. They came to their BBC project fully aware that for decades there had been a reading of canon in which Holmes and Watson were in love. They spoke openly about TPLoSH as one pastiche that covered this topic. The ‘famous desperately unspoken’ comment referred ONLY to that issue, for what else was ‘desperately unspoken’? Holmes is known for being outspoken, blurting out facts, secrets and deductions all over canon. Ejaculations all over the fucking place. So his ‘desperately unspoken’ can and does refer to his romantic feelings for his Watson. Mark means exactly that when he used this phrase about Sherlock in TPLOSH. In my opinion it is Mark’s KINK, his tie in to a trope in the gay community of longing and unrequited love that is so painful it’s delicious. He wanted that in his Holmes AU. [On a side note, I think Steven has wet dreams over Gabrielle Valladon, and wanted her in the AU, morphing from naked seductress Irene into covert operator Mary] Mofftiss were using their Holmesian knowledge to make their AU at the same time as writing their Holmesian fantasies into the vehicle. They KNEW what they were doing from day one, following Doyle with the hook of all hooks: SEX.

Johnlock HAD to go into the AU. It was started not by Mofftiss but by Doyle himself. It IS the hook in the stories that captivates and holds the reader/viewer enthralled. But in this modern era, any story with an element of gay love should have that element upfront and played out on screen. Not used as Victorian subtext or modern queer bait. It was the most obvious modernisation of the Sherlock Holmes stories. Fuck the mobile/cell phones, texts, messages on screen, and all the other clutter the writers go on about in their ‘genius’ updating, it was the John and Sherlock relationship that had the most traction, the most lure, the most pull, for an audience. Just look at the reaction, even in non johnlock fandom, the casual viewers all picked up on it; in jokes, in skits, in polls, in teasing. They all knew it was there. Where do you all think the bromance trope originated? Two buddies solving crimes but on the verge of sexual attraction/love? It started with Holmes and Watson. Why was this not updated to be a true romance? 

Mark and Steven had an opportunity that they let slip away. Instead of making history they had taken Victorian subtext to an absurd level with the use of mirror characters, which ceased to be clever after s2 and became just sloppy and easy writing of the gay romance. ‘Let the mirrors have all the fun’. Ending with  the last straw of Sherlock telling mirror-John-Molly ‘I love you’. They crossed the line in s4 in so many ways, it was like watching a clever theory combust into insanity. All the hubris and nepotism exploding back into their faces. Separation of Holmes and Watson never works, and violent estrangement was a stupid way to go, especially over the ridiculous death of Mary. Wasted opportunity on a grand scale.

We didn’t start johnlock, neither did Mofftiss. Doyle did. For those people on here who came to the party later, I just ask that you respect johnlockers who have predated BBC Sherlock. They cared just as much about this love affair as you do. Don’t attribute to Mofftiss this glorious century old gay romance, they just used it to pull in viewing figures as a tease. 

[mathildalocks]

Sherlock Inherits The Trickster

“ It began with what I can only describe as the pulling aside of curtains." 

Keep reading

[mathildalocks]

Thank you for the addition @yorkiepug ! Above everything, this is a beautiful fandom. Big gratitude for all the fan works.

I’m feeling a little salty today

Below is all just my opinion, so please take it as such.

I think it’s no secret that I am very angry and bitter about S4 of BBC Sherlock. I think that although I do not believe in a S5 that I have been accommodating to friends that do and supportive of those who still wish to write meta and look for clues in the show. Most of the posts I’ve seen from non believes have been of the same mindset, they don’t believe there’s more, but more power to those that do. So I’m really not sure why those of us that salt get so looked down upon, we keep our feelings to our own posts. I have never once gone on someone’s meta and written that I do not agree and think they’re crazy, BUT I’ve had tin hatters come on MY posts to tell me how wrong I am.

So, let me explain why I feel this way. And if anyone other than @lediona25 reads this, then I’ll be surprised ;-)

I’ll say right off the bat, who fucking knows what Moffitss plan. Do they want to do more Sherlock? Fuck if I know. If there really is some secret plan, their two main actors don’t seem that into it. Two men who used to love to talk about the show now either brush off questions, or in Martin’s case I’m not even sure I’ve heard him say a word about S4 after it aired. That all looks REALLY BAD for the future of the show.

Now Dracula flops and Mofftiss come running back to do S5 of Sherlock sometime in the next 5 years, I see one of two things happening:

1. We leave from where we left off or sometime in the near future. The boys don’t live together. John is raising Rosie but we never see her. They solve crimes. John still has that stupid wedding ring on. RIP in Mary you asshole. With or without more gay subtext, who knows?!

2. The whole thing (S4, since TAB, before that??) is a gosh darn dream or coma or whatever, SURPRISE Moffitss think they’re so clever. And actors who have aged (Martin quite like a fine wine, damn boy) try to play themselves 5 years ago, lots of heavy make up to cover laughter lines etc. We get stuck seeing Mary again as she comes back for The Past. Still no guarantee of Johnlock bliss. Probably more subtext and mirrors *heavy sigh*

NOW if the whole mind palace/dream/blog theory happen I’ll be super happy for folks rooting for it. BUT for me, and a lot of other folks, that’s just really bad writing/story telling. Like, that’s not a win to me. The time to end all this subtext bullshit was now not 5 years from now. To come back years later and all of S4 was a dream, god what a waste. Why not just write a good S4? Why the need for all the subtext and mirrors? Why not just write something GOOD for fucks sake???

And, for me, it’s important to actually enjoy what I’m watching. TAB was all MP and I loved it, it was entertaining, it was about John and Sherlock, no stupid fucking separation, minimal Mary, it felt like it had a point. S4 was awful to watch. It was not enjoyable. You can load up all the subtext and mirrors you want, but if your shit isn’t entertaining/interesting to watch, all that shit doesn’t matter. Honestly, I wasn’t a huge fan of S3 either, but I THOUGHT S4 would explain it all. Which we all know now, it didn’t. More questions no answers. That’s not entertaining television. That’s Mofftiss wanting to have All The Cliffhangers and give none of the resolution.

So, in conclusion: I again say meta away if you want. But don’t talk shit/down to those of us who are mad. We are more than allowed to be pissed and to say we’re pissed. I gave years and my heart to this mess only to have Mofftiss stomp on it with glee. They can kiss my pug’s ass.

[mathildalocks]

@yorkiepug the saltine cracker here! 🙋🏻

This entire thread is reflecting what I went through.

Here are my thoughts:

- S3 was not so good but still had a flicker of hope and great acting and promise.

- S4 was a Noah's flood that wiped away the BBC Sherlock for me. I have a ptsd now, I haven't watched the episodes twice and can't even enjoy the previous seasons anymore knowing what they did with the last 2.

- I love fanfics specifically the new fix-its of TRF. I was able to enjoy S3 fix-its before S4 aired but not so much anymore. Strangely, Victorianlock is a good place.

- I still adore the cast, actors I mean but quitted from being a fan of Mofftiss. Trust is like virginity, you only lose it once and they lost me. It was not just Johnlock but a combination of many aspects of their writing choices.

- I once liked Amanda's acting but don't like her acting anymore. It is unfortunate because she played a character that ruined the essence of such a classic literary bond. She is not to blame but unfortunate for her career as well. Again writing could have given her a much different direction still being Mary but not ruining this essence. The voiceover in the final scene of TFP, you must be kidding us, all the Holmesians.

- I will not follow any of the Mofftiss' new projects. I feel bad about Ben, Martin, Lara, Una, Loo, Rupert, Andrew etc. They were phenomenal and gave so much life to these characters. Any fan work that I can follow rests on their beautiful shoulders.

- making of history moment is gone. I respect all the new meta writers, I think they are brilliant like all of us were 2,3, 4 years ago but unfortunately my faith in the writers' brilliance is long gone. I just believe that the fandom will keep breeding brilliant new script writers.

As a final word, BBC Sherlock will live in S1 and S2 in my head forever. And that will be its place in my Holmesian memory. My only gratitude is for this portion and pairing these two actors so well.

I’m feeling a little salty today

Below is all just my opinion, so please take it as such.

I think it’s no secret that I am very angry and bitter about S4 of BBC Sherlock. I think that although I do not believe in a S5 that I have been accommodating to friends that do and supportive of those who still wish to write meta and look for clues in the show. Most of the posts I’ve seen from non believes have been of the same mindset, they don’t believe there’s more, but more power to those that do. So I’m really not sure why those of us that salt get so looked down upon, we keep our feelings to our own posts. I have never once gone on someone’s meta and written that I do not agree and think they’re crazy, BUT I’ve had tin hatters come on MY posts to tell me how wrong I am.

So, let me explain why I feel this way. And if anyone other than @lediona25 reads this, then I’ll be surprised ;-)

I’ll say right off the bat, who fucking knows what Moffitss plan. Do they want to do more Sherlock? Fuck if I know. If there really is some secret plan, their two main actors don’t seem that into it. Two men who used to love to talk about the show now either brush off questions, or in Martin’s case I’m not even sure I’ve heard him say a word about S4 after it aired. That all looks REALLY BAD for the future of the show.

Now Dracula flops and Mofftiss come running back to do S5 of Sherlock sometime in the next 5 years, I see one of two things happening:

1. We leave from where we left off or sometime in the near future. The boys don’t live together. John is raising Rosie but we never see her. They solve crimes. John still has that stupid wedding ring on. RIP in Mary you asshole. With or without more gay subtext, who knows?!

2. The whole thing (S4, since TAB, before that??) is a gosh darn dream or coma or whatever, SURPRISE Moffitss think they’re so clever. And actors who have aged (Martin quite like a fine wine, damn boy) try to play themselves 5 years ago, lots of heavy make up to cover laughter lines etc. We get stuck seeing Mary again as she comes back for The Past. Still no guarantee of Johnlock bliss. Probably more subtext and mirrors *heavy sigh*

NOW if the whole mind palace/dream/blog theory happen I’ll be super happy for folks rooting for it. BUT for me, and a lot of other folks, that’s just really bad writing/story telling. Like, that’s not a win to me. The time to end all this subtext bullshit was now not 5 years from now. To come back years later and all of S4 was a dream, god what a waste. Why not just write a good S4? Why the need for all the subtext and mirrors? Why not just write something GOOD for fucks sake???

And, for me, it’s important to actually enjoy what I’m watching. TAB was all MP and I loved it, it was entertaining, it was about John and Sherlock, no stupid fucking separation, minimal Mary, it felt like it had a point. S4 was awful to watch. It was not enjoyable. You can load up all the subtext and mirrors you want, but if your shit isn’t entertaining/interesting to watch, all that shit doesn’t matter. Honestly, I wasn’t a huge fan of S3 either, but I THOUGHT S4 would explain it all. Which we all know now, it didn’t. More questions no answers. That’s not entertaining television. That’s Mofftiss wanting to have All The Cliffhangers and give none of the resolution.

So, in conclusion: I again say meta away if you want. But don’t talk shit/down to those of us who are mad. We are more than allowed to be pissed and to say we’re pissed. I gave years and my heart to this mess only to have Mofftiss stomp on it with glee. They can kiss my pug’s ass.

[mathildalocks]

“I cannot fix on the hour, or the spot, or the look or the words, which laid the foundation. It is too long ago. I was in the middle before I knew that I had begun.” ― Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice

John Watson’s Deep Crimson Heart

[mathildalocks]

I am very happily reading all these new EMP metas. Not because I trust Mofftiss or have any expectations from the show anymore. The metas are just simply brilliant and reminds me of the meta renessaince of summer 2015. Too bad that so many of us have stopped following these new posts just because we are simply angry from S4 trauma. I really wished the creators were as brilliant and determined about Johnlock as you guys all are. If that ever becomes the case, i'll be like John in the Landmark scene of TEH.

Hats off to EMP people!

The flight of the dead...audience (’Sherlock’)

Note that this is not originally my idea. @possiblyimbiassed came up with the idea that the plane of the dead in TFP is a metaphor for the audience not understanding that Sherlock is dying. The audience is “asleep”, totally unaware of what is going on. And meanwhile Sherlock is dying; he is crashing. ‘Sherlock’ here refers to: 

literally the character Sherlock on the show who’s probably in a coma (or something) and dying at this point in TFP 

the show BBC ‘Sherlock’ as a whole that is undergoing its own Reichenbach moment at the end of s4

and the Sherlock Holmes character that has existed for more than 120 years and is also dying, trapped in a metaphorical “coma” because all the adaptations have pretty much ‘done’ him to death for the past century or so

So, as I said, this is not my idea. It’s what @possiblyimbiassed was brilliantly arguing in their comment to my meta.

I would like to expand that argument to encompass ASiB because this episode is, after all, where the ‘flight of the dead’ metaphor originally came from.

In ASiB, we have terrorists who really, really want “the bomb” to go off. Remember that terrorists (and terror cells and secret organisations and such) are a twofold metaphor on the show: 1) for sentiment, feelings, emotions that threaten to overwhelm Sherlock and 2) for us (!), the hardcore fans of the show.

So, what we have are the hardcore fans who are really invested in the idea that Sherlock should be overwhelmed by feelings. We want “the bomb” to go off (and all the “explosions” on the show are always metaphors for johnlock). We want that “bomb” to “explode”.

In ASiB, Mycroft, aka the stand-in for the authors, has come up with a plan, though, a plan that he calls ‘The Coventry conundrum’: Let the bomb go off amongst an audience that is dead, “asleep”, totally unaware of what is happening. This way the terrorists (we!) will be happy ‘cause we’ve had a win (johnlock), but the general audience won’t ever know anything about johnlock because they are, after all, “asleep on the plane”.

This is a metaphor for letting “the bomb” go off in such a way that there’s nobody to witness “the explosion”. The terrorists (we) will be happy with our success (aka whatever subtext we get), but the general audience will never notice anything (’cause it was all just in the subtext) and they never “woke up” to that, they were dead, “asleep”, anyway (ie, too stupid to get it). In other words, ‘The Coventry conundrum’ is the story of the perfect queerbait plan.

But…But! Here is why this metaphor is positively genius: In ASiB, this plan doesn’t work out! And who gets in the way?

Sherlock!

Sherlock symbolically represents the show ‘Sherlock’, remember?

So, the show itself turns on its creator (Mycroft=Mofftiss). 

Sherlock (aka the show) is so eager to impress Irene Adler (=Sherlock’s libido) that it becomes impossible to pull off ‘The Coventry conundrum’ with the “dead” audience. The perfect queerbait trick has to be stopped even before it is put into action. Sherlock (the show) has become too closely involved with his libido and messed up the whole plan. The creation has turned on its own creators. That’s why Mycroft scolds Sherlock (his own show) at the end and tells him that months and years of planning have gone to waste.

Now the terrorists (we) are warned. The terrorists (we) know about the plan. 

And that’s why Mycroft can’t put the plan (the queerbait) into action. Now he can’t let the bomb go off in front of an unwitting (“dead”) audience somewhere over the ocean where nobody will notice. He can’t do that anymore.

What Mofftiss are telling us here is that even if they wanted to queerbait us, they couldn’t pull that off. Because the “terrorists” know what’s up. And they do precisely because their own show (BBC Sherlock) got too closely involved with Sherlock’s libido.

You know, this is brilliant. Mofftiss are really, really clever arseholes.:) They’ve built a rebuttal to the queerbait allegation right into s2.

One of the things that never ceases to amaze me is how early they thought to come up with stuff like that. I mean we only really got on the johnlock train in full seriousness after HLV, and especially after TAB. But they’ve known as early as in s2ep1 that we would come after them for baiting us while keeping the general audience metaphorically “dead”, “asleep”. They’ve known, back then, we would come after them with this allegation. And they’ve built a rebuttal into their own show: A moment in which Sherlock himself ruins this ‘queerbait’ plan…and how. They’ve told us even back then: Sorry, even if we wanted to queerbait you, we couldn’t do it: Our own show is too closely involved with Sherlock’s libido and would destroy any plan like that. So, we can’t do that.

Which basically means…Mofftiss will go through with johnlock, at some point.

P.S.

And there’s even a little cherry on top of that cake:

Mycroft tells us, in ASiB, that they ran ‘a similar plan’ like that ‘back in the day’ with the Germans. A plan that worked out and where the “terrorist” weren’t alerted, ie, a plan where “the bomb” was successfully “blown up” amidst a “dead” audience of unwitting witnesses that were totally unresponsive to “the explosion” (ie, an audience that didn’t get it)…

Well, enquiring minds want to know: 

Dear Mark Gatiss, by ‘the similar plan with the Germans’ do you, by any chance, mean ‘The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes’? A film that, after all, features Germans rather heavily. Was that the Coventry plan that worked out because “the bomb” went off amidst an audience that stayed “asleep” (aka didn’t get it) back in the 1970s?

How much more meta can this show get?

@possiblyimbiassed @ebaeschnbliah @gosherlocked @tjlcisthenewsexy @the-7-percent-solution @sarahthecoat @sherlockshadow @devoursjohnlock @raggedyblue @fellshish

[mathildalocks]

I am on the same page with @miadifferent here. I only watched S4 once which was an impossible for me, even in other Sherlock Holmes adaptations. I think the crumbles of Johnlock that we might still find in S4 is actors living a similar story in their minds. They are closer to us than the whole fuckery of S4 so in small instances like it it seeps through the facade.

tbh all I looked at in that moment was their joined hands

[mathildalocks]

This ^ ^

Sherlock Holmes: A Hero for People Who Feel Different

When I was a teenager a friend of mine commented on how many science-fiction and fantasy fans were Sherlock Holmes fans.

“Of course,” I replied. “The scientific reasoning and logic.”

“No. He is a hero for people who are different,” She corrected me.

My friend was right. He is a hero for those who are different. The usual theme of modern science-fiction, fantasy, and superhero stories is that what makes the hero different is what makes him/her/their/other pronoun special. It is the very thing that others mock, that makes them feel like they do not fit in with “the cool people” and society that is at the center of their heroism. ACD canon Sherlock Holmes predates these stories and may well have consciously or unconsciously influenced some of them.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle referred to Sherlock Holmes as bohemian and it is clear that he is in many ways apart from the rest of society. He is unique. He is admired, but not always liked. This tendency has continued in the various adaptations.

Not only is Sherlock Holmes different, but many of his clients are people who are outsiders or lacking in power. Sherlock Holmes is the detective you go to when you feel that things are hopeless and you have no other choice. Sherlock Holmes’ clients are frequently women who might well be dismissed by the police. They are people who feel they are in a hopeless situation (The Boscombe Valley Mystery, etc). Holmes’ sympathies clearly lie with those who are different.

Sherlock Holmes is not afraid to confront, agitate, and fight the powerful. His sense of justice outweighs social concerns and the letter of the law (and Victorian England had its share of unjust laws). In the Granada Holmes series Jeremy Brett particularly identified with Holmes’ lack of respect for the British class system and that element of the stories is often enhanced in the series.

Jeremy Brett did a brilliant job at showing us a Sherlock Holmes who was different and wanted to be driven by scientific reasoning and logic, but was still a human being. He nearly called out to Watson in “The Final Problem” and had tears in his eyes when Lestrade complimented him in “The Six Napoleons”.

Most of us have moments when we do not feel like we fit into mainstream society. In some cases it is our culture at home (and/or in our neighborhood) that is different than the larger culture. Sometimes it is that we are not straight and/or cis. Sometimes it is that we are on the autism spectrum. Sometimes it is that we are smarter than a lot of people. Sometimes it is that we have a learning disability. Sometimes it is that we have a physical condition that limits us. Sometimes it is that we have a mental health condition. Maybe we are shy and new to the area.

Sherlock Holmes stories are detective stories. They deal with thefts, murders, blackmail, revenge, abuse, and other examples of the dark side of humanity. At the same time they have a glimmer of hope. Sherlock Holmes is different and it is those differences that are a large part of why people continue to see him as a hero over 100 years after Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote A Study in Scarlet. It is a reminder that even someone who different, unusually smart, driven by justice, and not always apt at the social niceties could have a supportive friend (or more than friend depending on your interpretation) like  Dr. John Watson. There is also the hope that comes from knowing that if you were in Sherlock Holmes’ world and needed help he would be willing to help you regardless of what demographic boxes you check.

@yorkiepug  @granada-brett-crumbs @granadabrettishholmes @jeremyholmes @watsonshoneybee @sussexbound @thejoyofdeduction @artemisastarte @the-moon-loves-the-sea @lizjoyce5 @fangirllock @honeybeelullaby @tendergingergirl @nibblesofflesh

[mathildalocks]

Exactly my sentiment!

Not only was Sherlock’s the only vow we’ve seen on the show, but it seems like Sherlock was the only one to do everything in his power to keep the vow he made the day of the wedding.

Mary lied and manipulated John from day one, so she’s right out. And then John had his little text fling, so there he goes.

Sherlock on the other hand, put his life on the line, and was willing to sacrifice everything to keep the vow he made (to John).

Sherlock really IS the best man

[mathildalocks]

I adore your blog. Help a desperate freebatch fan in need of freebatch fics. They're so hard to fiiiiiind. Actually just any good blog or write up about how freebatch may actually be real. 😭❤ Pliiith. Thank you

Some freebatch positive blogs: fyeahfreebatch, welovethebeekeeper, freebatcharchive, watsonsdick, fuckyeahshockblanket,  wearitcounts (check her ao3) of course, darlingbenny, love-in-the-mind-palace, unapologeticocdsufferer 

Regarding fics i have some on my ficrecs page (look for freebatch of course), also you should check out fyeahfreebatch’s fyfb recommended reading for reading material in the form of ficlets or fics on ao3! ♥