The (Non-Existent) Garridebs Moment...
You guys know that I belong to the rare kind of johnlock shipper who actually loved series four. I loved the depth of emotion of it all, I loved the imagery (I still can’t get over that “touch the glass”-scene) and I loved, loved, loved the relationship growth between John and Sherlock.
(And yes, I will use that gif until I die.)
But there were moments that were harder to love than others. Above all: The scene with the three Garridebs. However, there was a really good reason why the writers did what they did. And this is what the rest of this post is about.
First Of All: Why Is That Scene Such A Big Deal?
The Adventure Of The Three Garridebs by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is often described as “the gayest adventure in ACD canon, ever”, because of the compassionate moment which Holmes and Watson share after Watson is injured:
“You’re not hurt, Watson? For God’s sake, say that you are not hurt!”
It was worth a wound – it was worth many wounds – to know the depth of loyalty and love which lay behind that cold mask. The clear, hard eyes were dimmed for a moment, and the firm lips were shaking. For the one and only time I caught a glimpse of a great heart as well as of a great brain.“ (source)
Even those who don’t see a gay subtext in the original series still recognise the milestone that this moment poses in their relationship. Holmes comes completely undone in the face of losing Watson. In other words: Whether romance or bromance - this canon adventure is a big deal within the fandom and must be a huge moment in any modern adaptation, too.
False Promises In The Modern Adaptation
But the Garridebs scene in The Final Problem was strikingly not that. In fact, it was anything but. The scene goes by super quickly, it is anticlimactic between all those high-stake challenges, and Sherlock is more composed than he has been in the entire series. There seems to be no emotional or story telling value to this scene whatsoever.
Why would the writers give us such a scene in the first place, let alone have it include one of the most expectation-loaded references to ACD canon? True, we have had quite a few “Garridebs moments” in the past (the swimming pool scene in The Great Game comes to mind), so perhaps the writers felt we didn’t need any more of such moments. But then why bring it up at all? Why get everybody’s hopes up and then not act on it? Why not reference any other adventure? No, this was deliberate. Mofftiss are up to something. And it is time for some tin hatting (or, as it was called in my day, literary analysis).
Chekhov’s Gun
Many of you will have heard of the principle of Chekhov’s gun by now:
Chekhov’s gun is a dramatic principle that states that every element in a story must be necessary, and irrelevant elements should be removed; elements should not appear to make “false promises” by never coming into play. [..]
“Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it’s not going to be fired, it shouldn’t be hanging there”
(source: Wikipedia, emphasis added by me)
Chekhov’s gun has been a recent discussion point in the fandom, after Louise Brealey brought it up in a *slightly* pissed off tweet of hers.
Yes, read some fucking Chekhov. Every scene is there for a reason. As is the Garridebs reference. And indeed, just in case we wouldn’t get it, Mofftiss put an actual rifle on the wall in the Garridebs scene, basically to confirm, if we had doubts, that they know what they are doing. Subtlety be damned.
A seemingly pointless scene, a promising reference that remains unfulfilled, and a reminder that there shall never be pointlessness or broken promises in drama - either, Mofftiss have gone completely bananas or the message is: We wouldn’t give you all these gay references, if we weren’t planning on following through eventually.
And Then There Are The Red Walls
If you are having doubts about which of the above two options it is, let me draw your attention to another seemingly pointless detail in this scene: The red walls.
Mofftiss, I think, are referring to H.G.Wells’s “The Red Room” here, a short story published in 1896 (x). In short, after having slept one night in a supposedly haunted room, the narrator comes to the conclusion that the room is indeed haunted, but not by ghosts, but by fear itself.
In Eurus’s experiment, the red walls have no apparent function. Perhaps they make the atmosphere slightly more creepy, but they do not have any impact on the challenge, Eurus isn’t really concerned with them at all, and it just all seems a bit odd. And yet, Mofftiss are wasting valuable screen time by having Sherlock comment on the red walls. So they are important.
Additionally, only this one room has red walls. If this is supposed to make things creepier, why not paint all of the rooms? The answer is: Because the read walls are relevant to this room and this scene only: to the unfulfilled promise of the Garridebs moment.
Mofftiss would not give us all this relationship development between John and Sherlock if they weren’t planning on going somewhere with them. All that is haunting the johnlock fandom is fear itself.
Oh, thank you, this is interesting! it's no secret that i didn't enjoy s4, but i so appreciate this articulation of what's hopeful in it.