This Scene Just Does Itself

I don’t think i have seen this since i was a lurker! :)

@sherlockedcarmilla @thinkanddoodle-batch OMG 😂 I am howling!!!

This is so perfect I’m crying laughing!! Hahahahaha 😂

Laughing in public, people starting to look at me weirdly ;)

Yes - this conversation is hilarious, and so true! 😂 I honestly can’t interpret it in any other way. They’re talking about how much they miss each other, with Sherlock resorting to drug abuse and John’s marriage being a disaster, boring him to the point of cycling to work only to avoid his new wife for a little while. Sherlock deduces this, and his conclusion is supported by ’Billy’, whose deductions go even further. But - in the light of this - isn’t it rather contradictory that, later in the same episode, Sherlock claims that John fell in love with ’Mary’ because she offered him so much danger and excitement? I mean, if John already felt that ’Mary’ was a BAMF who fulfilled his need of adventures, why cycle to work??

@ebaeschnbliah @raggedyblue @sagestreet @sarahthecoat @gosherlocked

ok so a different rb of this just showed up on my dash and i looked at the notes in case i had said this already. Having just re read the first part of @impatient14 's meta about the space time continuum, which is about how the mechanics of sherlock running scenarios in his mind theater works, and placing EMP start point BEFORE the rooftop scene in TRF (and please do go read it!) *takes a breath*

So, i am reading this as "mary" representing sherlock in a relationship with john*, and wiggins representing drugs=chemistry of love. sherlock is trying to work out "the moriarty case" (which is itself, in my reading, a metaphor for his own sexuality, AND how it has been repressed in previous adaptations, etc etc)

*see also @sagestreet 's baby switch metaphor, because "mary" makes a point of the pregnancy, ie, possible future relationship, as a major factor in all of this.

i am not good enough at this to write a line by line translation, like @wellthengameover 's brilliant example above, but what i see is sherlock trying to understand if this works, both for him and for john, from what he knows about john so far (in TRF, remember, having just called him a machine and left the lab) (and setting aside for the moment a metaphorical reading of TRF because my brain will turn inside out). can he really talk to john about his emotional problems? if john finds out, will he be angry, or still care?

john has been expressing his sexual needs thru dating a string of women, but he stopped in ASIB, does that mean he really wants sherlock, or just that he's frustrated ("cycling" to "work")? or is cycling a metaphor for going to therapy? something about what john said to sholto in TSOT equating 'trick cyclist' to therapist. if john and sherlock are going to be together, but john still goes to therapy, is that a good or a bad thing for their relationship?

then there is molly (=john)'s line elsewhere in the scene about "throwing away his gifts", sherlock's fear that if he gives in to his Great Heart, he'll fail as the Great Brain.

in @impatient14 's reading, all of HLV is sherlock running the scenario of 'the moriarty case' where he straightup murders moriarty (=shooting CAM), and concluding that's out of the question. (srsly, please read, will link before i post!) in my metaphorical reading, that means he is going to decide that repressing his sexuality and associated trauma, definitely isn't working, either personally or in his association with john.

ok, here is the link i promised

would this be a good time to bring up triangulation and the way it works as queer coding in literature? 

For example, often in fiction the desire of a man for another man is triangulated via a woman who resembles that man. For example, Victorian lit couldn’t really have a dude being attracted to another man, so often an author would make him attracted to that man’s practically identical-looking sister (see: Lady Audley’s Secret). In the Study of Four, there’s a scene in which Watson is thinking about Mary and she literally turns into Holmes in his head. 

So this scene, in which John points out the similarity between Sherlock and Mary, the same scene in which Sherlock points out that Mary’s like him because “you married her”? It’s kind of screaming, “yeah, you’re attracted to her because she’s like me.” 

In short, it’s saying, what John saw, or wanted to see, in Mary - is Sherlock. 

So yes this is my first meta contribution to TJLC enjoy. 

“For example, Victorian lit couldn’t really have a dude being attracted to another man, so often an author would make him attracted to that man’s practically identical-looking sister“.

That is one of the many, many, many reasons why I believe Sherlock’s dad had an affair with Sherlock’s maternal uncle (Uncle Rudy), as I pointed out in my ‘Follow the dog’ meta (here: x), then just turned around and married the guy’s sister (Sherlock’s mother). 

Needless to say there are lots of hints that Uncle Rudy and Sherlock’s mother mirror each other, as in: they’re both very hot and very intelligent (both are Sherlock!mirrors, after all).

wow, yes! and she won't thank me for tagging her in a sherlock post, so i will just mention that p l a i d a d d e r recently read and discussed lady audley's secret, and Noticed that particular bit of queer coding.

*rubs hands together in anticipation*

There’s a lot of talk of John marrying Mary as a way to ‘prove’ his heterosexuality. He felt the need to appear ‘normal’, so he took on a normal life: wife, child, living in the suburbs. If we expand upon this a bit, I think his reaction to Mary when he finds out who she really is is telling. 

He’s not upset that she lied. He’s not upset she has a secret identity. He’s not upset that she shot Sherlock to cover up who she is. No, the thing that appears to upset him the most is that she ‘isn’t normal’. She doesn’t conform to idea of a ‘perfect’, ‘normal’ (aka, heterosexual) life. She isn’t the happy wife in the suburbs with a child, but a highly trained assassin. John chose Mary because he thought he could have a normal life with her. He chose someone who he thought was the exact opposite of Sherlock: wanting to settle down, not go on crazy, dangerous adventures.

But, even in his attempt to chose someone completely opposite to Sherlock, someone he can pretend to be straight with, he still ends up choosing someone who is similar to Sherlock in a lot of ways.

Hmmmm…. interesting viewpoint.

Plus, he dealt with his grief and anger over Sherlock, went to therapy over it. Maybe came to the conclusion that as exciting as he found living with Sherlock, and being in the army, they were choices that ultimately caused him great pain (physical or emotional). Perhaps he made the conscious choice to change to a more ‘normal’ life, married to a woman and living in the suburbs, raising a family.

Having Sherlock coming back and then discovering that Mary was an assassin pulls him right back where he was before. It wasn’t supposed to be like that!

yes! which makes sherlock’s line about ‘she’s that way because you chose her’ (i forget the exact wording, but it’s weird) another one of those snags for me. john *didn’t* choose her because she was “like that”, he *chose*her to be *normal*. so something else is going on.

that whole scene has so many snag moments, when what they say to each other doesn’t properly string together, only they try to make it sound like it does by the way they deliver the lines. like, if you just listen to the tone of voice and the facial expressions, it looks like a coherent conversation. but if you focus on the text, it isnt.

Hmm, interesting discussion. First of all, I very much doubt the ’domestic’ scene in HLV (and all of the scenes in HLV an onwards, for that matter) is actually ’real’; I rather think this is Sherlock’s MP analysis of what would happen if/when John finds out his ’normal’ wife is actually a criminal.

I agree with @sarahthecoat ; the conversation in that scene is far from logical and coherent. And there’s actually nothing to suggest that John really chose Mary. My impression (from the blog and TEH) is that she’s a colleague at John’s clinic who starts to invite him out, and John ends up accepting her invitations mainly because she insists and is very sympathetic to his grief. I can’t find any scene where John seems to be in love with Mary, all I see is a deeply depressed man desperately needing help to get out of his state. His ’choice’ is not an active one (as it is with Sherlock, who told him some of his flaws already when they met at Barts); he’s being persuaded by someone who claims to be the best thing that could have happened to him. What John actually chooses to do is to conform himself to convention, because he doesn’t believe his former choices have been healthy.

On the other hand, I can’t see that John is drawn towards Mary because she’s a ’dangerous’ person to hang out with. Unlike Sherlock, she doesn’t introduce John into solving crimes or chasing criminals and she’s not even into any ’dare-devil’ sports or similar. You’re not ’dangerous’ just because you can decipher a skip code!

The thing with Mary, in my opinion, is that from the very start she’s too good to be true. Would a ’normal’ woman be OK with the situation in TEH? She clearly does realise that John is in love with Sherlock; she even teases him about it. When Sherlock’s reappearance from the dead makes John lose it, Mary sides with Sherlock and even promises Sherlock she’ll ”talk him around”. Not a glimpse of jealousy or resentment towards the guy who just destroyed her special moment with John proposing to her. That’s really not ’normal’; that’s being manipulative! Mary has an agenda, and even if it turns out she’s not an assassin, or any of the other weird things she appears to be in HLV and S4, there’s definitely something fishy going on with her. Some time ago, I tried to analyse the significance of Mary here (X, X), for what it’s worth.

@raggedyblue , @sagestreet , @gosherlocked , @ebaeschnbliah

yes, and the more closely we look at scenes like this, the more convinced i am that the writers literally compose the subtext first, and then loosely paper it over with a semblance of a surface narrative. s3 and s4 are increasingly this way, but once you start looking for it, there's plenty in s1-2 as well.

so begin by assuming that "mary" is not a "real person" but is there to represent something subtextual. like, as a sherlock mirror, since john DID choose SHERLOCK because he "could be dangerous". and SHERLOCK is worried that john won't like him if he discloses too much about himself and his past.

in TEH, "mary" sides with sherlock because she is an aspect of him, maybe a part that lives inside john's head. john is understandably upset at sherlock, but he's also still in love with him, so "mary" is representing that mix of feelings one can have. like the old joke, in 60 years of marriage, did you ever consider divorce? divorce, no, murder, yes, reply the octogenarian lovebirds.

THEY  DIDN’T  DO  IT  …..

________________________________________________________________

There are some characters in Sherlock BBC who, at one point, become suspects in a murder investigation. And in each of those cases it turns out in the end that someone else had been the perpetrator. 

Lady Louisa Carmichael

It is Mycroft Holmes who sends the lady with the otherworldly case to his brother. A remarkable woman, thinks John Watson and even Sherlock Holmes is impressed and defends the lady against the disparaging comment of her husband.

Nevertheless, Lady Carmichael soon becomes the main suspect in this case.

TBC below the cut ….

Weiterlesen

@ebaeschnbliah: Great post. Another important pattern. And I think that all of these lead up to THE FALSE SUSPECT no. 1 - Sherlock. He is suspected again and again of committing crimes none of which he is responsible for:

Therefore I think that all the other occasions where people and animals are falsely accused of crimes serve as a mirror for the fact that Sherlock again and again is accused of crimes he did not commit, that he is made to suffer for other people’s deeds or even framed. 

That’s an interesting take on it @gosherlocked! And let’s say that these accusations basically happen inside Sherlock’s own head (except for the media persecution in TRF); is this actually Sherlock blaming himself for a number of things? Self-loathing? Could it possibly tie back to his childhood, maybe he has some kind of survivor’s guilt, of feels somehow responsible for Victor’s death? Hmm…

Indeed, @possiblyimbiassed  As you added in your comment here, regarding the above listed characters who get wrongly accused of murder (Phil, the cat, the hound, Lady Louisa, Molly, Janine, Mary and Lady Smallwood), one can reasonable conclude that ‘love didn’t do it’. 

What I find also very interesting is that on a first look six suspects in six cases are involved. Then, when the actual ‘perpetrators’ are revealed, it turns out there are only five cases which reflect the pattern of wrongly accused suspects, because two characters, Mary and Lady Smallwood, are suspects in the same case, the Tiblisi hostage incident. The actual culprit is Vivian Norbury who used Smallwood’s codename AMO. This reminds me stronly of the six Thatcher busts who are owned by five different people. 

@gosherlocked  I agree, the theme of guilt is an ongoing one. It includes also characters like Henry Knight, who utters the words ‘I’m so sorry, Dad’ when his repressed memories finally come back. There is Major Sholto, who once led people into battle but it went wrong and all of them died. Also, Sir Eustace, who fears to be dragged to hell for something he had done in the past. Another main theme seems to be revenge. Ajay, Jim, Jonathan Small and Eurus are clearly driven by it. Assuming all those characters are in some way linked to Sherlock, the chances are high, this has indeed something to do with Sherlock’s past. 

Yes @ebaeschnbliah; the merging of six into five is interesting indeed. I wonder if Mary and Lady Smallwood are mutually exclusive? If Smallwood represents ‘true love’ and Mary the heteronormative facade, basically a lie, then both of them cannot exist in the same moment and circumstances, can they? But Mary is never actually freed of any charges, it’s just that Norbury shows up out of nowhere, under a false name (just like Mary), and commits another crime, while kind blaming ‘love’ for it. 

As for guilt, i can’t get rid of the feeling that Sherlock feels guilty for having loved, as if his love has lead to someone dying or getting hurt? Sherlock seems to be repressing emotions, and he alway declares that emotions are bad. But there’s actually only one kind of emotion he does repress, and that’s love. He has never seemed to have any problems expressing anger, frustration, contempt, impatience, boredom, disgust or any other negative emotions, has he? And he does have humour, he has no problem with laughing either (especially when he really shouldn’t laugh, like after having played dead for two years), and sometimes he becomes euphoric. Love is the only feeling he actually rejects, which makes it very suspicious in my opinion.

@gosherlocked 

@possiblyimbiassed: Absolutely. Could not agree more. And this is supported by the text itself - love being a vicious motivator, etc. Love is indeed the only feeling he does not allow himself. 

And I stumbled upon a post with an old Moffat quote about Mr Jekyll: Hyde is love. And love is a psychopath. Well, well, well …

Agree, @possiblyimbiassed  This story circles heavily around love … AMO. And AMO is at the same time AMMO …. ammunition. Because love is a very explosive chemistry, dangerous and destructive. At least, this is Sherlock’s viewpoint back in ASIB. A conviction most likely caused by a painful experience (or experiences) from his past.

Good one, @gosherlocked  As far as I remember, Sally Donovan, Philip Anderson and Mary’s ex David call Sherlock a psychopath, while he likes to see himself as a sociopath. In HLV John regards Sherlock as well as Mary, as psychopath and Magnussen calls the Watson’s ‘Mr. and Mrs. Psychopath’. Really interesting, this quote about love. 

Nice catch, @sarahthecoat  (this comment)  The person who smashes the two Thatcher plaster busts, owned by Miss Orrie Harker, and kills her, wears indeed black gloves. 

And in TEH Mary can be seen wearing similar gloves as well.

As does Sherlock …

In fact, Sherlock wears his gloves more often than not. His black gloves are almost just as prominently displayed as his Belstaff. He wears them outdoors (when no one else seems to need those items), he wears them also indoors and even when he shakes hands. I often wondered that this is a bit strange. 

Interesting point about sherlock and "mary" both having black gloves.

Sherlock is often metafictional in nature: in series three particularly, the writers frequently draw the audience’s attention to the fact that the programme is constructed. One of the ways through which they accomplish this is through utilising word selection and dialogue framing so as to draw attention to the particular implications of specific linguistic choices.

This plays a significant role in The Sign of Three, particularly in the exploration of relationships, and is exemplified by the framing of the introduction of Major James Sholto:

The resolution of the client’s dilemma is a simple one: even if the audience hadn’t heard of identical triplets before, it remains the most obvious explanation of three people who are identical other than mole patterns. The case doesn’t serve to showcase Sherlock’s deductive abilities and makes no impact on the criminal investigation aspect of the narrative. So what was it doing there? Possibly it was there to insinuate a connection between the case and the relationship between the other people present in the discussion either physically or by mention. It is between John twice reading out “my husband is three people” that Major Sholto is introduced – a character who is discussed with language carrying romantic implications. This is first exemplified during the following dialogue:

The framing of this dialogue creates a double entendre – Mary’s statement that it’s her wedding day serves explicitly as a reason for her to smile, but the implicit implication of it following her reminder that neither she nor Sherlock were ‘the first’ is that there is something romantic in the nature of John’s relationships with Sholto and Sherlock as well as her.

The second is during the flashback to John and Sherlock’s conversation on the bench while investigating the case of what will later be referred to as the ‘Invisible Man’:

‘Why don’t you see him anymore’ and the term ‘ex’ are, of course, culturally associated with romantic relationships. It’s also particularly significant that John emphasises the semantic differences between ‘previous’ and ‘ex’, since the language of sexuality affects him more than any other character in the programme. He never claims to be straight, only “not gay” – a defensive technique which I and many other bisexual people can attest to having used – and only on two occasions when he has been pressured into discussing personal matters with someone he dislikes and then when it has been insinuated that he couldn’t possibly marry a woman. His other denials of involvement with Sherlock refer to their relationship status – he is “not his date” or they are “not a couple”, but those are temporary claims that in no way discount the possibility of attraction to or future involvement with Sherlock or with men generally. That John plays the most prominent role in exploring the minute differences in language in this episode will therefore be of interest to anyone who reads him as queer and closeted.

Even John notes Sherlock’s unusual level of interest in ‘another human being’ (and ‘chatting’, Sherlock? really?) - remember that at this point in the narrative, when the flashback scene actually took place, Sherlock was not aware that Sholto was the intended victim of the ‘Invisible Man’. The parallel that Sherlock draws between himself and Sholto (implying that he is John’s current commanding officer) is also notable, given that he is evidently jealous of him and discusses him romantic terms.

Then there’s the dialogue between Sherlock and Sholto through the hotel room door:

John parallels Sherlock and Mary several times throughout series three – ‘she has completely turned my life around; changed everything. But, for the record, over the last few years there are two people who have done that,’ ‘You should have got married’ and ‘I want to be up there with the two people that I love and care about most in the world. … Mary Morstan… and… you’ – and here we again see Sherlock explicitly paralleled with Sholto, too.

This triplicity, the triplicity of ‘The Sign of Three’ as a title and the “my husband is three people” case could perhaps coexist coincidentally, but ‘the universe’ (and the media industry) ‘is rarely so lazy’.

-

This is derived from my meta on romantic conventions in Sherlock, which can be read here.

Good one!

A(LITTLE) STUDY IN OUTFIT

The first time we see Moriarty, Jim from I.T. , he’s dressed as a twelve-year-old gay boy with a tender face and low pants.

 It is also curious in this picture watching Molly and John stare fascinated Jim. Molly is a mirror of John, it’s no wonder she/he was hit by Jim, because it’s Mr. Sex after all, it’s the part of Sherlock that seduces people. But he’s gay and it’s something Molly and John have long denied. One could think this is like the sexuality of SHerlock at a first stage. It isn’t for nothing that we are in the middle of a case involving facts dating back to the 80s. We will see Moriarty dressed in a similar way when he attacks the jewels of the crown, presumibilemte a reference to when for the first time (a memory of, recalled because the conditions have resurfaced similar), desire has turned into a fact. The first sexual experience, more or less shared, perhaps isnt even important.

however this is a rather suggestive image

The other times we see Moriarty perfectly dressed in tailored clothes, a feature that compares him to Sherlcok and to Mycroft. Sherlcok wears clothes like armor.

We will then see Motiarty dressed as John (thanks to this fun meta X). 

Sherlock’s desire has been shaped by the object of his love. A story teller in soft jumpers.

@gosherlocked @ebaeschnbliah @possiblyimbiassed @sarahthecoat

Ha ha, yes this is very apt @raggedyblue ! :))) ”A storyteller in soft jumpers”, I love it! (And I also love those funny cardigan gifs in your link). And Andrew Scott is always priceless, but one of his best scenes, in my opinion, is that one from TRF where he elegantly performs a ballet-inspired frontal attack on the crown jewels, shattering any glass walls in the way. ”I want to break free”, indeed! :)

@gosherlocked @ebaeschnbliah @sarahthecoat

Thanks @appliedcontext for reminding me of these excellent observations by @raggedyblue! Seeing this again, something else occurred to me: the ’soft-jumpered storyteller’ impersonated by Jim is something that has totally disappeared in S4. The faked vulnerability that Moriarty is displaying in these pictures only lasts up until the Fall. After this, Jim is 100% tailor-suited villain. And John’s jumpers may stay a bit longer, until HLV, but the storyteller has already adopted a different tone. 

By S4, John’s soft jumpers and cardigans are totally gone and he’s wearing shirts and jackets instead, more like Sherlock. Several ‘darker’ topics are openly addressed in S4, which had only been hinted at in the show that far: depression, loneliness, drug addiction and suicide. This reminds me of the last post on John’s blog, which is entirely written by Sherlock. At first, Sherlock tries to “mimic John’s style of writing” (albeit in an exaggerated way), but pretty soon he abandons this tone and goes on to complain about John, Mary and their ‘sex holiday’ in words dripping with resentment and sarcasm. In S4 we also learn that John’s blog has “gone a bit downhill” and people now regard it as Sherlock’s blog (= Sherlock is the storyteller). 

My interpretation of this is that the show has been told by Sherlock from start, but in the first two series the storytelling was mimicking John’s style, while the rest is more and more Sherlock himself. Which would be consistent with Sherlock getting trapped inside his own mind palace.

@raggedyblue @gosherlocked @ebaeschnbliah @sarahthecoat @sagestreet

Oh, interesting thought! I am also glad to read this again, especially in light of recent discussions about "mary" being a multiple-mirror, both for john and for sherlock. It seems jim is also a multiple mirror, maybe that's part of why he (and "mary") are "so changeable". HMM, come to think of it, i wonder if this multiple mirroring function is at work in other characters who seem "out of character" in s4.

V O W S   &   P R O M I S E S

________________________________________________________________

MY FIRST AND LAST VOW …..  Sherlock in TSOT

 More vows and promises under the cut ….

Weiterlesen

@ebaeschnbliah​: Oh, I like this. You know I am a fan of parallels. So here are my thoughts:

1. There is a clear parallel between TAB and TST. Sherlock both times not being able to save a spouse and blamed for that. However, and this is where it gets really interesting: The scene in TAB happens BEFORE TST which means that Sherlock is anticipating not being able to save Mary and being blamed by John. Which, I think, is big. 

2. And equally interesting: In his MP Sherlock expects John to come to his aid, to defend him. Not after the death of Lord Carmichael but before, the famous moment of John stepping in Carmichael’s way when he seems to attack Sherlock. 

3. List of people who have compared Sherlock to a dragon slayer:

We know definitely that Mycroft and Jim know each other and have met more than once. But how is it possible that Mary as well uses the very same metaphor with regard to Sherlock? Or is this a man imagining a terrible outcome similar to the Carmichael murder which happens in his mind as well?

Yes, @gosherlocked those cases are clearly connected with each other on more than one level. Just like TRF is taken up again with the Ricoletti case, the Carmichael case repeats main topics of THOB, which then reappear once more in TFP. The vow from TSOT, the failure to fulfill that promise in TAB and the repetition of the failure in TST relate to one and the same problem, I guess. And taking into account that Sir Eustace as well as Mary are mirrors for Sherlock and both get killed … stabbed and shot in the same place … this would mean that it is Sherlock himself who assumes that he will not be able to survive whatever he thinks is waiting for him. 

What’s more … which characters does Sherlock suspect will be responsible for the killing? Three people hide under the veil of the bride in TAB … Janine (female and diminutive name for John), Molly (major John mirror) and Jim Moriarty, Mr.Sex. That’s a very familiar constellation of characters. Just like in TEH the main question seems to be: John or James, James or John. In TST, on the other hand, it is Vivian Norbury who kills Mary. Vivian uses Lady Smallwoods codename AMO (I love). This looks very much as if Sherlock assumes to be either killed by love or sex or both. 

YES.

Is John’s blog canon?

When I first learned about John Watson’s online blog - I think it must have been sometime after the airing of Series 2 - I thought it was created only for the entertainment of the show’s most dedicated fans. I took for granted that the blog must be some sort of complementary reading for those who wanted a more in-depth version of the crime cases. It was a bit of fun to read John Watson’s ‘public version’ of what we could all clearly see was the story’s ‘real’ content, namely the TV show. But also to read the comments from characters that appeared in the show and those who didn’t (like John’s sister Harry). 

But then Series 4 aired, and I think many of us realised pretty soon that if the show no longer seemed to make much sense, this was certainly true for the blog as well. In S4 we quickly learned, for example, this:

a) John is now writing on a jpg file instead of the blog editor, which is simply impossible.

b) Lestrade talks about being able to take the credit “…until John publishes his blog”. But this never happens; the blog hasn’t been updated since TSoT.

c) People in the show no longer consider it to be John’s blog; in TLD everyone thinks it’s actually Sherlock’s blog.

So now there’s definitely something fishy going on with the whole blog theme. Which seems a bit weird for a complementary device, doesn’t it? But then this addition by @raggedyblue to another post made me realise that the blog might actually be so much more - it might represent a true version of BBC Sherlock’s canon. And suddenly the pieces seemed to fall into place - and I don’t mean just some of them, I mean all the pieces.

Because the thing is, that this blog of John’s, which we can all very easily find and read online in real life (’IRL’), is in itself a part of the show. It doesn’t just have some references in the show; it’s referred to in every single episode except for TBB, TRF, HLV and TFP, and often multiple times. We hear about it from Day 1 in ASiP when John is seen with his laptop. On no less than 35 occasions in this show, which I have listed below, John’s blog posts are being referred to, shown, discussed or alluded to by the different characters in the show - and not only by Sherlock and John themselves. 

So, with this much support for the idea that the blog is much more than just a complementary device directed at fandom, I think we can conclude that yes; the blog must indeed be regarded as part of canon. Which means, in my opinion, that any theory, any hypothesis about what’s going on in this many-layered show, that contradicts what we learn from the blog, will have some explaining to do. 

If you want to claim, for example, that Mary isn’t at all real in the show, that she only exists in Sherlock’s or John’s imagination, you’ll also have to explain why she appears on John’s online blog, making conversation with other characters. If you want to claim that Sherlock never recovered from the Fall, that everything that happens after TRF is totally fake, you also need to explain how Sherlock can be writing on John’s blog after that. And - of course - if you want to take S4 at face value, you need to give a reasonable explanation of how John can write on a jpg file, and how come the blog hasn’t been updated since TSoT, in spite of so many references to it in S4. 

On the other hand, in 2017 I tried to come up with a theory that does not contradict the blog, but still doesn’t accept the inconsistencies and weirdness we can see in this show. In short, the idea (which is originally @raggedyblue‘s) is that up until the wedding in TSoT Sherlock is using John’s blog posts to set up mental scenarios based on his and John’s experiences together. And after TSoT, Sherlock’s (now unconscious) brain keeps going with the introspection even without the blog. It’s all here (part of my meta series), so if you have a better idea that does not contradict the blog, feel free to try to debunk mine. :)

In the mean time, if you have the patience to read it, let me present an extensive list of the 35 occasions where John’s blog is mentioned in this show. if you have more examples, please add them to those presented under the cut (Thanks to Ariane DeVere for all these invaluable transcripts):

Keep reading

Wow, good work! I generally buy the idea that john's blog represents "reality", and the show is sherlock's "embellished" mind theater, at least through s2. S3 is so over the top bs in places, it's harder for me to buy into, ie, even john writing a blog post about something is not necessarily convincing. S4 is clearly fake, so, w/e, mind theater, blog theory, it's all good, or better than the surface anyway!

I love the idea in #19, that this scene is entirely in sherlock's imagination. And again, it's sherlock himself providing the "embellished" version!

#20, hmm, is there such a thing as a blog that's not online? "blog" being short for "web log".

#17 & 21, sherlock's claims to have "written a blog", which were never shown on his website. I came to the show well after s2 aired, so all i ever saw of the tobacco ash entry was "deleted". Is anyone still here from early enough to say if that entry was ever there either?

#25 good catch with the guardsman's missing gun. And boy does the mayfly man cosplay TGG moriarty here or what? The baseball cap, the cold weather version of what jim wore to the crown jewels. Homophobia stabs england/john in the back, while pretending everything is fine. I know we have seen meta about bainbridge and sholto as sherlock mirrors, but soldiers in uniform also screams john mirrors.

#26 a very interesting thought that the stabbing could be entirely in sherlock's mind theater.

Is John’s blog canon?

When I first learned about John Watson’s online blog - I think it must have been sometime after the airing of Series 2 - I thought it was created only for the entertainment of the show’s most dedicated fans. I took for granted that the blog must be some sort of complementary reading for those who wanted a more in-depth version of the crime cases. It was a bit of fun to read John Watson’s ‘public version’ of what we could all clearly see was the story’s ‘real’ content, namely the TV show. But also to read the comments from characters that appeared in the show and those who didn’t (like John’s sister Harry). 

But then Series 4 aired, and I think many of us realised pretty soon that if the show no longer seemed to make much sense, this was certainly true for the blog as well. In S4 we quickly learned, for example, this:

a) John is now writing on a jpg file instead of the blog editor, which is simply impossible.

b) Lestrade talks about being able to take the credit “…until John publishes his blog”. But this never happens; the blog hasn’t been updated since TSoT.

c) People in the show no longer consider it to be John’s blog; in TLD everyone thinks it’s actually Sherlock’s blog.

So now there’s definitely something fishy going on with the whole blog theme. Which seems a bit weird for a complementary device, doesn’t it? But then this addition by @raggedyblue to another post made me realise that the blog might actually be so much more - it might represent a true version of BBC Sherlock’s canon. And suddenly the pieces seemed to fall into place - and I don’t mean just some of them, I mean all the pieces.

Because the thing is, that this blog of John’s, which we can all very easily find and read online in real life (’IRL’), is in itself a part of the show. It doesn’t just have some references in the show; it’s referred to in every single episode except for TBB, TRF, HLV and TFP, and often multiple times. We hear about it from Day 1 in ASiP when John is seen with his laptop. On no less than 35 occasions in this show, which I have listed below, John’s blog posts are being referred to, shown, discussed or alluded to by the different characters in the show - and not only by Sherlock and John themselves. 

So, with this much support for the idea that the blog is much more than just a complementary device directed at fandom, I think we can conclude that yes; the blog must indeed be regarded as part of canon. Which means, in my opinion, that any theory, any hypothesis about what’s going on in this many-layered show, that contradicts what we learn from the blog, will have some explaining to do. 

If you want to claim, for example, that Mary isn’t at all real in the show, that she only exists in Sherlock’s or John’s imagination, you’ll also have to explain why she appears on John’s online blog, making conversation with other characters. If you want to claim that Sherlock never recovered from the Fall, that everything that happens after TRF is totally fake, you also need to explain how Sherlock can be writing on John’s blog after that. And - of course - if you want to take S4 at face value, you need to give a reasonable explanation of how John can write on a jpg file, and how come the blog hasn’t been updated since TSoT, in spite of so many references to it in S4. 

On the other hand, in 2017 I tried to come up with a theory that does not contradict the blog, but still doesn’t accept the inconsistencies and weirdness we can see in this show. In short, the idea (which is originally @raggedyblue‘s) is that up until the wedding in TSoT Sherlock is using John’s blog posts to set up mental scenarios based on his and John’s experiences together. And after TSoT, Sherlock’s (now unconscious) brain keeps going with the introspection even without the blog. It’s all here (part of my meta series), so if you have a better idea that does not contradict the blog, feel free to try to debunk mine. :)

In the mean time, if you have the patience to read it, let me present an extensive list of the 35 occasions where John’s blog is mentioned in this show. if you have more examples, please add them to those presented under the cut (Thanks to Ariane DeVere for all these invaluable transcripts):

Keep reading

Wow, good work! I generally buy the idea that john's blog represents "reality", and the show is sherlock's "embellished" mind theater, at least through s2. S3 is so over the top bs in places, it's harder for me to buy into, ie, even john writing a blog post about something is not necessarily convincing. S4 is clearly fake, so, w/e, mind theater, blog theory, it's all good, or better than the surface anyway!

I love the idea in #19, that this scene is entirely in sherlock's imagination. And again, it's sherlock himself providing the "embellished" version!

#20, hmm, is there such a thing as a blog that's not online? "blog" being short for "web log".

#17 & 21, sherlock's claims to have "written a blog", which were never shown on his website. I came to the show well after s2 aired, so all i ever saw of the tobacco ash entry was "deleted". Is anyone still here from early enough to say if that entry was ever there either?

#25 good catch with the guardsman's missing gun. And boy does the mayfly man cosplay TGG moriarty here or what? The baseball cap, the cold weather version of what jim wore to the crown jewels. Homophobia stabs england/john in the back, while pretending everything is fine. I know we have seen meta about bainbridge and sholto as sherlock mirrors, but soldiers in uniform also screams john mirrors.

#26 a very interesting thought that the stabbing could be entirely in sherlock's mind theater.

If Mary was real...

If Mary was real…

In TST, since AJ is supposed to be after Mary, the laser point would be on her head, not John’s.

Sherlock would have texted her an address, not this sentence he said to himself in TGG.

In His Last Vow, when they come back from Leinster Gardens, she wouldn’t just stand there, oddly silent, all the information we get coming from Sherlock’s mouth. She would have at least had a small reaction when John kicked a table, maybe not like Mrs Hudson, but even Sherlock jumped a little. She didn’t blink!  

In TST she wouldn’t copy Sherlock’s near death from HLV.

In TLD she wouldn’t imitate Sherlock’s deductions.

“There are no ghosts in this world…save those we make for ourselves”, Sherlock says in TAB. Mary has to be one of those ghosts he created for some purpose. Is she the alias he created for himself to come back after the fall ? Or was it John? In HLV they say it’s his fault.

M.C.BF

OH, i like the way you think! The red dot on john feels like a callback to TGG also, and possibly TRF, but in TGG we (and sherlock) actually saw the dots. I wonder if there is a connection between the pool and the aquarium, i bet i have read some discussion about that somewhere. TGG is also where john got a bit shouty at sherlock, over stuff like caring and saving lives and who or what is a hero or a disappointment.

Whoa. This is blowing my mind. 😱😱😱

He created her because of johns bad reaction on his coming back?🤔😲

No, I don’t believe in John’s bad reaction, I think it’s a trick, a lie he put on the blog. I think Sherlock came back incognito after the fall under the alias of Mary Morstan. It’s a feeling I have when watching the beginning of TAB, with both Sherlock and Mary arriving at Baker Street incognito (Sherlock hidden in the carriage and Mary under a veil), and later when we learn that Mary infiltrated a secret group, and I believe that’s what Sherlock did when he was fake-dead.

There are scenes I can’t explain though: Sherlock’s deduction of Mary in TEH, Rosie, but most of the time I see her as a clue Sherlock is reading, and after her death I only see her as Sherlock after the fall.

Back in s3 hiatus, or maybe TAB hiatus, i remember a meta that examined the "deduction cloud" around "mary" in TEH, and pointed out that most, maybe all, are true of sherlock. Like, how can he know "mary" has an appendix scar? He may be observant, but he didn't see her naked. We know he likes dogs, and that there's loads of subtext around dogs, but that doesn't mean he isn't also a cat lover, or whatever cats are subtext for. ETC.

I like your point about both arriving at baker st in TAB hidden!

Saving John Watson

What a funny coincidence, right? Exactly the same wording. And there is more. We do not know for sure who sends the skip code. We assume it is Magnussen but the first message is addressed to Mary whereas the following are directed at Sherlock. Anyway, Mary is involved. It is her decision to turn to Sherlock - something she is not told to do by the sender. Which is strange if we remember her skills. She could have driven the motorbike herself. 

And in TLD it is Mary herself who sends the message, a video presciently recorded before her death. At least we are meant to believe this. But it happens in an episode that is full of prescience if not clairvoyance. 

Strangely enough, in TEH the immediate danger to John is far greater than in TLD. Sure, he seems depressed but he is not drugged and put into a fire, right? 

Another thought: In TEH Mary is leading Sherlock into danger in order to save John. In TLD Mary is leading Sherlock into danger in order to save John. 

But how can we interpret this on a symbolic level? Well, it is Mary (whatever she may represent here) who is sort of uniting Sherlock with John. In both episodes Sherlock and John have been estranged and in both episodes it is Mary who brings them together again. Which is remarkable since we usually tend to see her as divisive where the two men are concerned. 

This is quite a jumble of thoughts and I would love to hear your ideas.     

@ebaeschnbliah, @sagestreet, @sarahthecoat, @tjlcisthenewsexy,  @possiblyimbiassed, @raggedyblue, @someovermind, @shylockgnomes, @sherlockshadow, @hemlock-her-loss, @devoursjohnlock, @loveismyrevolution, @beingallmysterious, @i-believe-n-sherlock-holmes, @sherlock-overflow-error

I love these thoughts @gosherlocked !!

Especially as there’s still a draft waiting in my metas with the exact same name! And it’s waiting there since before shooting s4 even started!! So it didn’t even involve teh!! And still I concluded back then that “save John Watson” is the main theme of the show! All that shown and explained by the score/soundtrack/music (as was to be expected with me 😆) and you know what?? It all already started in tbb - the episode which gave us codes to decipher problems/the show! Coincidence?

Maybe this meta will eventually be finished… 😬

But back to your post. Nice observation with Mary being the connecting factor when the boys are estranged. Not exactly sure what to make of that… but I was thinking if maybe her being a Sherlock mirror had anything to do with it?! Same as Eurus connecting them being a mirror, mirroring them both actually… connecting link?! The two psychopath ladies being matchmakers? Maybe even unwillingly, unintended? Hmm… just rambling here…

And the two times Mary sends Sherlock into danger to rescue John… I actually see development here… One time Sherlock has to actively rescue John himself, the second time it’s more indirect as John’s reactions on Sherlock being in danger are rescuing him. He’s also rescuing Sherlock here… (#sherlockholmeslives = #johnwatsonlives)

And also here Eurus combines and comes into the game… because she puts both of them in danger for both to be rescued….. Again without intending to do so imo…

There are more thoughts, but they’re even more a mess than these already written out… maybe I’ll add them later.

But well, let me just say it again… definitely SAVE JOHN WATSON !

@ebaeschnbliah @possiblyimbiassed @devoursjohnlock @sagestreet @sarahthecoat @sherlockshadow @shylockgnomes @raggedyblue

Good points, @loveismyrevolution  I haven’t seen your comment in time to add to it. Just this …. the music emphasises the idea that Mary represents a certain aspect of Sherlock. It’s definitely not the sound for a villain. Would love to read another music meta of yours. :))))s 

yes, me too! I don't pick up on the music very easily, so music meta is very helpful!

Saving John Watson

What a funny coincidence, right? Exactly the same wording. And there is more. We do not know for sure who sends the skip code. We assume it is Magnussen but the first message is addressed to Mary whereas the following are directed at Sherlock. Anyway, Mary is involved. It is her decision to turn to Sherlock - something she is not told to do by the sender. Which is strange if we remember her skills. She could have driven the motorbike herself. 

And in TLD it is Mary herself who sends the message, a video presciently recorded before her death. At least we are meant to believe this. But it happens in an episode that is full of prescience if not clairvoyance. 

Strangely enough, in TEH the immediate danger to John is far greater than in TLD. Sure, he seems depressed but he is not drugged and put into a fire, right? 

Another thought: In TEH Mary is leading Sherlock into danger in order to save John. In TLD Mary is leading Sherlock into danger in order to save John. 

But how can we interpret this on a symbolic level? Well, it is Mary (whatever she may represent here) who is sort of uniting Sherlock with John. In both episodes Sherlock and John have been estranged and in both episodes it is Mary who brings them together again. Which is remarkable since we usually tend to see her as divisive where the two men are concerned. 

This is quite a jumble of thoughts and I would love to hear your ideas.     

@ebaeschnbliah, @sagestreet, @sarahthecoat, @tjlcisthenewsexy,  @possiblyimbiassed, @raggedyblue, @someovermind, @shylockgnomes, @sherlockshadow, @hemlock-her-loss, @devoursjohnlock, @loveismyrevolution, @beingallmysterious, @i-believe-n-sherlock-holmes, @sherlock-overflow-error

Yes, @gosherlocked  It’s quite strange how the character of Mary Morstan/Watson is presented. As you say, on both occasions she acts as an intermediary between John and Sherlock to reunite them. This doesn’t make the least sense for a supposedly jealous wife. But it doesn’ t make sense either that Sherlock seems jealous as hell of Major James Sholto, a man who clearly belongs to John’s past, instead of Mary, the woman John is about to marry. That’s neither a common nor a realistic behaviour in a situation like this. 

Even before S4 aired, I had started to view Mary in a different way, on a different level and the new series only encouraged my considerations. Especially the promo pics for TFP show Mary (and most of the other main characters) in an outfit similar to Sherlock himself. And I guess the reason for this - and for quite a lot of similarities Mary shares with Sherlock - is, that she is not an autonomous character but represents, like Eurus, a very important part of Sherlock himself.  Mary is not the woman who comes between two men, she is Sherlock’s facade which - up to a certain point - Sherlock wants to keep for protection. And only when he is finally ready to part from his facade, emotions and memories (Eurus) start welling to the surface of his mind.

Source of pics  x

I really really like this shortcut to Mary=Sherlock’s facade @ebaeschnbliah !! You know I love your Mary=Sherlock mirror meta. But this sums it up and narrows it down rather perfectly!

yes! I'm just starting to catch up with this discussion, wow.

WESTIE’S  ENGAGEMENT  PARTY  &  JOE’S  CONFESSIONS

This and a little bit more under the cut ….

Continua a leggere

@ebaeschnbliah I totally agree. When I saw the scene again to listen to the dog, it all gave me strong vibes “Stag nigth”. The light, the drunken friends, the defenses lowered. Takin things from  pockets, these are things we see John do often, but he has also done Sherock to John (the gun in HLV). These two men spend their time stealing …. phones and guns each others … hem … And then again a memory stick. Like AGRA. Very secret plans on a simple key, like the very secret data of AGRA agents. Really an amazed way to conceal information. It seems more an easy way to pass them on to someone else rather. A transition from one hard drive to another. Information however that really is not passed or read. The memory stick of the plans ends at the bottom of a pool and the other inside a fireplace. Submerged by water, burned by fire. And the name, West, canon, but already in ACD I think there was a clear intention in the division of the two cardinal points. The West is killed … or falls in love? After all, again the love / death metaphor is in the game?

The name of the killer after all is qeuivalente to: Harry’s son as you say well, Harry, the hidden homosexual part of John, who kills the heteronormative part of Sherlock. The facade is destroyed. At the same time though we see the killer dressed as we will see later Mycroft (absolutely OCC). The control that kills the feeling. Even if by mistake. Again multiple mirrors. And great capture with the Central, I honestly missed it. It is there that the story “derails” is not it ?. That the cards are really put on the table, that the sexuality of Sherlock is exposed.

@ebaeschnbliah @possiblyimbiassed @sagestreet @gosherlocked @sarahthecoat

RB for discussion. HMM, yes, the pickpocketing. ASIP, sherlock admits to pickpocketing lestrade's warrant card, in TGG we get joe pickpocketing westie, and john being instructed to pickpocket sherlock. "mary" hands over her agra stick, but sherlock fights ajay for his. Mirroring, mary (and westie) as sherlock are actually more forthcoming than ajay as john.

the subtle way of showing disrespect by putting your fingers into somebody’s glass of water

My favorite Mary-Sherlock parallel is from their respective first scenes with John, because they’re both like “Welcome to your new life. Sorry in advance”

*stares, mouth agape*

This!!!!

@ebaeschnbliah

I’m stunned 😲

Splendid! And thanks for tagging @loveismyrevolution  Maybe I should update my Sherlock/Mary-Similarity-List some day. I stopped counting near 35, if I remember correctly. The one thing I’m really waiting for is the secrret tattoo …. both of them should have one …  :))))

@gosherlocked 

Oh, this is incredible. Even more proof of you theory, @ebaeschnbliah.

wow! I had forgotten "mary" ever actually let that word pass her lips.

John can’t ever know that I lied to him…

LIKE THIS IS NOT MARY SPEAKING. This is Sherlock… he lost John…

Stab me with a fork. I’m done.

@waitedforgarridebs and @sonnet57 sorry dudes… But Mary IS Sherlock… like… So of course… this is about Reichenbach…everything is about TRF…. 

Yes, @shylockgnomes  And Mary (Sherlock) shooting Sherlock in HLV, is Sherlock’s own desperate attempt to stop himself from going deeper. Probably because he is afraid what he might find there. Holmes killing Holmes ….

@gosherlocked @sherlockshadow @raggedyblue @sarahthecoat @possiblyimbiassed

“It would break him”

Well I wasn’t upset be this before… but I am NOW. The thing is… She’s such a strong Sherlock mirror and people just miss it. Because she’s blonde. But honestly. It’s another reason for the way it became the Mary show. And why it didn’t work when the narrative was given to Mary… also why the narrative is still with Mary at the end…

I always think of Moff’s character RORY WILLIAMS in Doctor Who back in the same year he was making Sherlock series 1. Named Rory for Mary and Williams for Sherlock. 

mmhmm.