#also like. thob and trf are some of my least watched episodes so it is possible i'm missing something. but.

[queerholmcs]

'christmas day five years ago' but also moriarty's like 'am i under arrest again' and i know we've already talked about how the timeline makes no sense in any form. but. just to clarify. mr mycroft holmes. the idea is supposed to be that sometime after giving this criminal mastermind sherlock's life story to get him to talk, sometime after that, you also decided it was worth it to give him five minutes unsupervised conversation with the younger sister who traumatised sherlock so badly that he wrote her out of his memories and turned his memory of his best friend into a dog? just to be clear? am i getting anything wrong?

[notagarroter]

Sherlock Survey

No one tagged me or asked me to do this, and I'm not going to bother asking you to suggest a fandom, since obviously I only care about Sherlock haha. (Stolen from @marcceh )

---------

My favorite Episode: ohhh this is so hard.  ASiB is just so perfectly wrought, but TGG has some of my very favoritist scenes, but HLV is the one that grips me and thrills me from beginning to end, but TRF has all that amazing Moriarty, and TSoT's wedding speech is such a tour de force of acting and writing, and then TAB blew my mind in so many ways -- but I think I'm going to have to go with The Lying Detective.  From the moment I read the canon story, I was so eager to see what Moftiss would do with it, and they did not disappoint at all.  Funny and beautiful and tragic and grotesque, it's Sherlock at its most over-the-top, pull-out-all-the-stops baroque, and I adore it.  

My least Favorite Episode: I hate to be negative about anything Sherlock related, but let's just say that THoB and TFP were two episodes where I probably would have made some different artistic choices.  Minor tweaks, really.

My favorite Arc: I guess I'd go with the arc I described in this series of metas, where Sherlock has to move from an Enlightenment-style man of Rationality and Pure Reason to grudgingly accepting a more post-structuralist worldview, where truth is unstable and irrationality a force to be reckoned with.  Which I think he finally fully embraces in S4, hypothesizing that the drugs opened his mind to useful hallucinations...  and then with Eurus, who shows that pure reason and logic can themselves begin to look like madness.  

My least favorite Arc: ummm probably Mrs Hudson's? I like that she's more than she seems at first glance, but her bad-ass-ness went a tiny bit over the top for me in S4.  

My favorite ship: oh gosh, I hate to choose.  I think in a lot of ways Marylock is fun for me because I got in on the ground floor of that one...  I got to see fans all around me starting to admit to themselves and each other the powerful chemistry between Sherlock and Mary, and I wrote some very early headcanons for it. But I also really love Johnlockary, because they are all so right for each other and so wrong at the same time, which is delightful for a writer to dig into.  But when I watch the show, the ship that always dazzles me is Sheriarty, and I can never understand why it doesn't get talked about more.  There's just so much sparking erotic energy there, I can never get over it.    

My favorite character: sherrrrrrrrrrlock, always and forever.  but I love everyone else so much too!  the show just wouldn't be right without any of them.  

My favorite season:  oof, another tough one. Okay, in terms of most flawless season from beginning to end, with practically no weak spots, I have to go with S3.  I just feel like Moftiss really nailed that one, and each episode is a brilliant tour de force -- TEH is funny and quirky with lots of postmodern flourishes; TSoT is sunny and brilliant and clever but with this deep undercurrent of melancholy, and then HLV just smacks you in the face over and over with twists and shocks and heart-racing thrills.  (And then TAB comes along and destabilizes everything so brilliantly, but I suppose it doesn't really count as belonging to any season.)

My least favorite: Oh, I really do love them all, but...  gun to my head, I guess I'd say S1?  Just because we're still getting to know the characters and the world, so it's just not quite as wild as the later series...  though it's getting there in TGG, especially by the pool scene.  

Who I wish would have stayed till the end: Hmm I think moftiss have as much trouble saying goodbye to great characters as fans do, so no one ever really goes away on this show lol.  But I do wish we had seen Sally and Anthea in S4.  Oh, and Anderson.

Who I wish would have left the show sooner: Of the recurring characters?  No one, really...  But I wish they had just let Redbeard stay a dog, and maybe just kept it to the two references in S3. 

Who I think is the most cheated character: Ummm Victor Trevor.  I just really loved Victor Trevor in ACD canon, and I was looking forward to exploring that relationship in BBC-verse.  But making him a little boy (who we only glimpse for a minute or two, and who doesn't have any lines) didn't really do any favors to the character. It made sense for the story they wanted to tell, but it was a missed opportunity to look at Sherlock's formative relationships before John.  

Who got more screen time than they maybe should: Maybe Eurus would have been more effective in TFP if we'd seen a bit less of her?  Like with Moriarty, part of why he is so scary and thrilling and fun is that he hardly has any scenes, but the ones we get have tremendous impact.  

What drew me to it: Some friends put it on my radar, but this stellar review in the New Yorker is mostly why I finally sat down to watch.  Well, that plus @elizabethminkel‘s article + personal essay about it in The Millions.

What kept me watching: Above all, the visuals. It's just much more dazzlingly well-shot than anything I'd seen on TV, though since then other shows have copied many of its techniques. But clever-yet-thoughtful writing makes it more than just a surface pleasure, and then Benedict's performance as Sherlock is simply addictive to watch.

If I would recommend it: I can't really recommend it anymore because I can't actually talk about it with anyone who isn't a superfan, for fear of looking like a crazed obsessive (which I am).  I just don't think I'm the best spokesperson for the show at this point, lol.  I'm more the wild-eyed acolyte.

[brilliantorinsane]

A Good Man

Before watching BBC Sherlock I had never read ACD, largely because I had somewhere picked up the ridiculous notion that cannon Holmes is cold and unfeeling. When I finally started watching the show, with considerable skepticism, I was certainly intrigued by the storytelling and instantly drawn to John and fascinated by Sherlock. Nevertheless, there seemed reason to fear that it was going to offer exactly what I didn’t want to see: a story about a detective who one is expected to love because he is clever and sexy and abrasive, but who has no real heart to him. That, I knew, was a story I would struggle to invest in. 

But then, John asked why Lestrade let Sherlock hang around. And Lestrade began by admitting that he was desperate for the help; but then he added this:

That was it. That, right there, is the line that sold me on the show. I’ll admit it feels a bit heavy-handed; but it is one of my favorite lines anyway because it gave me permission to love Sherlock in all his faults and in the eager hope that he would develop into the good man he already showed glimpses of becoming. That was the first arc I became invested in, long before I shipped  Johnlock and even before I fully latched onto John and Sherlock’s friendship. So Lestrade’s line in TPF: “He’s better than [a great man]: he’s a good one,” ought to have felt deeply satisfying: the culmination of the story arc that drew me into this series in the first place. But it didn’t. In fact, I saw the line coming a few beats before it was spoken and positively grimaced when it was actually spoken.

There are a lot of reasons the line is so unsatisfying, of course, the primary one being the deeply unsatisfying nature of the whole episode and the flood of cheap, rushed callbacks in the last few minutes. There is also the fact that it is clumsily delivered (in terms of writing, not acting), and that Lestrade wasn’t present for the events of TFP, increasing the sense that the statement didn’t grow organically from this moment of the story. But I think there is also a broader reason this line feels wrong: it is not only misplaced within the episode, but misplaced within the series as a whole. The statement appears either too late or too early in Sherlock’s development: the timing isn’t right.

(Continued below the cut, because this wound up rather longer than expected!)

For the first three seasons, the show plays with our perceptions of Sherlock. Nearly every episode gives us a glimpse of his great heart—only to give an alternate explanation which leaves room to question whether his ‘emotions’ are a cover for his sociopathy or his ‘sociopathy’ is a cover for his emotions. Below I listed what I see as the development of this question throughout the first three seasons, and its eventual answer (or near answer) in HLV:

ASiP: Sherlock is a detective who saves the innocent and brings the guilty to justice—but he supposedly does it only as a cure for boredom and cares nothing for the lives involved.

TBB: I don’t think there are any major instances here; it’s more a continual juxtaposition of seemingly contradictory behaviors: giving John his card but then shutting him out (literally and figuratively); his rudeness to Sarah vs his gentleness when he saves her, etc.

TGG: This is one of the episodes in which the existence of Sherlock’s heart (in terms of his ability to care in general, not romantically yet) is put under heavy scrutiny, culminating in his obvious distress over the death of the old women, which next moment is said to be merely his frustration over having lost the game and to have nothing to do with any emotions about the lives lost. However, TGG does end with explicit and unrefuted confirmation of Sherlock’s heart at the pool scene. After this moment one can no longer deny that he has some heart; but there are plenty of questions left unanswered (at least on a textual level). Apparently he is capable of caring; but is he capable of romantic love? (Not that he would be some sort of unfeeling monster if he wasn’t, obviously. But it is a question the show is clearly interested in interrogating) Does he care more about his friends or his work? Would he be sacrifice himself for his friends, as John proved willing to sacrifice for Sherlock in TGG? These, in that order, are the questions interrogated in season 2—interrogated, but left unresolved.

ASiB: (for a casual viewer) Sherlock seems to be showing romantic interest in Irene, possibly even to be heartbroken over her ‘death.’ But then comes the final deduction, and it’s apparent that he was frighteningly cold and detached to the entire time—to an extent that might almost make one question TGG’s refutation of sociopathy. Then the second turn—he saves Irene, even keeps her phone as a memento! But what does that mean?? Simply that, as TGG demonstrated, he is capable of caring about those in distress? Or that he did have romantic feelings for Irene and his detachment during the deduction scene was a façade?

THoB: After pushing John away under the influence of the drug, Sherlock has what appears to be a deeply heartfelt apology scene with John—it is clear that this friendship means a great deal to him, and he is willing to work to maintain it. He even makes John coffee as a further apology! Until . . . it turns out that, directly on the heels of the ‘beautiful proof of his affection,’ he is attempting to drug said object of affection without John’s knowledge, knowing John has PTSD, and having recently been completely unhinged by the drug himself. Although his compassionate treatment of Henry at the end, together with “going to see a man about a dog,” acts as reassurance that he is not utterly devoid of ‘sentiment,’ the sequence leaves a bad taste in the mouth. If Sherlock is willing to subject John to such an experience purely for the sake of casework, just when their friendship is on more tenuous ground than normal, how much does he really value that friendship? Does the work still mean more to him than his best friend? 

TRF: Here is the answer, right? Now we get our final proof! Yes, the episode flirts with the possibility of Sherlock’s emotional detachment in the way he cuts John off again; in the Richard Brook ‘reveal’; and in his indifference to Mrs. Hudson’s supposed death; but in the end all is revealed: all of that was done to protect John and those he loves. He will sacrifice everything for them: his comfort, his city, his work. And while he survived somehow, one feels certain that he would have sacrificed his life as well if there hadn’t been another way. They episode even hints at a confirmation that he does experience romantic love—that sure looked like a love confession to Molly. To top it off, the episode is concluded with a declaration of the fulfillment of Lestrade’s hopes when John declares Sherlock to be “the best and wisest man that I have ever met.” And so,  for two long years during the hiatus following TRF, the audience was left without a doubt of Sherlock Holmes’s great heart. Then . . . TEH happened.

TEH: I don’t know how the TJLC fandom reacted to TEH as I wasn’t around at the time; but as a casual viewer I found it deeply frustrating. Watching it felt like seeing all of that heart I was certain had been revealed in TRF systematically dismantled—or at least called into question. Yes, there was evidence that Sherlock wanted John around, and Sherlock diving into the fire for John was a relieving oasis of confirmation that yes, he cares. But everything else . . . First Sherlock claims to expect that John’s life was simply put on hold while he was away, as if John has no agency or being apart from him. Then, in contrast to all the fulfilling explanations I could have thought up for Sherlock not telling John about his ‘death,’ he pulls out the remarkably unsatisfying: “I didn’t tell you you might not have seemed sad enough; even though I wasn’t concerned about the 30 other people I told, including my parents who most people would expect to grieve most heavily and yet who didn’t even bother to show up at the funeral”! And then there is the explanation of the fall given to Anderson, in which Sherlock claims that the fall was meticulously planned out months in advance, long before the snipers came into play, and John was simply never informed because, you know, apparently it would be more convenient not to have him tagging along, and if John was told ahead of time he might complicate the Holmes brothers’ grand scheme by not crying enough. Nah, better to let him live in terror for a while and then let him grieve for two years. And THEN, as if to rub salt into the wound, the scenario repeats in miniature in the train car—for a moment it looks as if Sherlock is panicking at the prospect that he might have led John to his death and is desperate for John’s forgiveness; next moment it turns out that some if not all of it was another ruse whereby Sherlock allowed John to suffer terror and loss just to get him to say some nice words. This scene also ensures that the audience is forced to doubt the validity of John’s “best and wisest man speech” by having him repeat it just before Sherlock starts looking—yet again—as if he might be a sociopath after all. Of course, as usual all of this could be seen two ways: Sherlock might not be telling the whole truth about why he didn't told John he was alive; we are explicitly told to question Sherlock’s narration of the fall; the train car could have been Sherlock genuinely panicking for John’s safety then later taking advantage of the heightened emotion because he is desperate for John’s forgiveness and doesn’t know how to procure it (which is still a dick move; but a whole lot better than the alternative interpretation). To some extent I saw that possibility, and I never really believed for a moment that Sherlock might actually be heartless. Nevertheless, I sat there stunned at how they had somehow managed to make Sherlock’s grand sacrifice look like it could be the action of a high-functioning sociopath obsessed with grand puzzles, heedless of the damage he leaves in his wake, caring nothing about John’s well-being and simply wanting an adoring puppy to follow him around tossing out compliments (but only when convenient—when inconvenient he can be kicked to the wayside, to be swept back up at Sherlock’s leisure). As little as I believed that narrative, at the time I couldn’t see my way out of at least some deeply disappointed conclusions. It galled me. And it left anyone who prefers to see Sherlock as an unfeeling machine with plenty of material.

TSoT: After TEH, this was a delightful relief. Sherlock’s motives surrounding the fall were still unclear; but at least clearly regretted it. He was obviously pouring himself into making this as good as possible for John, and mourning the loss of his friend he had made mistakes, and his past decisions still weren’t sitting right with me; but just look at how he adores John Watson! Yet even this revelation is temporarily interrogated yet again in the first half of HLV: first Sherlock hasn’t been in contact with John for a month; and supposedly it has nothing to do with his spiraling emotionally after losing John—it’s all for a case! And then there is Janine, and his callous treatment of her makes one wonder whether he has learned anything about caring about the needs of others when it isn’t convenient for “the Work” after all; and now all of a sudden he seems to have had a hidden agenda even at John’s wedding!! And there I was again, terribly frustrated; because I wouldn’t complain about Sherlock having faults (which he clearly has in abundance) but why did the show have to propose a heartless alternative explanation for every major caring or selfless action Sherlock ever commits??? And then . . . 

HLV: Finally, finally, FINALLY: the second half of HLV. From the moment Sherlock runs to Redbeard in his mind palace to the instant in which he shoots Magnusson—the moment in which he sacrifices his life and his work openly and unambiguously, with no possibility of ulterior motive, for the man he has come to love so deeply—there is no more debate. That which fans deduced and many casuals believed long ago has been confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt: Sherlock’s ‘sociopathy’ has never been anything but a protective cover for that great heart—albeit a cover that was beginning to resemble the truth through Sherlock’s concerted effort before John brought all his desperate work crashing down. And if Lestrade had been privy to this moment and declared Sherlock to be a good man now, in this moment when Sherlock finally granted his heart open and unambiguous conquest over his cold mask—well, it might still have felt a bit on the nose, but the timing would have felt right.

But . . . at the end of TFP? That doesn’t seem right at all. It’s not (thank goodness) that they yet again call Sherlock’s heart into question during TAB and s4—sure he is still an insufferable a great deal of the time, but his prioritization of those he loves over his work and his willingness to sacrifice himself for them is reiterated over and over. The thing is, on a textual level, his character development doesn’t go beyond reiteration. In terms of quantity, s4 might increase our perspective of the depth of deep his loyalty and love—although even TLD, it seems to me, demonstrates this more fully than TFP—but (again, on a purely textual level) in terms of quality he has made no forward progress beyond mere continuation. So when Lestrade drops the “good man” line that is supposed to bring the series full circle, we are left asking: why now? In what way did TFP complete Sherlock’s growth that HLV did not? That line could have been thrown in anywhere post-HLV and it would have fit equally well (or equally badly). The end of HLV would have been a far better place for the line. Yes, it would have been better . . . but perhaps not the best.

After all, as we all know there is one more question about Sherlock’s heart that it yet to be answered; a question that, for all Mofftiss’ protests, has been relentlessly harped on in a way impossible to miss even from a purely textual, heteronormative perspective; interrogated in ASiP, ASiB, TAB, TLD, and endless smaller moments in between: the question of whether Sherlock feels romantic love.

Let me reiterate again: I do not equate being a complete and good human being with being in a romantic relationship or with experiencing sexual or romantic attraction. However, IF Sherlock does experience romantic attraction, and IF he is in love with a certain John H Watson, then for him specifically the journey from great man to good man is not yet completed in its fullness. Because if Sherlock is hiding away that love, his development is not fulfilled by being willing to die for John; he must find the courage to disclose himself fully to the man he loves, and he must learn not to die, but to live with him and for him, in a far deeper mutuality, not the relationship of savior/damsel in distress that Sherlock—by loving but refusing to be loved—has perpetuated.

I’ll end this ridiculously long post with one final observation: Sherlock has been called a good man three times now—twice by John and once by Lestrade (or three times by John if you subscribe to TFP is John’s TAB theory). But as we have relentlessly reminded each other over these last two months, “people always give up after three,” and I like to think Sherlock’s goodness will be declared one last time. And while the declaration was not false in the first three instances, this time the fullness of its truth will have come to pass, and the timing will finally be right.

[ebaeschnbliah]

THE  RUG-PULL  EXPERIMENT

________________________________________________________________

or:  The devil’s finest trick is to persuede you that he does not exist

°

As mentioned already in my last post about ‘The Big Four’ out of 'Agatha Christie’s Poirot’ there was some talk about the contents of this film with @isitandwonder . The 'minor’ thoughts that came in the wake of it quickly grew bigger and bigger and a new theory was born. We agreed to write our own version of this theme  Comparing the results was really great fun. I don’t know if anyone has written about this before so please give a shout if there is something similar already out there. Always interested in new data. 

Look at this as an experiment … and enjoy it if you can. Thanks!   :)))

Based on the assumption that Jim Moriarty (or whatever his real name may be) is actually dead I started to wonder if he was indeed the mastermind behind all that had happened in the past 9 episodes of Sherlock. As some of you have already stated - more than half of the story is told by now and all main characters introduced. Usually the final show-down with the BigBaddy is saved for the dramatic end of a story. So …. in case Jim is dead for real he might not have been the BB after all. If Jim himself had been a marionette … who then is the puppet master of the great game? And what is this 'great game’ about anyhow? Is it even such a great game as it looks like?

Right from the start Mofftiss teased us repeatedly that we have already all the clues that are nessesary to solve the case. That we 'see but we don’t observe’ … that 'we are told but do not listen’. And with delightful glee they announced a forthcoming 'rug-pull’ that will break our hearts and leave us in tears. So … I wondered which one of the main characters could be the real BigBaddy. Who would surprise us the most and leave us drenched in tears?

The most possible candidats that came to both our minds were: Mary, Molly, Irene, Janine, Mycroft, Anderson and John.

I excluded John right away … although he would be the perfeckt reason for a shocking surprise as well as a terrible heartbreak. But I don’t think Mofftiss would go down this road.

Anderson: Oh well … that would be a great surprise indeed but at the same time a bit of a disappointment I think. And surely I wouldn’t consider me heartbroken after such a revelation.

What about the Woman … Irene Adler? Would she surprise us and leave us in tears? There are some hints in TAB that she could come back … so the surprise wouldn’t be that big. I greatly enjoyed her in the past. She’s a brilliant character. But heartbreak and tears … I think not.

Bridesmaid Janine is suspected already … so the surprise lacks I would say. Tears and heartbreak? She’s too short a time in the story for this … we don’t know her much. Why would she - beeing the BigBaddy - throw us into devastation?

That leaves the M’s:  Mary first - She is already a very bad girl … we mostly assume the worst anyhow where she is involved. No surprise there I would say. And the heartbreak?  Ahhhh ….. NO !!!

Molly then?  Oh yes …. that would definitely be both. She’s there from the beginning and I loved her since then. Always kind, always loyal, always dependable. This would break my heart and move me to tears. But a really great surprise? After some cleverly sawn doubt in TAB there is suspicion already …. Also I wonder if Mofftiss would choose a non-canon character for the BigBaddy.

Last but not least - big brother Mycroft:  Meddling, arrogant, aloof and the 'most dangerous man you’ve ever met’ … according to Sherlock. And we love him with all our hearts. We fear the worst things will happen to him in the near future. That he will give his life for his little brother whom he protects always, no matter what. Ahmmmm …. yes! Yes, yes and yes!!!  Great surprise … great heartbreak …. ocean of tears!!! Complete devastation!!!

So … let’s put this horrible suspicion under the microscope and look at it more closely. Just for science …. of course.

As it is known from many crime stories there are three criterias which must be fulfilled to convict a suspect:

OPPORTUNITY - ABILITY - MOTIVE

Do they apply to Mycroft? Alas … the most promising character of the story concerning ability and opportunity is without a doubt Mycroft. He is certainly in a very powerful position. Has insight in secret documents. Useful connections in Britain as in foreign countries. He isn’t officially known as politician but works already in the dark. He has no qualms to tolerate/work with people of dubious/criminal intent as long as they are of use to him (Magnusson for example). Power changes people … corrupts them. 'Absolute power corrupts absolute’ (Christoper Lee describing the effects of 'TheOneRing' in Tolkiens famous tale  'The Lord of the Rings’). Take a look at the world and you will find that this applys not only to the realm of Fantasy.

The next point I looked up was the timeline of the original ACD stories because Mofftiss keep rather close to them despite their modern version. They told us there will be just one major modification.

Mycroft now … he is just a rare guest in the original stories. He appeares first in 'The Greek Interpreter’ , is mentioned in 'The Final Problem’ and appears also in 'The Bruce-Partington Plans’. According to the 'Ernest Bloomfield Zeisler Chronicles’ these stories are set in 1888, 1891 and 1895.  After that Sherlocks big brother Mycroft is never mentioned again in the stories. That leaves Mofftiss with a lot of opportunities (like the original Mary Morstan character).

Now the show itself:  my very first impression of the mysterious and obviously dangerous man who had abducted John Watson to persuede him to spy on Sherlock Holmes for money was …. 'that’s Moriarty!’.  M’s statement: 'If you were to ask him (Sherlock) he'd�� probably say I'm his arch-enemy’ convinced me even more. Was this the time when we were told and didn’t listen?

Some things are clear: Sherlock doesn’t like his meddling brother very much and he tries to stay away from his family as a whole. In ASIP we learn of a 'petty feud which is childish’ … that it was Mycroft who 'upset Mummy’ … John considering M as 'criminal mastermind’ and Mycroft being 'the British Government, the British Secret Service or the CIA on a freelance basis’. And let’s not forget his unrestricted access to CCTV and confidential data.

Mycroft doesn’t occur personally in TBB. Just someone who identifys as ’M’. Someone with connections to the fare East. (Foto: Hands of Gen. Shan TBB)

There is a very interesting music-meta by @miadifferent about this. 'The voices of life and death'  

A short excerpt:  "Now let’s establish a basis for further speculation. LSiT wrote a great TBB meta about reading Soo Lin as a mirror for Sherlock. (And therefore her collegue as a mirror for John and Zhi Zhu for Mycroft, killing Sherlock metaphorically for relationships - caring is not an advantage).”  You can find the whole text here . 

The first case in TGG - the missing Bruce-Partington Plans - is brought to Baker Street by Mycroft. In the end this leads to Jim Moriarty and the pool. There is a reference to Sherlocks first 'case’ - the Carl Powers incident. How great is the possibility that Mycroft knew about Sherlocks attempts to get the police involved in this one? He is 7 years older than his brother … so near 20 at that time. Would big brother investigate? Would he try to find out everything about this murderous teenager and keep a weather eye on him? Mycroft wouldn’t be Mycroft if he didn’t. Jim - or whatever his real name may be - could come in handy some day after all. 'People like him … we know about them … we watch them'  does Mycroft mean 'we’ or rather 'I’?  What if Jim was already 'in custody’ before TGG?  If he was 'allowed’ to get loose ….

ASIB - the case of the dominatrix starts also with Mycroft. Thinking about his close connection to the CIA … would he really not know about them breaking into Irenes flat? His words 'Bond air is go … check with the Coventry lot’ are spoken in earshot of Sherlock. On purpose? And what is likely to happen if a big brother tells his younger sibling: 'You are not allowed to do this!' ???   Mycroft sitting at the long table and looking worried after reading Jims text … what was he worried about? Sherlock? Or other things? Maybe Jim (still on the loose) got a bit 'high-handed’ … endangering/stopping Mycrofts 'flight of the dead plan’? Dealing with terrorists? And the Woman? Was she Mycrofts pawn from the start or just midway? Because she was conveniently in cahoots with 'on the loose Jim’ who was working a bit 'freelance’ at the time? Better to take him on a leash again? All we know for real is that Mycroft put Jim in prison sometime between that text and THOB. And  most likely he doesn’t know Irene is still alive.

 THOB shows anew how far reaching Mycrofts influence is. At the end Jim gets free again to play once more with Sherlock … to let him dance. TRF is full of things Mycroft could have accomplished easily. And he is perfectly able to send Sherlock on a wild goose chase around the world to hunt a criminal network that never existed. But all we know is that Sherlock first went to Molly for help. Maybe Mycroft joined that particular 'plot’ a bit later?

What happens next is TEH. Sherlock gets 'rescued' very fittingly to return precisely at the day John Watson proposes to Mary Morstan. What a coincidence! And who placed Mary in a position where she was able to befriend John? Does she now about 'a game’ or is she a pawn and cleverly played too? A scene that alway disturbs me greatly is right at the begining when Mycroft pulls Sherlocks head up by his long hair and wispers smirking in his ear that it is time to come back. And don’t forget …. Sherlock:'You sat there and watched me being beaten to a pulp. You were enjoying it …. definitely enjoying it’.

The wedding leaves Sherlock clearly heartbroken and Mycroft has little more too say than: 'I told you so’ … 'don’t get involved’ … and … 'remember Redbeard …'  By the time of HLV a case involving drugs seems to come in rather convinient for Sherlock. And again big brother tells him 'If you’re going against Magnusson you’re going against me!'  Meant as a warning or rather a goading?  Did Mary and the shooting happen on purpose or was it an 'accident’? And who is responsible?

This is the point were I stop rambling about big brother Mycroft and his possible influence on the dubious/dark events of the story because I’m not certain if MP starts right after Sherlock waking up in hospital - or rather with TAB. Hopefully this will be cleared in the near future.

Now to the most impoant bit … the third criteria in convicting a suspect - THE MOTIVE

What do we know about the Holmes brothers:  Mycroft is seven years Sherlocks senior. That means he had for seven years the full attention of his parents before a little baby arrived (maybe the baby in s4 is actually little Sherlock?). What if young Mycroft was not very amused about this 'inconvenient disturbance’? Was he interested in experiments as a young boy? Not with a microscope … rather the ones about human behavior, maybe?

In TSOT when Mrs. Hudson tells Sherlock that his mother has a lot to answer for - Sherlock responds with 'I know. I have a list. Mycroft has a file.'  Does this mean Mummy and Daddy Holmes had/have more to complain about Mycroft than Sherlock? How did/does 'Myc’ feel about this? Does he feel at all … or just different?

If Mycroft had an emotional deficiency already before Sherlock was born and he had to deal with a baby brother who was completely different form him …. was open and emotional … connected rather easily … would be loved more easily … would Mycroft be jealous?  If so … what would he do?  Surely he was already pretty intelligent even as a young boy. Maybe a plan was born … the plan to 'mend' his 'damaged’ baby brother and change him into someone more 'reasonable’ … into someone more like himself?  To even the score? To erase the 'Emotion-Virus’ and replace it with pure logic?

Sherlock seems to be a very emotional being but he tries to suppress his feelings forcefully. His brother belittles him repetedly … 'you’re a very stupid little boy’ …*such a disappointment’ … 'Mummy and Daddy are very cross’ … 'how would you know’ … and reminds him constantly that … 'caring is not an advantage’ … 'don’t get involved’ … 'I told you so’ …  'remember Redbeard'  Why?   And who/what is Redbeard? .

Maybe young Sherlock got a puppy once and loved it dearly … called it Redbeard … because 'initially he wanted to become a pirate’. And big brother Mycroft thought it a suitable idea to teach Sherlock a lesson … how much it hurt loosing something you love? That it is better to keep distant and cold. And so there was an 'accident’ and Redbeard had to be put down. 'See, little brother … that’s what caring leads to! You don’t get involved … you don’t get hurt!'  (What will Sherlock do if he ever finds out?)

Did Sherlock love and adore his clever big brother - back then - did he try hard to meet the high expectations. Eventually something very bad must have happend that led to the deep rupture between the brothers. Sherlock suffers … distances himself from Mycroft and the rest of the familiy too … seeks release in drugs. Is that 'event’ the trauma/skeleton he burried so deep and tries to unearth in TAB?

Could it be that the whole 'game’ is based at the core on some sort of 'familiy dynamic’. A game between brothers (or rather of one brother with the other) that grew bigger and bigger over the years? Young boys play little games and when they grow up the games grow with them. Does Mycroft still want Sherlock to be on the same side as himself … to be equal … an iceman without a heart and without emotions. Because only then he can tolerate him as a brother … be proud of him? So again and again he teaches him his lessons … and in doing this he drives Sherlock purposefully time and again on the brink of destruction only to pull him back at the last moment?

But the time comes … always … when such 'games’ grow too big. And Mycroft wouldn’t see this anymore because he is already way too deep in it. Does he think of himself as infallible? That he would never stumble over simple molehills (or hedgehogs?:))) like many clever geniuses before him? John happens and things change rapidly … Sherlock changes  … grows up in heart and soul. Starts 'feeling' the 'virus’ … recognizes the *error in the data’ …. that maybey caring is not a complete disadvantage? Love can make such things happen.  

But if Mycroft doesn’t approve … will he come to the conclusion that he has to do something against it? A pure logical conclusion!  Is he therefore the one who decides tearing Sherlocks heart out and burning it?  Is he the one who decides to erase John Watson … like he once did with Redbeard? But not by just kiling him. That would be too easy. No!  Sherlock will have to loose this man very slowly and painfully to another person … first.  After that … some killing may occur anyway. Then 'little brother' surely will come to his senses and believe - once and for all - that caring is not an advantage.

And should Sherlock still be stubborn and unreasonable … well … better no brother at all than … a GOLDFISH … ???

“There’s an east wind coming all the same, such a wind as never blew on England yet. It will be cold and bitter and a good many of us may wither before its blast. But it’s God’s own wind none the less, and a cleaner, better, stronger land will lie in the sunshine when the storm has cleared.”

John comes from the East back to England … is he the terrifying force that lays waste to all in its path? Will he seek out the unworthy … and pluck them from the Earth? But this time the one who gets 'plucked’ is not Sherlock ….  ?

Interview with Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss on Digital Spy: 

Which of them is the nicer brother?    “…. in a way Mycroft has schooled him (Sherlock)  to say … you know …  'don’t get involved’ … 'caring is not an advantage’ …  and he has absolutely taken that in as a child …"  (Mark Gatiss)

A bit not good … this stuff … I know.  May Mycroft have mercy with goldfisheses clueing for looks and thinking 'minor' thoughts . :)))  

________________________________________________________________

There's a name no one says   and   Poirot: The big four  by @isitandwonder

'About Smoke and Mirrors’   also about The Big Four

@callie-ariane your scripts are truly invaluable! Thank you so much!

________________________________________________________________

THE 'RUG-PULL EXPERIMENT' HAS ORIGINALLY BEEN POSTED ON MARCH 22nd 2016. Today (March 9th 2017) I noticed that the link doesn't work anymore. Thankfully I've made a copy at the time.  Of course some things have changed since then. Lots of new thoughts and new informations. But all in all most of the ideas are still interesting as well as possible I think.

If more damaged links turn up please let me know. I've copies of everything that is on THE LIST.  Thank you.  :)

March, 2016

[hawksmoor17]

I'm watching Doctor Who "dinosaurs in space" rn and all I can think of is that Lestrade is now an archaeologist. Also, earlier while watching another episode, it occured to me that Moffat likes the "it's all in their head plot twist". It's not impossible (or totally probable) that he used it once again in TFP.

Okay. So. I’m kind of freaking out right now, because your ask has just triggered my memory and I think I’ve stumbled across something incredibly important!

Now, if you haven’t seen Doctor Who, bear with me because I seriously think that this is a massive clue as to what’s been going on in season four.

We already know that Moffat’s written Sherlock into Doctor Who before.

I’ve considered a dream-sequence type thing as well. Not because of “Dinosaurs in Space”, though, but because of the episode “Amy’s Choice”.

Just to get this out of the way, I’m not sure whether TST/TLD are entirely constructed or not. It’s quite possible that they are partially real, partially fake. I highly suspect that TD-12 is the culprit in this case.

To anyone who hasn’t watched Doctor Who, but is following along with the conspiracy, I highly recommend watching “Amy’s Choice” stand alone because it’s got some crazy Sherlock parallels and will also give you a bit of an idea of Moffat’s particular brand of rug pull.

The basic premise of the episode is that it focuses around reality being contingent upon a single choice.

In this case, the Doctor’s companion, Amy, has to choose between either staying with her spouse Rory, or “the madman” aka., the Doctor. Remind you of someone?

The antagonist / bad guy of the day “The Dream Lord” traps the Doctor and Amy within a shared dream where they wake up in another reality in which Amy chose her husband Rory over the Doctor. They are both happily married, Amy is pregnant, and neither the Doctor nor Amy realise that they are dreaming at first.

Oh yeah. And The Dream Lord? He’s played by Toby Jones. How about those parallels?

Over the course of the episode the Dream Lord makes the Doctor and Amy wake up over and over again in both the reality in which Amy chose Rory, and the reality in which Amy chose the Doctor.

In the reality in which Amy chose Rory they are being chased down by aliens, and in the reality in which Amy chose the Doctor they are in the TARDIS about to be frozen to death by a nearby astrological phenomenon. A bit of a catch 22, then.

But the catch is that if you die in the dream, you wake up in reality.

Amy has to then choose which reality she thinks is real or a dream, in order to kill herself and finally wake up. 

I think this merging of dream and reality has been occurring on and off for Sherlock since his hospitalisation in His Last Vow.

Remember all the weird discrepancies and surrealist elements within season four? We get the same thing happening in “Amy’s Choice”, when the Doctor is trying to figure out whether they’re dreaming or not:

“The Doctor: Examine everything. Look for all the details that don’t ring true.Rory Williams: OK we’re in a spaceship that’s bigger on the inside than the outside.Amy Pond: With a bow tie-wearing alien.Rory Williams: Maybe “what rings true” isn’t so simple.The Doctor: Valid point.”

Meaning the glowing skull / lamp hell / OOC character behaviour / reused lines of dialogue all point towards constructed memories.

Moving along, where things get really incriminating is when you consider that the big reveal at the end of the episode: The Dream Lord is actually the physical manifestation of the Doctor’s darkest fears and insecurities.

“The Doctor: Drop it! Drop all that. I know who you are.Dream Lord: Of course you don’t.The Doctor: Of course I do. I’ve no idea how you can be here, but there’s only one person in the Universe that hates me as much as you do.”

“Sherlock Holmes: The point I’m trying to make is that I am… the most unpleasant, rude, ignorant, and all-round obnoxious arsehole that anyone could possibly have the misfortune to meet. I am dismissive of the virtuous, unaware of the beautiful, and uncomprehending in the face of the happy. So if I didn’t understand I was being asked to be best man, it is because I never expected to be anybody’s best friend…”

Just like the Doctor, Sherlock’s biggest weakness, central to the type of character he is, is loneliness.

The Doctor is so afraid of being alone that he conjures up a monster that traps he and Amy in a reality contingent upon her leaving him.

So to sum up the parallels, we’ve got …- The Doctor // Sherlock- Amy’s choice // John’s choice (post HLV)- Amy’s Pregnancy // Mary’s Pregnancy — The Schrodinger’s Baby dilemma- The Dream Lord // Culverton Smith // (John) // Sherlock- Additionally Billy Kincaid (mentioned in TSoT) mirroring Culverton Smith as well - Possibly The Dream Lord // Eurus // Sherlock

Relevant quotes/references:

Amy // John

Amy is referred to in Doctor Who as “the Girl Who Waited”. She meets the Doctor when she’s young, and he promises to come back and save her, but due to the TARDIS malfunctioning accidentally disappears and only comes back years into the future when she’s already grown up. (Paralleling Reichenbach.)

This theme of the Doctor leaving Amy behind because it’s in his nature/that’s just the sort of man he is really links into John and Sherlock’s dynamic. John thinks that Sherlock is always abandoning him both literally (TRF) and emotionally (THoB, ASiB, etc.,) because he’s a “sociopathic genius”, it’s just who he is, when really, unlike the Doctor, Sherlock is only being forced away from John due to Moriarty.

“Dream Lord: Poor Amy. He always leaves you, doesn’t he? Alone in the dark. Never apologises.Amy: He doesn’t have to.Dream Lord: That’s good. Because he never will. And now he’s left you with me. Spooky old not-to-be-trusted me. Anything could happen.Amy: Who are you and what do you want? The Doctor knows you, but he’s not telling me who you are. And he always does. Takes him a while sometimes but he tells me. So you’re something different.Dream Lord: Oh, is that who you think you are? The one he trusts?Amy: Actually, yes.”

“Amy: I love Rory and I never told him. And now he’s gone.”

“John: Just text her, phone her, do something while there’s still a chance, because that chance doesn’t last forever. Trust me, Sherlock, it’s gone before you know it. Before you know it!”

In Doctor Who, in order to make the right choice Amy must choose Rory over the Doctor, the man she loves over the man she is infatuated with.

In this case, Sherlock, although he parallels the Doctor, also parallels Rory.

Sherlock // the Doctor

What does the Doctor say the first time he, Amy, and Rory are together again?

“The Doctor: Now. We all know there’s an elephant in the room.”

And what is he referring to? Amy think’s it’s her pregnancy, but the Doctor makes a joke and says that he’s talking about Rory’s terrible choice of hairstyle. Of course, that’s not what he’s actually talking about. The real elephant in the room is the fact that Amy is standing between the two men she loves and has to choose between.

Weather Metaphors: “The Oncoming Storm” vs. “The East Wind”

Within Doctor Who we have the extended metaphor of the Doctor being referred to as “the Oncoming Storm” which can be seen as paralleling the “East Wind” in Sherlock, which is very likely referring to himself, namely his emotions.

“The Doctor: Someone—something—is overriding my controls!Dream Lord (Toby Jones): Well that took a while. Honestly, I’d heard such good things. Last of the Time Lords. The Oncoming Storm. Him in the bowtie.”

“The East Wind is coming, Sherlock. It’s coming to get you.“ 

And in mythology ... “Eurus is God of the East Wind. He was thought to bring warmth and rain, and his symbol was an inverted vase, spilling water. His Roman counterpart was Vulturnus.” [x]

From The Blind Banker:

“Sherlock: Someone else has been here. Somebody else broke into the flat and knocked over the vase, just like I did. John: You think maybe you could let me in this time? Can you not keep doing this, please?Sherlock: I’m not the first.”

Plus Sherlock drinking from the vase in TLD:

Conclusions

”Amy’s Choice” provides a conceptual basis for what is likely going on in Season Four. 

Where Toby Jones represents the darkness within The Doctor as The Dream Lord, it is possible that Culverton Smith at times represents the darkness within Sherlock. At the very least this also links into how other characters such as Faith/”E”/Eurus/Mary can sometimes be seen as representations of characters’ psyches.

Amy’s baby, aka., Mary’s baby, is likely existent in one reality and non-existent in another. Season four shows us a reality where Rosamund does exist so we know certain scenes are not real, just like how Amy’s pregnancy is not real.

Amy’s choice between the Doctor and Rory parallels John’s choice between Sherlock and Mary. In S4 Sherlock’s worst fears to do with loneliness are being projected into reality, just like the Doctor’s, likely because of TD-12, which parallels The Dream Lord’s “psychic pollen”.

Within “Amy’s Choice” Amy and the Doctor are presented with three separate realities. There’s the real world, the fake real world on the TARDIS where Amy chose the Doctor, and the fake world in the village where Amy chose Rory. Due to this I think it’s quite likely that there are multiple layers of unreality we are seeing in season four, just like when Sherlock wakes up into fake reality in TAB and goes to dig up Emelia Ricoletti’s body.

This makes even more sense considering the fact that TAB can be seen as a key for understanding season four. Dreams within dreams within dreams.

@worriesconstantly @jenna221b @teapotsubtext @drugsbust @my-relaxation @timey-wimey-consulting-dragon @misanthropic-acedia @theveryunnecessaryfeelings

[katyagrayce]

The Final Problem: my final opinion

I know that there are some fans, on Tumblr and elsewhere, who actually liked this episode. THAT’S OKAY. SERIOUSLY. You’re entitled to like whatever you want. It doesn’t mean anything other than that we have different taste in movies/different priorities when it comes to what we want from Sherlock, and that kind of opinion divide is pretty much inevitable with a show this varied and this popular. So if you belong to the TFP Fans Club, I want to clarify that I mean you no hate :-)

Personally, however, I did not like The Final Problem. My reasons included, but were not limited to: a) The disproportionally rapid, action-reliant and melodramatic storytelling, which wasn’t really consistent with the series’ tone so far. (This encompasses everything from that crazy Hollywood explosion to the fake cell Euros built for Sherlock - not to mention the the ‘video game’ set up of her puzzle system. Also, the age-old idea of throwing someone down a well. There were a lot of clichés at play in this episode). b) The suddenness with which Euros was introduced as a character, and the unfeasibility (IMHO) of Sherlock not remembering her at all. c) Speaking of unfeasibility - I also had issues with Euros planning the entire torture session in five minutes, building all of that underground lair, ferrying herself between Sherrinford and London so easily, getting everyone to Musgrave Hall/into their various cells so quickly, and getting John/Victor down that well without causing them serious injury. d) The oversimplicity of Euros’ psychological arc also frustrated me. I mean - there is loneliness, and then there is clinical psychopathy. They are two separate things. It’s true that there’s some overlap between the two groups, but not enough to pin all Euros’ behaviour on her being a scared little child with ‘no one’ to turn to - someone who later becomes 100% complacent just because she’s finally been hugged. Plus, when they decided to oversimplify Euros’ psychology Mofftiss basically dropped the chance to create a really complicated, really nuanced villain like Moriarty (remember all that amazing analysis about whether he wanted to beat Sherlock or just wanted the distraction, why he killed himself, whether boredom had driven him almost to the edge of insanity, etc., etc.? Euros doesn’t get any of those interesting conversations, mainly because she’s been automatically typecast as a ‘creepy loner child in need of attention.’) e) Speaking of emotional oversimplification - I also didn’t like the maximum emotional milking that Mofftiss brought to EVERY SCENE. Entire sequences, like Sherlock’s phone call to Molly and Euros forcing Sherlock to choose between Mycroft and John, seemed explicitly orchestrated to stir up audience feels as quickly as possible, instead of doing it slowly, skilfully and in-context (eg. I found Sherlock’s conversation asking for Molly’s help at the end of TRF much more feels-worthy than his phone call here, because it tied back to a conversation they’d already had about her ‘not counting’ and didn’t take place in a completely staged, high-tension situation.) f) And now for a big one - inconsistent character development. I feel that there were a lot of characters who acted quite OOC in this episode. First up, I think that John would have shot the governor. After all, he’s a soldier, he knows the pain of losing a wife, he’s very morally self-assured and he has killed before (see ASIP for evidence of the last two points), so even though he would have found it difficult I think he would’ve pushed through. I also think he would’ve tried very, very hard to talk Sherlock out of suicide, not just stood there dumbly and watched. Especially considering that he’d been prepared to die for him literally twenty seconds beforehand. Now for a second character: Molly. I understand that the scene with Molly was really effective for a lot of viewers, but - I wasn’t one of them. In TEH, it seemed that Molly was finally getting some character development beyond her crush on Sherlock - she recognised that he was using her as a replacement for John and cut that behaviour in its tracks, despite how difficult it might have been for her. In this episode, she spends every second on-screen looking totally lovesick, and proceeds to sacrifice her dignity just to answer a request that - from her perspective - must look a lot like either a cruel prank or a childish whim. The Molly we knew had grown beyond that - and, while I’m happy she survived, I’m not happy she had to fall apart to do it. Plus, what about that quick glance of her in the closing sequence when she pops into Baker St, smiling and seemingly totally okay? Did the phone call really have that low an emotional impact on her? To me, it just seems like a quick, lazy fix. And now, last but not least: Sherlock. This episode throws some spanners in what has been, up until this point, a very consistent and well-written subplot about his emotional growth. Throughout all the previous episodes we can track his ‘becoming a good man’ - he knows he’s hurt Molly in ASIB, he soothes a hysterical Henry Knight in THOB, he can talk down Major Sholto in TSOT and understands John’s grieving process in TLD. He even goes from subtly intervening in John’s suicide in ASIP to explicitly saving ‘Faith’ in TLD, which is an amazing example of how much he’s grown as a character. But in this episode - all of a sudden - he starts fluctuating wildly between ‘emotionally incapable’ and ‘emotional paragon’ when he shouldn’t really be at either end of the scale. The kind of man who can’t understand why Molly isn’t picking up, and who thinks “But it’s me calling!” is a valid excuse, can’t possibly be the same person who charms his sister out of psychosis with a hug and explicitly tells a DI that his brother ‘isn’t as strong as he thinks.’ Personally, I think that the episode’s latter actions are slightly more in-character for Sherlock than the earlier ones, but that’s not the point. The point is that this episode muddled a lot of very good character development back up again. g) A more minor thing, but - this episode was literally full of plot holes. Including, but not limited to, how the furniture in 221B possibly survived the blast, how Euros (an adult woman) sounded like a little girl on the phone, and how John climbed out of a well he was chained to. h) Another, less minor thing - ALL THE LOOSE ENDS FROM THE SERIES THAT THIS EPISODE LEFT BEHIND. Irene Adler was brought back into the picture, only for nothing to come of it. Rosie Watson was born and then featured for a grand total of two seconds after TST. Euros had a working partnership with Culverton Smith (? How did that exist while she was confined at Sherrinford?) that was neither explained nor justified. And, perhaps worst of all - this whole ‘final problem’ promised by Moriarty ended up being organised by someone totally different. i) And finally, one of the most disappointing elements of the whole episode - Mary’s final video. Put bluntly, it contradicted everything that I see the show as being about. Sherlock has always been very much about the two people behind the legend, putting the spotlight on Sherlock’s fragility and John’s dangerous addictions where ACD just smoothed them over with a Victorian gloss - ‘there’s always the two of them,’ as said in TAB, and the focus is on the relationship in between. But what Mary is saying in this speech is that nothing the show gave us apparently matters. Only the legend does. The ACD stories are apparently the important part. It’s a very, very demeaning way for the series to summarise itself, and it’s this, over anything else, that makes me suspect we might have a secret 4th episode upcoming.

Now, you might notice something - reading the above list. You might notice that I didn’t mention Johnlock. That’s right. I, personally, didn’t mind whether Johnlock happened or not. And it’s getting really frustrating seeing people dissatisfied with TFP get dismissed because ‘they’re just angry that their ship didn’t happen.’ There was a lot, a LOT wrong with this episode beyond the ship, and while it might be a valid reason for people not to like TFP (I’ll get to that in Point 4) it’s not the only one. Please, don’t write off some very legitimate, very reasoned disappointment as some kind of ship-driven whim just because you can.

Now, all that said - I have to add that the queer-baiting in the lead-up to this episode was absolutely horrendous. Like I said, I’m not a Johnlock shipper and always had doubts about it happening, but the trailer editing and publicity stunts - Sherlock saying ‘I love you’ right after the Culverton Smith ‘darkest secret’ quote, the flickering rainbow letters on the PBS TV spot, Benedict saying ‘Love conquers all’ and Amanda saying TFP ‘makes television history’ - all those things were pointing in one pretty obvious direction. Now, this wouldn’t be such a bad thing if it had happened with literally any other potential plotline on the show, but the thing about queer-baiting is that it exploits a highly vulnerable and extremely under-represented group - the LGBTQ+ community. It lures them in with something they sorely want and need - media representation - and then not only fails to deliver but thumbs its nose at their disappointment. It rubs salt into the wound. It’s cruel and not okay, and as an experienced partnership with one gay member Mofftiss should have known better. So, even if you think disappointed Johnlockers are ‘just being petty,’ you have to remember that the experience of being denied this ship can carry a lot of emotional impacts other ships don’t.

And, finally - there were things about this episode that I liked, even loved wholeheartedly. Sherlock calling John family. Their re-decorating the flat, and the two-second snapshot featuring a happy Rosie. Sherlock remembering Greg’s name, and Greg calling him a ‘good man’ (it was a bit on-the-nose, but still). Mrs Hudson sassing Mycroft about the kettle. Even the idea of Euros as a little girl on a plane was fundamentally a good one, if oversimplified, over-focused on and overdone. So yes - this episode did have its moments. And it’s not affecting my enjoyment of Sherlock as a whole, but still - that doesn’t mean I have to like it. Um... If you’ve read this far, congratulations! I didn’t mean for this post to get so long, but it feels good to have vented a bit :-)

[waitedforgarridebs]

What if the IDEA of Moriarty was just the creation of Mycroft, to ensure that his little brother would have a reason to stay alive? Mycroft is not UNDER Moriarty's thumb - Moriarty IS Mycroft' thumb! #TheEngineersThumb

THANK YOU FOR SENDING ME AN ASK WITH YOUR TAGS ON THAT POST (x) I WANTED TO REBLOG THAT !!!! You genius, Mycroft is Moriarty’s thumb, this made my day!

Ask @johnnlocked, I was yelling, and it was 4am!

And yes, I completely agree with you, Mycroft created the idea of Moriarty - but I don’t think his motive was to give Sherlock a reason to stay alive / to stay off the drugs, and since I never came around to write that post, I’ll do a short version now. 

(I say “short”. It’s not short. Imagine what the long version would have looked like though, lmao)

I do believe that the government / Mycroft created the project “Moriarty”, nameless or with another codename (”Amo” / “Love”?). “Moriarty” means “navigator” or “sea-worthy”, so it could be something water-y.

Those are, after all, very “deep waters” for Sherlock… 

My theory is that Sherlock discovered the very fringes of the whole Moriarty machination in TBB #it’s always TBB. And this was completely not what Mycroft wanted, Mycroft never wanted Sherlock to know about this, at all.

Because, those people are really really dangerous, and Mycroft is far from being able to control them all - at least not as in, “don’t harm my little brother”, that would completely contradict the actual purpose of Moriarty; a tool to ensure “the greater good”. 

So, Mycroft wanted to focus the damage Sherlock could do to something more controllable, more limited, and that is not an entire organisation, but a single person. This is why Mycroft invented “Jim” Moriarty, and designed him in a way that he would be the perfect match for Sherlock, that he would be something Sherlock could obsess about, far away from all the actual business of Moriarty.

So far, so good. But if that plan would have worked, the whole plot of the show would have been quite boring though. 

I feel like Jim very much was following his own agenda, maybe he even wanted to destroy Moriarty from within, “commit suicide”, his apparent “death wish”, because thanks to Mycroft he now was Moriarty, he was the only person who would be able to stop this project. If Jim is anything like the character he plays, he loves chaos, he loves the randomness of things, and Moriarty is the exact opposite of this. Moriarty tries to order the chaos, to control it. Very much a Mycroft-esque thing to do. 

(I’m aware of the fact that all of this probably doesn’t make very much sense when you haven’t read at least this part of my meta series (x), but “Moriarty”, in my opinion, is an Orwellian project run by the goverment.)

After TST, and also looking back at the scene at the end of THoB, I think that Sir Edwin is very much in on this, he is probably Porlock. Lady Smallwood is quite clueless, and honestly, I can’t wait to see her kick everyone’s asses for this, but I’m getting off-topic…

Back to Jim. 

The introduction of the character “Jim Moriarty”, in combination with Irene, is the downfall of the Moriarty project. Irene gives Jim the information he needs to turn the tables.

“Bond Air” is Mycroft’s “Skyfall”.

Therefore, even if Mycroft tried to keep Sherlock save and the Moriarty project alive at the same time, there was no way this could ever have worked out. And it was the Moriarty project that had to die, because after the failed Bond Air project, it had already been kind of dead. 

It would’t take long for the terrorists to figure out that someone had played this game with them. That the British government had been trying to fool them in this way. Oh my, that would have had serious consequences. 

That is why Moriarty had to die. But one also had to ensure that no one would be able to link all those events to who actually had committed them, the British government, because this was exactly the reason why they had to kill Moriarty in the first place, to not have anything that would lead back to them. 

Nobody knew up to this point that Moriarty was a thing though. Except some criminals, and they would keep their mouth very much shut about this.

Cue: TRF.

Jim was actively advertising in this episode. And this not because he needed clients, or the money, that was never what he was doing all of this for. 

They. Told. Us. All. Of. This. 

It was important that the world got to know Jim Moriarty. The master criminal. The person who had committed so many crimes, who was apparently so powerful - and in all of that, Sherlock Holmes was helping.

Up to this point, Sherlock was the only person to ever have seen Jim Moriarty’s face - because, Moriarty itself has no face! - and now Sherlock was telling the world, hey, this is him, James Moriarty, the Napoleon of crime. I am the great Sherlock Holmes, you better believe me, this man is my worst nightmare, he tried to blow me up.

And, just before that, Jim had broken into the three most secure places of the country. Sherlock was only confirming to the public what the press had already been telling them, like, trying to steal the Crown Juwels, ermahgerddddd, arrest this man!

So, not only had Jim been able to show off his skillz, but also had he been able to link the name “Moriarty” permanently to his face.

He does all that, and then commits suicide. Welp. Not very clever? 

Except this was what all of this had been for. 

Now, Moriarty, the potential traitor, was dead. No need to take revenge on a dead person. And the link to the British government was gone, too. Sherlock Holmes was on vacation, so they had a lot of time of peace and quiet to get the project running again.

Oh yes. Moriarty is dead, long lives Moriarty. 

Or (Lord) Moran. 

The government didn’t stop doing what they were doing, this whole business was much too promising for that. They just had to carry their coups out in a different way - they have a lot of talented people working there, after all.

And if that meant that Sherlock Holmes had to come back from the dead only to actuate the off-switch on a bomb in order to prevent a terrorist attack that no one ever actually wanted to carry out, that was just meant to frighten people into agreeing with the introduction of an anti-terrorism bill, well. (x)

Which makes me think… 

SHERLOCK: […] Tomorrow the US president will be at the embassy as part of an official state visit. As the president greets members of staff, Greta Bengtsdotter, disguised as a twenty-two stone cleaner, will inject the president in the back of the neck with a dangerous new drug hidden inside a secret compartment inside her padded armpit. This drug will then render the president entirely susceptible to the will of their new master, none other than James Moriarty. KINGSLEY: What?!SHERLOCK (quick fire): Moriarty will then use the president as a pawn to destabilise the United Nations General Assembly which is due to vote on a nuclear non-proliferation treaty, tipping the balance in favour of a first strike policy against Russia. This chain of events will then prove unstoppable, thus precipitating … (he finally slows down and says the next words slowly and precisely) World War Three. (x)

I guess we should watch out for hints at that treaty in the upcoming episodes…?

ANYWAY.

Mycroft introduced Jim into Sherlock’s life. Mycroft planted the idea that Moriarty is a person in Sherlock’s head, the only person who could ever be an equal or worthy opponent for Sherlock. 

And Sherlock believes it.

Sherlock believes that Jim, even if he hadn’t been able to fake his death, would have been able to set up a plan that would take effect after his death, only to continue their little game. 

(^balance of probability, Sherlock, why do you even think that. I am so disappointed, honestly. YOU were able to fake your death, and you really think Jim wouldn’t have been able to do the same, and this just because of your gay fever dream, INSTEAD you really believe he would have been able to set up something like- oh my god make it stop)

And I really think that only in TST, Mycroft is beginning to realise what he really has done there. His brother is obsessed with Moriarty, despite the fact that he isn’t even alive anymore. 

Yes, the plan to distract Sherlock is kind of working, he doesn’t see what is actually going on, that Mycroft is the source of all of this, but at what cost? Is Sherlock gonna get insane because Moriarty will continue to not get in touch, and this additionally to all the guilt that must be nagging at him now because of that whole Mary-business? 

I can really see why he’s gonna be back on drugs tonight… no case and no John, oh my.