The Padded Cell

[J.P.]

It seems this scene was not that much of a subject yet. I would very much like to discuss it again. For the beginning I collected all I could find through the search function. Sorry if I messed up the quotes, the system sometimes is not that cooperative. The highlighting in bold letters are mine.
 

 

*Sigh*... how I do love that whole mind palace sequence. A killing from the perspective of the victim - while that might not be a completely original idea, it was certainly brilliantly executed and finally, we got a good glimpse inside Sherlock's funny old head.

 
Speaking of which, Sherlock has an interesting attitude towards (his own) death. He doesn't strike me as suicidal, but on the other hand, he doesn't seem to go to any great lengths to avoid dying, either. Self-preservation doesn't appear to be his first priority [....]He doesn't start to really fight for his life until he remembers that it would be a bad time to die because John is in danger.
 
This.  I have watched that mind palace sequence so many times.  Gorgeous work.
 
I think the self-preservation part is very evident, but he's fighting a battle he nearly loses, and one that grows increasingly focused on himself until a burst of herculean will allows him to let a focus on others motivate him.  I notice these points:

• Once Mary has shot him, his consciousness is still on the "surface," so to speak.  The alarm starts blaring in the background, which is a release of adrenaline.  His body is moving into fight-or-flight mode, and his mind prepares to go with it.  
• As the panic grows, his perspective grows increasingly internal, as symbolized by the run down the spiral staircase.
• He navigates the fall, and there's a second burst of adrenaline (alarm blare) that he has to mentally squelch.  He does so with the image of Redbeard, which is located firmly in the memory portion of his mind palace/brain, but not in the "limbic system" or instinctive/reflexive parts of his brain.  That's reserved for.....
• Moriarty, who for me symbolizes not some deep psychological problem, but just the body's instinctive life/death/pain response center.  It's Moriarty in a padded cell, and indeed, this part of everyone is a little psychotic.  This is the part of one's brain that goes into gear when people lift fallen automobiles off children and other seemingly impossible feats of personal strength.  It's a little nuts down here when it needs to be.
• He's got to find a way to use his mind to control the pain.  He looks horrified when he "realizes" that he has no choice about experiencing pain; all he can do is accept it.  And this pain is enough to kill him.
• His mental image of himself is writhing in pain, which means that the real him is consumed with the pain he's feeling.  Ultimately, the only way to escape the gut-tearing agony he is experiencing is to let himself die, and now the choice is not life or death but agony or release.
• But he's so strong mentally that he can use the last milliseconds of consciousness, when the pain is leaving him along with the life force, to actually think through the implications of his "actions."  His death will leave his best friend married to a murderer, while Sherlock takes the knowledge to the grave.  He can't do this to bring himself release at the expense of bringing his best friend pain and danger.
• So, in the most bad-ass example of self-preservation and yet selflessness ever portrayed on film, he freaking climbs out of his own limbic system and lets his analytical brain pull his physical body back into life.  Talk about the triumph of intellect over base instincts.  

Anyway, that's the way I experience that scene, and why I love it so.

 

 

And way was Jim chained and in a straight jacket in the dying Sherlock's mind palace? And why is he the last person Sherlock seeks out?

Well I have always interpreted Moriarty as a part of Sherlock himself. Not really a figment of his imagination, but sort of. Moriarty represents who Sherlock could have easily become if he hadn't chosen "the side of the angels". Of course that option is not entirely dead. Sherlock just has it well under control, chained and imprisoned. He needs it once in a while, I guess. Or it simply can't be killed. Which is why it does make sense in a way that Moriarty is alive for real, too (even though I still don't like that bit).

 

[J.P.]

 

 

 

I think you're right that John's absence is probably to heighten the drama, as he is the catalyst for Sherlock's (improbable) return to life. It is interesting, though, that the writers chose to present it that way. They could have featured John and still kept the dramatic turning point. For instance, he could have appeared in the final Mind Palace scene, in distress and calling for Sherlock's help, or he could have been a distant, receding figure drawing Sherlock back towards life. That's just off the top of my head, of course, and I am sure the writers could have come up with a very dramatic way of featuring John as a catalyst in SQherlock's imagination.

Yes, but wouldn't it have been terribly difficult to do so in a way that isn't too romantic? Besides, the people in Sherlock's mind palace don't seem to be representatives of their actual live counterparts so much as different aspects of his own personality, who take on different voices. The mind palace scene is basically Sherlock talking to himself, I think.

 

I like the Moriarty solution. First of all, because it's another way of the series coming full circle. In series 1, it was Moriarty who made Sherlock see that he did have a heart, by using John, by putting John in danger, and then in His Last Vow, of course it is Sherlock's "inner Moriarty" who taunts him with "John Watson is in danger". Besides, for some reason, it seems to be the villains' job in this series to tell the characters (mostly Sherlock) the truth about themselves. So it's appropriate, from my point of view, that Moriarty gets to point out how Sherlock is failing his vow and that yes, he does have a reason to live.

 

Speaking of a reason to live: Wasn't that "the final problem", anyway? Staying alive - what for? So of course it has to be Moriarty who brings this up again!

 

And by the way. Isn't it dark and sad and interesting that Sherlock didn't fight for his life for it's own sake? He's not all too fond of living, it seems. One of my favorite "send a shiver down my spine" moments in the entire series is when, in The Hounds of Baskerville, Sherlock immediately associates "Liberty In" with "Liberty in death" and calls this "the only true freedom". He has a death wish for sure. And who could be better to personify that than Moriarty?

 

It would be quite in character with the original Mr Holmes. He claimed that he would die gladly, if he could take Moriarty with him. I always had the impression that Mr Holmes, sooner than live to lose his mental faculties in old age, would gladly be killed on some adventure, provided his exit made a big enough smash and bang and drama. Unfortunately, there were always people and countries who needed him and dragons to be slain...

 

I'd guess that the writers could manage to hit whatever note they chose but, if it was romantic, would that matter? I don't think you could get a more heightened example of romanticism than the gothic image of Jim Moriarty in a straitjacket, chained up in some sort of pit. Or did you mean romantic in an erotic sense? Again, would it matter? They've hardly avoided playful hints along those lines already, so I can't see that it would be so terrible if the Mind Palace scene had featured John in a way which had the Johnlock shippers going "Well, of course...." and everyone else seeing it as an illustration of the powerful bond between Sherlock & John.

 

Ironically, given that he prides himself on his rationality and cold logic, Holmes has always been a romantic character - a knight errant facing unimaginable evil in defence of the innocence In his current incarnation, he's positively Byronic, all dark curls and flowing black coat. (Not that I'm complaining, you undrstand.   )

 

I agree that giving the lines to Jim works well, though his role in the Mind Palace isn't without paradox. It is easy to forget that the characters are all representations of Sherlock's own mental processes, so it is his subconscious which is telling him that he feels pain and heartache but need not fear these feelings. So he has unconsciously chosen an imaginary version of Jim, a genuine psychopath, to tell himself that he does have feelings - i.e. not a sociopath - but he can control them. Strange.....

 

As for Jim's warning that John is in danger......Why does Sherlock think that? Surely he doesn't think Mary would harm John after shooting him? In fact, John would have been safer if Sherlock died and Mary could play the grieving friend, comforting John for his loss. If Sherlock fought his way back to life, he could expose her and maybe put John in danger if he reacted badly to the news. How would Sherlock being alive help to keep John out of danger? Wouldn't it put him in greater danger? Or was Jim referring to something else - something we don't yet know?

 

 

 

So you're saying that it wasn't all that unrealistic for Sherlock to a] give himself the best chance to survive being shot (by imagining what Molly might recommend -- see, we're still on topic), and b] fight his way back through sheer determination?

 

Not just sheer determination -- have you noticed how as soon as the mind palace Moriarty mentions John, Sherlock gets back up, albeit painfully so.

 

 

I've got this great image (unable to post, of course!) that has a very striking comment about this scene.

 

"Just die, why can't you?"

 

The most terrible thing about this is that it is not James Moriarty telling Sherlock to die.  It's Sherlock telling himself that he would be better off dead, and he is using Moriarty's words way back from Bart's rooftop as encouragement.

 

There is a lot of truth in that comment.  Notice that Sherlock does call John's name right as he is leaving the padded cell, and once when ascending the stairs.  The thought that John was in danger via Mary pulled him from those depths of despair.  Remember that (as far as we know), Moriarty did NOT know about Mary as she came on the scene after the fall.  That's why his words spoken about her - even that she was the wife of John - are really all Sherlock's subconscious.

 

And to keep this on topic, Molly does help him to survive by focusing on what he needs to do in his 3 seconds before he loses consciousness.  She tells him to get control when he's in terrible pain, but his own "demons" of doubt and a bit of self-loathing in the form of Moriarty begin to fell him in the padded room.

 

Sherlock Pressure Points - Case Notes

 

- For those wanting to know the full list of Sherlock's pressure points, there are five repeated over and over again: John Watson, Jim Moriarty, Irene Adler, The Hounds of the Bakerville, Redbeard.

(…)

- Unsure though we are about bringing Moriarty back in a literal way, having him around as a Hannibal Lecter-like presence inside Sherlock's mind, a presence that only arises in his darkest moments, is kind of a brilliant prospect. Interesting, too, that he was in a padded room trying to keep Sherlock there with him. After their "You're me" conversation on the rooftop, it makes tons of sense that Sherlock's greatest fear might not be death, but his own potential for madness like Moriarty's.

 

The staircase would have been stored in his mind palace, as everything was, so if it isn't the original staircase, it is certainly a visual reference to it.  Love that he's got Moriarty in the mind palace chained up by the neck in a straight jacket and padded room where he absolutely cannot escape.  Moriarty says he is dead, which means that Sherlock absolutely believes that Moriarty IS dead.  You can't blow your brains out and not be dead (and the creators said that they didn't create a double fake-out suicide).

(…) 

Mycroft is in control of his intellectual prowess, and Sherlock is not entirely in control of his own.  Especially from the "A Study in Pink" to "His Last Vow," we can see more and more that as he gets flooded with information, he can go completely off-kilter and manic (the classic wedding reception scene) trying to sort it all out, something that Mycroft apparently doesn't suffer.  Makes me wonder if Sherlock's drug habit  wasn't partly to calm the voices in his head.

 

(…) And way was Jim chained and in a straight jacket in the dying Sherlock's mind palace? And why is he the last person Sherlock seeks out? And Sherlock asks him something like "How did you stand the pain?" or something along those lines.

Mycroft had Jim tortured, but Sherlock had under gone torture at the hands of the Serbs, so that doesn't quite cover it.

If there was a more detailed discussion about it, feel free to  in the right direction. If not, I will write more soon.

[Arcadia]

Afraid I don't have anything to add; some good analysis going on up there and I certainly can't top it. I particulalry like Boton's interpretation; I like to the think the Sherlock crew is actually that good.

 

 

[J.P.]

I want to add something, but it have to wait until tomorrow. For now I put the transcript so it's at hand when needed. I trimmed it a bit

 

 

 

SHERLOCK (straightening up and leaning up from the wall): You.

SHERLOCK: You never felt pain, did you? Why did you never feel pain?

JIM MORIARTY (slowly turning his head more): You always feel it, Sherlock.

JIM: But you don’t have to fear it!

JIM: Pain. Heartbreak. Loss.

JIM (in an intense whisper): Death. It’s all good.

JIM (now on his knees beside him): It’s all good.

JOHN’s VOICE: Sherlock?

(…)

(Back in the padded cell, the lighting has turned a blue colour as Sherlock continues to convulse on the floor, his eyes wide. Beside him, Jim is back on his feet and he begins to sing slowly and softly.)

JIM: ♪ It’s raining, it’s pouring. Sherlock is boring ... ♪

 ♪ I’m laughing, I’m crying ... ♪ 

(He kneels down beside Sherlock, whose convulsions stop apart from an occasional twitch. His eyes gaze blankly upwards, then begin to close.)

JIM (slowly, softly): ♪ ... Sherlock is dying. ♪

JOHN: Sherlock.

(He is sitting or kneeling behind the paramedic, looking at his friend with concern.)

JOHN: We’re losing you. Sherlock?

(Sherlock’s eyes crack open a little.

On his knees in the padded cell, Jim leans forward as far as his chain will let him and breathes out heavily into Sherlock’s face.)

JIM (softly): Come on, Sherlock.

JIM (softly): Just die, why can’t you?

(He lies down on his side on the floor and puts his face close to Sherlock’s head.)

JIM: One little push, and off you pop.

(…)

JIM: You’re gonna love being dead, Sherlock. No-one ever bothers you.

JIM (a little wide-eyed and manic): Mrs Hudson will cry; and Mummy and Daddy will cry ...

(He is suddenly on his feet again and turns round and round on the spot until his chain stops him, then he rotates in the opposite direction.)

JIM: ... and The Woman will cry; and John will cry buckets and buckets. It’s him that I worry about the most. That wife!

(He grimaces and blows out a noisy breath.)

JIM: You’re letting him down, Sherlock. John Watson is definitely in danger.

(On the floor of the cell, Sherlock’s eyes abruptly open. (…)

JIM (tetchily): Oh, you’re not getting better, are you?

(Sherlock hauls himself to his feet, then staggers and slumps back against the wall.)

JIM: Was it something I said, huh?

(He grins at him for a moment, then his smile fades as Sherlock glares back at him, breathing heavily and covered in sweat. Grunting with the effort, Sherlock pushes himself off the wall, turns to the door beside him and pushes it open.)

SHERLOCK (frantically): John!

(Wide-eyed and looking panic-stricken, Jim screams out behind him.)

JIM: SHERLOCK!

 

[T.o.b.y]

I'm glad you brought this up again, because I find the whole mind palace sequence fascinating. The Moriarty scene in particular is one of those that make perfect sense to me intuitively, but I can't quite say why, once I sit down and think about it.

 

Let me see...

 

Control, control. Okay, so Sherlock originally seeks out the padded cell because it represents that. Control over his dark side, which of course has Moriarty's shape and voice, but which he needs occasionally, so he hasn't killed it - if he even could. He thinks his inner devil or whatnot could maybe help him Not Feel, which is what the guy is for, I guess. Not feel and not fear. Like Moriarty, who never seemed to feel anything and never seemed afraid. I am sure Sherlock envied him from time to time, come to think of it.

 

Anyway. Ironically, it was originally Moriarty who made Sherlock aware that he had a heart to feel and fear with in the first place. Funny that. Their meeting inside Sherlock's mind pretty much goes the way their real-life encounters went. Moriarty mocks him, tempts him with a promise of the relief death could bring and then shuts that door in his face by reminding him how, inconveniently, Sherlock cares so much about those ordinary people who need him, so he can't just nod off and rest. Back to pain, loss, heartbreak and life. And Baker Street, thank goodness. At least Sherlock has a reason to live - poor Moriarty didn't and was terminally bored.

 

So it's not Molly or John or Mrs Hudson or Mummy or any of the good guys who usually tell him what's right who reminds Sherlock that he needs to live and keep his loved ones safe. It's Moriarty - of all people. Which is odd until you consider that it's always been Moriarty who threatened Sherlock's friends and forced him to show his hand - or rather his heart.

 

Sherlock doesn't consider that some people might just like to have him around. Nobody showed up inside the mind palace and said "don't go - I'd miss you". Not because nobody would, but because all the people there are just facets of Sherlock's own consciousness, and he still hasn't really gotten that figured out. He knows people will cry, though - that's a start, at least.

 

I love the part where his eyes pop open. Gives me shivers every time.

[Arcadia]

There's a real possibility that this is my favorite sequence in the whole 9 episodes. (the whole thing, not just the Moriarty part.) Just sayin'.

[T.o.b.y]

There's a real possibility that this is my favorite sequence in the whole 9 episodes. (the whole thing, not just the Moriarty part.) Just sayin'.

 

It's definitely among my favorites. We waited 9 episodes to find out what goes on inside that funny old head, and finally...

 

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I love this sequence as well (and everything posted above discussing it). 1 of my favorite parts in HLV.

[J.P.]

I'm glad you brought this up again, because I find the whole mind palace sequence fascinating. The Moriarty scene in particular is one of those that make perfect sense to me intuitively, but I can't quite say why, once I sit down and think about it.

 

It's my problem too. So let's poke a little, maybe we can come up with something. 

 

First said - I'm afraid I'm projecting a lot into this scene, so it might blur my sight. 

 

The fact is I am living the most of my life with an idea of something dark and dangerous enclosed somewhere deep in a dark dungeon of my mind, something very destructive... And I felt that even before I ever heard of the Jungian concept of Shadow.

 

So it is no wonder that it was the first idea that came to my mind. The Inner Jim is a sum of all suppressed emotions and fears, and Sherlock has a whole load of them.

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" may refer to (1) an unconscious aspect of the personality which the conscious ego does not identify in itself. Because one tends to reject or remain ignorant of the least desirable aspects of one's personality, the shadow is largely negative...

 

I tried to count what Sherlock's fears might be:

Surely a fear (or suppressed desire, or even fear of suppressed desire) he might become (like) Jim.

Jim is mad in Sherlock's eyes -> Fear of madness.

 

Fear of commitment and ties that would make him dependent on other people. Maybe also the fear he would not be good enough to fulfill commitments.

 

Fear of closeness, which again might be fear of not being good enough, and fear of being hurt.

 

And of course - fear of his own emotions. Because they blur one's mind, leads one to wrong decisions, a chemical defect found in the losing side. (Thank you, Mycroft! )

 

Fear of the Dark Side -> maybe Sherlock fears his moral system would be not strong enough to keep "the demons" under control. He is so much about control: controlling his mind, his body, people around him. Jim is an incarnation of Chaos, madness and death wish.

 

All of this is closed in a padded cell, bound by a chain and a straitjacket, with a face of Sherlocks archenemy, the one at the opposite pole, but equally powerful. 

 

 

What real Jim has done on Bart's roof? He gave Sherlock a choice:

 

Sherlock dies -> his friends stay alive ->  his friends suffer the loss of Sherlock

 

Sherlock stays alive - > his friends die -> Sherlock suffer the loss of his friends

 

 

In the padded cell Jim gives Sherlock a similar choice:

 

Sherlock dies - > no more pain -> his friends suffer the lost of Sherlock and John is in danger (which nature is not clear to S.)

 

Sherlock stays alive - > well, he has to endure the physical pain of the moment, but also the future pain of being alive  ->  but he can protect John and stay with his friends.

 

Only this time there is no cheating, no Big Blue, the choice is ultimate.

 

Contrary to a Freudian definition of shadow, therefore, the Jungian shadow can include everything outside the light of consciousness, and may be positive or negative. "Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is." It may be (in part) one's link to more primitive animal instincts, which are superseded during early childhood by the conscious mind.

 

So it also might be the source of survival instinct, "the body's instinctive life/death/pain response center" as Boton put it. 

 

Sherlock is dying, he is running down the stairs and in the deepest level of his mind he finds his greatest fears chained to the wall in a padded cell. As well as his suppressed will to live.

 

This instinct/will is tied to an emotion or even it IS an emotion (limbic system again). I have read somewhere (probably in a relation to the show) that while the logical mind is the "how", the emotions are the "why" we do things, the energy that fuels the "machine". Sherlock finds it and it brings him back to life. 

 

Now as I look at it, THIS MOMENT might be the greatest sacrifice Sherlock did - not risking his life by shooting CAM, but choosing life with all its suffering, while it would be so easy just to let go...

 

And here comes the most important line:

You always feel pain - but you don't have to fear it.

Heartbreak, loss, death - it's all good.

 

Life IS suffering. If you deny pain you deny life. Fear of pain is fear of life. So living is in the end the embracing of pain. 

 

 

It becomes very personal for me, as I too bought walls around me at least as high as Sherlock did, and for similar reasons. (and keeping those walls intact takes a hell of an effort and energy)

 

Mofftiss, you couldn't choose a worse ending for the episode: Sherlock made his choice and paid for it dearly. The irony of it all. Caring is still not an advantage...  I would really appreciate a little encouraging, guys. I wonder if I will ever brave enough to make the same choice, without any Watsons and Mollys around. You are not particularly helpful. 

 

PS: I still wonder why Sherlock thinks Jim has never felt pain.

[Arcadia]

 

I'm glad you brought this up again, because I find the whole mind palace sequence fascinating. The Moriarty scene in particular is one of those that make perfect sense to me intuitively, but I can't quite say why, once I sit down and think about it.

 

It's my problem too. So let's poke a little, maybe we can come up with something.

 

 My reaction is that this scene -- like most of HLV -- heck, like most of Season 3 -- is meant to be understood intuitively. As so many of us have discovered, when you try to apply reason to this episode (like, how did Mary get into CAM's office?) it starts to fray a bit. Quite a bit, in some instances. So I would argue -- that's not the way it's meant to be watched. It's meant to be understood with the heart, not the intellect.

 

Is that in some way cheating, to tell a story that way? To wave away the omission of details by saying they're unimportant to the real meaning of the story? I don't know ... I suspect it's all really just personal taste. HLV brings out some very strong emotions in me and I love it for that. So although I have fun musing on and debating about the details, I don't, in the end, really care about them. Or at least not nearly as much as I care about the emotional impact.

 

I know this isn't the real topic of your post! But as regards the padded cell, I really haven't been able to think of anything new to add to what's already been said, and said so well. Your post makes perfect sense to me (both intuitively and rationally ) and I'm just enjoying this thread a whole heck of a lot.

 

 

... Mofftiss, you couldn't choose a worse ending for the episode: Sherlock made his choice and paid for it dearly. The irony of it all. Caring is still not an advantage...  I would really appreciate a little encouraging, guys. I wonder if I will ever brave enough to make the same choice, without any Watsons and Mollys around. You are not particularly helpful.

This is the only part of your post I am not sure I am interpreting correctly. By ending, do you mean Sherlock killing CAM? So am I correct in guessing that you mean ... since Sherlock chose the pain of living, it was cruel to turn that back on him, and use his choice to live (and his choice to care) to destroy his life?

 

Or am I way off track? I hesitate to say more until I'm sure we're talking about the same thing.

 

PS: I still wonder why Sherlock thinks Jim has never felt pain.

Me too!

[J.P.]

 

This is the only part of your post I am not sure I am interpreting correctly. By ending, do you mean Sherlock killing CAM? So am I correct in guessing that you mean ... since Sherlock chose the pain of living, it was cruel to turn that back on him, and use his choice to live (and his choice to care) to destroy his life?

 

Exactly.

 

I know the scene works well on the intuitive level. I just hope someone could see something I can not. Another perspective, ommitted detail etc. I know I have a tendency to analyse things to death somethmes, but if you try to convince me, you better talk to my head, not to my heart (which is enclosed in a padded cell and cannot hear you :P )

[T.o.b.y]

Mofftiss, you couldn't choose a worse ending for the episode: Sherlock made his choice and paid for it dearly. The irony of it all. Caring is still not an advantage...  I would really appreciate a little encouraging, guys. I wonder if I will ever brave enough to make the same choice, without any Watsons and Mollys around. You are not particularly helpful. 

 

:D I never thought about it quite that way, but... you've got a point. This is one of the things that fascinate me so about the series, though, that they leave the question of whether caring is an advantage or not pretty much open. It's usually not seriously brought into question. Of course I'm firmly of the opinion that it is - sure, sometimes I wish I didn't care and think how much easier my life would be, but it wouldn't really be a life then, just an existence, and that's not quite enough for me. I do not envy Mycroft (although yes, I do know he cares about Sherlock, but he's so convinced caring is bad that he can't do anything useful with that).

 

If you want encouragement, by the way, I suggest reading "Le Petit Prince", if case you haven't yet. That did it for me. (The answer is: "because of the wheat" )

 

 

 My reaction is that this scene -- like most of HLV -- heck, like most of Season 3 -- is meant to be understood intuitively. As so many of us have discovered, when you try to apply reason to this episode (like, how did Mary get into CAM's office?) it starts to fray a bit. Quite a bit, in some instances. So I would argue -- that's not the way it's meant to be watched. It's meant to be understood with the heart, not the intellect.

 

Is that in some way cheating, to tell a story that way? To wave away the omission of details by saying they're unimportant to the real meaning of the story? I don't know ... I suspect it's all really just personal taste. HLV brings out some very strong emotions in me and I love it for that. So although I have fun musing on and debating about the details, I don't, in the end, really care about them. Or at least not nearly as much as I care about the emotional impact.

 

This reminds me of an article (okay, that sounds pretentious, it's actually just the Wikipedia entry) I read on Raymond Chandler lately. In the part about his Marlowe novels, it says:

 

"For Chandler the plot was almost secondary; what really mattered was the atmosphere and the characters. An ending that answered all the questions and neatly wrapped up every plot thread, was less important to Chandler than having interesting characters, who behave in believable ways."

 

I never really realized this reading his books, but then, I also never noticed until the Wiki guy pointed it out that in "The Big Sleep", it is totally unclear who killed the chauffeur.

 

In any case, I'm with him. I don't read crime novels or watch mysteries for the intellectual challenge of solving the case, although I enjoy that and feel cheated when the audience isn't given all the information the detective has - I want my chance of figuring it out myself and I won't really believe the hero is a genius if he can't win against me in a fair game... :P

 

But that is secondary. My personal opinion about a detective story is that it's no good if I can't get anything out of it the second time round, and it's really good if it gets better once the suspense isn't there anymore to distract me. And this is where atmosphere and character work and relationships and "poetic" aspects come into play.

 

So no, I don't think it's cheating to put "the real meaning of the story" above the plot. Ideally, of course, you get both right - but if you have to prioritize, then I think this is the way to do it.

 

The funny thing is, I can't do this myself. I get stuck writing because I start out with big ideas, but then little details and inconsistencies bother me and I become so worried about how to deal with them that I loose focus. I envy writers who have the self-confidence to just go F*** it - this is brilliant, lets print it.

[J.P.]

 

I do not envy Mycroft (although yes, I do know he cares about Sherlock, but he's so convinced caring is bad that he can't do anything useful with that).

You know what? You just reminded me of something I wrote long time ago, in my late teens: "Freedom is not an absence of restrictions. It is an ability to give without expecting anything back. Our expectations - it's them which make the bars of our prison." (if only I was good enough to live up to this ideal)

 

Because we actually have two meanings of caring, don't we? One is like: "I want to help making your life save and happy", the other one is more like: "I can't live without you". With the first kind you actually can do a lot of useful things. Sadly, those two aspects seem to be inseparable, or not even seen as two...

 

 

 

If you want encouragement, by the way, I suggest reading "Le Petit Prince", if case you haven't yet. That did it for me.

 

Yes. I know "Le Petit Prince". And thought about it already in regards to Sherlock - The story with the Fox. "You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed."

 

Look, in the whole Sherlock finding his inner human storyline, we see (or desperately WANT to see) Sherlock's heart, his opening, his journey to what seemed to be a better life. At least I have the impression that most of viewers appreciate this development, and that it is what Mofftiss wanted to achieve. Still, being me, I had so many doubts about it. Why do you desperately want to change him? Why should he change? What is there for HIM, beside being easier for OTHERS to handle and to manipulate? Is it responsible to tame this fox, only to break him? Invite him to a party and let him stand alone?

 

 

I have never in my life cried (and am still crying) so much over a damn TV show. Maybe because never before I've seen a fictional character with whom I can sympathise that much.

 

The stupid thing - I still want to hug him. Even if he most probably doesn't like hugs. 

 

Okay, okay, I see I drift away.

 

So, back to the padded cell. Another question:

Why is Sherlock's Inner Jim in such miserable condition?

 

[Inge l-w]

Dear J. P. , I do wish you would not use "lost" when you mean loss!

They tried to play with the mind palace as a cushier option to any alternative of bringing him back to life, possibly because Mr Moffat has proven to have a sadistic streak where his main characters are concerned, Sherlock's loss in Scandal, both emotional and actual, his definite involvement in The Fall, causing such heartbreak and suffering to John, and then scoring a hat trick in HLV by showing not only that caring is not an advantage, but that you may have to pay with your life for your poor choices of judgement, including the impasse at the end of the Magnussen arc.

The only good thing about that sequence is that the way Moriarty looks, he is dead and decaying, not alive as the last-minute turnaround would have us believe.

The plot holes have been discussed extensively in the How would you fix HLV thread, and the scriptwriter could not be bothered to come up with a more ingenious solution, perhaps he was deep into another Dr Who arc.

Overall, that THING does not need too much analysis, it was the cheapest way out, having the whole sequence of running up and down stairs last a full eight minutes of valuable 90 minute space.

I am poised with anticipation to see how they will extricate themselves from such a deep hole that they dug for themselves!

Last but not least, Holmes himself warns the ravaged Veiled Lodger: " Your life is not your own, keep your hands off it...The example of patient suffering is the most precious of all lessons in an impatient world", so perhaps Sherlock is heeding his own advice both in the hospital and at the airstrip scene, later on.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... this scene -- like most of HLV -- heck, like most of Season 3 -- is meant to be understood intuitively. As so many of us have discovered, when you try to apply reason to this episode (like, how did Mary get into CAM's office?) it starts to fray a bit. Quite a bit, in some instances. So I would argue -- that's not the way it's meant to be watched. It's meant to be understood with the heart, not the intellect.

The more I think about it, the more I suspect that none of the prior episodes were really all that logical either.  It's just that the non-linear format of Series 3 makes it more obvious.  Also, in Series 3, we don't generally have John nodding his head and looking like it all makes sense, because this time he's just as bewildered as we are.

 

[Arcadia]

A couple of thoughts as I was re-reading your post:

 

... And of course - fear of his own emotions. Because they blur one's mind, leads one to wrong decisions, a chemical defect found in the losing side. (Thank you, Mycroft! )

But that's not completely true, is it? Emotions can also sharpen one's focus, lead one to the correct solutions. When someone cares about getting something right, aren't they more likely to do so than if they're indifferent to the outcome? Like most things, it's all a matter of balance, isn't it?

 

... Mofftiss, you couldn't choose a worse ending for the episode: Sherlock made his choice and paid for it dearly. The irony of it all. Caring is still not an advantage... I would really appreciate a little encouraging, guys. I wonder if I will ever brave enough to make the same choice, without any Watsons and Mollys around. You are not particularly helpful.

I don't think the outcome goes all one way, though; Sherlock paid dearly, but he also gained something, which was the preservation of those he cared about. He was at peace on that score at the airport. I don't care for the CAM solution but I understand why it works.

 

What's interesting to me is to see if/how Sherlock will change as a result of this journey into darkness. I can see it going either way; he could withdraw into a remote protective figure, watching over those he loves, but from a distance; or he could continue to learn how to live and interact in their world. I'd prefer the latter, because I'm at heart a romantic softie, but I expect the former, because it's more bleak, which seems to be the tenor of our times.

[Shadow Dweller]

What's interesting to me is to see if/how Sherlock will change as a result of this journey into darkness. I can see it going either way; he could withdraw into a remote protective figure, watching over those he loves, but from a distance; or he could continue to learn how to live and interact in their world. I'd prefer the latter, because I'm at heart a romantic softie, but I expect the former, because it's more bleak, which seems to be the tenor of our times.

 

 

The first would mean he take a Mycroft-alike stance. Could he live with that, considering his need for companion?

[T.o.b.y]

 

Look, in the whole Sherlock finding his inner human storyline, we see (or desperately WANT to see) Sherlock's heart, his opening, his journey to what seemed to be a better life. At least I have the impression that most of viewers appreciate this development, and that it is what Mofftiss wanted to achieve. Still, being me, I had so many doubts about it. Why do you desperately want to change him? Why should he change? What is there for HIM, beside being easier for OTHERS to handle and to manipulate? Is it responsible to tame this fox, only to break him? Invite him to a party and let him stand alone?

 

That's an interesting question... will becoming more "human" make Sherlock happier. I don't know. I could argue though that he can't become much more unhappy than he was when John met him. I mean, back then Sherlock's life meant so little to him that he'd have thrown it away in a game of mind chess against a murderous cabbie.

 

I suspect Sherlock thinks it's a change for the better - if he thinks about it at all. Anyway, he said during the best man's speech that John had saved him in "so many ways".

[J.P.]

 

I mean, back then Sherlock's life meant so little to him that he'd have thrown it away in a game of mind chess against a murderous cabbie.

All life ends... sooner or later.

 

 

 

 

I could argue though that he can't become much more unhappy than he was when John met him.

 

Why should he be unhappy? He had a job that was his hobby and a sense of purpose.

 

I am living alone for like 25 years now and I don't see my life as miserable because I am solo. 

[Arcadia]

 

What's interesting to me is to see if/how Sherlock will change as a result of this journey into darkness. I can see it going either way; he could withdraw into a remote protective figure, watching over those he loves, but from a distance; or he could continue to learn how to live and interact in their world. I'd prefer the latter, because I'm at heart a romantic softie, but I expect the former, because it's more bleak, which seems to be the tenor of our times.

 

The first would mean he take a Mycroft-alike stance. Could he live with that, considering his need for companion?

 

 

If he could convince himself it was better for all concerned, yeah, I think so. He does have a touch of the martyr in him, after all.

 

 

I mean, back then Sherlock's life meant so little to him that he'd have thrown it away in a game of mind chess against a murderous cabbie.

All life ends... sooner or later.

 

I could argue though that he can't become much more unhappy than he was when John met him.

 

Why should he be unhappy? He had a job that was his hobby and a sense of purpose.

 

I am living alone for like 25 years now and I don't see my life as miserable because I am solo.

 

 

I don't know if Sherlock was unhappy, exactly; but I do think he was lonely, whether he realized the emotion for what it was or not. Otherwise I can't explain why he accepted John as his "colleague" so quickly; in spite of what he said, he obviously didn't "need an assistant"; he wanted one, and one he could get along with. Yeah, he could've just wanted an audience, but he wanted a supportive audience, and I find that an important distinction.

[J.P.]

I wouldn't say no to a supportive audience either . I've experienced a Sherlock/Watson-like friendship for more than two years, and so far it is the only connection that survived the distance of 300 miles for 25 years.

 

There are not much people that actually want to be an audience, and if it's difficult to understand what you talk about, the chance are not that great. Sherlock was damn lucky (or un-lucky, dependent on your POV) to find Watson... (and otherwise there wouldn't be a story)

 

Just as I write it, the line from SiP popped in my head: "He (John) may be the making of my brother, or make him worse than ever" (quoted from memory) Wonder what Mycroft meant by that - could it be he's afraid that a goldfish might harm his little brother?

[Boton]

 

 

 

 

I don't know if Sherlock was unhappy, exactly; but I do think he was lonely, whether he realized the emotion for what it was or not. Otherwise I can't explain why he accepted John as his "colleague" so quickly; in spite of what he said, he obviously didn't "need an assistant"; he wanted one, and one he could get along with. Yeah, he could've just wanted an audience, but he wanted a supportive audience, and I find that an important distinction.

 

 

I'm going to be either optimistic or foolhardy here and say that I think Sherlock was neither unhappy nor lonely when we first met him.  He was a bit of a daredevil; he lacked a real defining purpose.  But I don't think he was unhappy.

 

I think he took to John so quickly because, just like there can be romantic "love at first sight," there can also be a near-instantaneous click with a friend who is destined to become a soul mate.  It's not necessarily a super-rare occurrence, but not everyone gets a Watson (or a Holmes, as the case may be) in their lives.  It's a particular kind of very special relationship, and it's why I never like to dabble in the idea of Holmes/Watson (in any incarnation) as a romantic couple -- because this other kind of soul mate bond is also interesting to watch, and it's just as uncommon and just as magical as something that ends in a romantic love.  To me, the "click" happened because both John and Sherlock recognized their "other half" in this kind of soul mate friendship, and it just developed from there.  

 

Ironically, now that he has had this relationship, I think Sherlock has the potential to be unhappy and lonely.  Great loves of any kind carry the potential for all kinds of hurts, and if Sherlock were to lose John in any way (even him moving out of the flat for his marriage), he would feel the sense of loss.  

 

I think that's what Moftiss did well with the character of Mary, love her or hate her.  She understood at some level that marrying John was tantamount to marrying Sherlock.  Not in a threesome or sexual sort of way, but simply that loving John romantically and sexually and all the other ways you love a spouse carries with it the agreement that she would also love John's "bond" with Sherlock.  By making Sherlock and Mary into friends very quickly, they avoided that stupid trope of the jealous girlfriend/spouse that would have destroyed our favorite show.

 

What the heck does this have to do with the padded cell?  Heck, I don't even know any more.   :D   I do still love that mind palace scene and count it as one of my favorite scenes of all TV and movies ever.  I do still like my "limbic system" metaphor that was linked at the beginning of this topic, in which Sherlock F. Holmes is that daggone good that he can still anthropomorphize and interact with his own biologic processes as he hurtles to death and can still have a conversation with his innermost physiology that he can't die now because he has a friend to protect.  

 

And, for what it's worth, I have had exactly one friend like John in my entire life.  I cherish that relationship.  And when that friend took one of those "which character are you" quizzes about Sherlock, she came up as Moriarty.  I didn't comment out loud, but there's more truth there than I would care to admit that she's probably one of the few things that could bring me back from the brink if needed.

[Arcadia]

Just as I write it, the line from SiP popped in my head: "He (John) may be the making of my brother, or make him worse than ever" (quoted from memory) Wonder what Mycroft meant by that - could it be he's afraid that a goldfish might harm his little brother?

 

I originally took that to mean that John might turn out to be the brake Sherlock needed to curb his worst tendencies, and provide the stability he needed to actually succeed at being a detective. Or, John could just feed Sherlock's ego and encourage him to be (at least from Mycroft's p.o.v.) more reckless and irresponsible.

 

After HLV, though, I wonder if Mycroft meant that he thought Sherlock was already too apt to "care", and the "worse than ever" meant "more involved with people than ever."

 

It would be kind of funny, actually ... here's most of us thinking John's been good for Sherlock, and Mycroft's over there going "aghgh, he's ruined him!" :D 

 

 

I don't know if Sherlock was unhappy, exactly; but I do think he was lonely, whether he realized the emotion for what it was or not. Otherwise I can't explain why he accepted John as his "colleague" so quickly; in spite of what he said, he obviously didn't "need an assistant"; he wanted one, and one he could get along with. Yeah, he could've just wanted an audience, but he wanted a supportive audience, and I find that an important distinction.

 

I'm going to be either optimistic or foolhardy here and say that I think Sherlock was neither unhappy nor lonely when we first met him.  He was a bit of a daredevil; he lacked a real defining purpose.  But I don't think he was unhappy.

 

I think he took to John so quickly because, just like there can be romantic "love at first sight," there can also be a near-instantaneous click with a friend who is destined to become a soul mate.  It's not necessarily a super-rare occurrence, but not everyone gets a Watson (or a Holmes, as the case may be) in their lives.  It's a particular kind of very special relationship, and it's why I never like to dabble in the idea of Holmes/Watson (in any incarnation) as a romantic couple -- because this other kind of soul mate bond is also interesting to watch, and it's just as uncommon and just as magical as something that ends in a romantic love.  To me, the "click" happened because both John and Sherlock recognized their "other half" in this kind of soul mate friendship, and it just developed from there.  

 

Ironically, now that he has had this relationship, I think Sherlock has the potential to be unhappy and lonely.  Great loves of any kind carry the potential for all kinds of hurts, and if Sherlock were to lose John in any way (even him moving out of the flat for his marriage), he would feel the sense of loss.  

 

I think that's what Moftiss did well with the character of Mary, love her or hate her.  She understood at some level that marrying John was tantamount to marrying Sherlock.  Not in a threesome or sexual sort of way, but simply that loving John romantically and sexually and all the other ways you love a spouse carries with it the agreement that she would also love John's "bond" with Sherlock.  By making Sherlock and Mary into friends very quickly, they avoided that stupid trope of the jealous girlfriend/spouse that would have destroyed our favorite show.

 

What the heck does this have to do with the padded cell?  Heck, I don't even know any more.   :D   I do still love that mind palace scene and count it as one of my favorite scenes of all TV and movies ever.  I do still like my "limbic system" metaphor that was linked at the beginning of this topic, in which Sherlock F. Holmes is that daggone good that he can still anthropomorphize and interact with his own biologic processes as he hurtles to death and can still have a conversation with his innermost physiology that he can't die now because he has a friend to protect.  

 

And, for what it's worth, I have had exactly one friend like John in my entire life.  I cherish that relationship.  And when that friend took one of those "which character are you" quizzes about Sherlock, she came up as Moriarty.  I didn't comment out loud, but there's more truth there than I would care to admit that she's probably one of the few things that could bring me back from the brink if needed.

 

 

I guess I think that kind of "instant bonding" implies that something was missing from those people's lives before -- whether they recognize it or not. Sherlock seemed so determined to be cut off from his feelings that I don't know if he would have recognized lonliness for what it was ... until he had something to contrast it with.

 

I don't think it's ironic at all that he now has the potential to be unhappy and lonely. That's what it takes to become a "real boy", that's why it takes so much courage to be one. It's been demonstrated more than once that people who are sheltered from pain all their lives never develop genuine empathy and compassion for others. Without those qualities, are you really human?

[T.o.b.y]

 

 

I don't know if Sherlock was unhappy, exactly; but I do think he was lonely, whether he realized the emotion for what it was or not. Otherwise I can't explain why he accepted John as his "colleague" so quickly; in spite of what he said, he obviously didn't "need an assistant"; he wanted one, and one he could get along with. Yeah, he could've just wanted an audience, but he wanted a supportive audience, and I find that an important distinction.

 

I'm going to be either optimistic or foolhardy here and say that I think Sherlock was neither unhappy nor lonely when we first met him.  He was a bit of a daredevil; he lacked a real defining purpose.  But I don't think he was unhappy.

 

I think he took to John so quickly because, just like there can be romantic "love at first sight," there can also be a near-instantaneous click with a friend who is destined to become a soul mate.  It's not necessarily a super-rare occurrence, but not everyone gets a Watson (or a Holmes, as the case may be) in their lives.  It's a particular kind of very special relationship, and it's why I never like to dabble in the idea of Holmes/Watson (in any incarnation) as a romantic couple -- because this other kind of soul mate bond is also interesting to watch, and it's just as uncommon and just as magical as something that ends in a romantic love.  To me, the "click" happened because both John and Sherlock recognized their "other half" in this kind of soul mate friendship, and it just developed from there.  

 

Ironically, now that he has had this relationship, I think Sherlock has the potential to be unhappy and lonely.  Great loves of any kind carry the potential for all kinds of hurts, and if Sherlock were to lose John in any way (even him moving out of the flat for his marriage), he would feel the sense of loss.  

(...)

 

I guess I think that kind of "instant bonding" implies that something was missing from those people's lives before -- whether they recognize it or not. Sherlock seemed so determined to be cut off from his feelings that I don't know if he would have recognized lonliness for what it was ... until he had something to contrast it with.

 

I don't think it's ironic at all that he now has the potential to be unhappy and lonely. That's what it takes to become a "real boy", that's why it takes so much courage to be one. It's been demonstrated more than once that people who are sheltered from pain all their lives never develop genuine empathy and compassion for others. Without those qualities, are you really human?

 

Thanks, you two - you've managed to express pretty well what I think but couldn't put into words. The last paragraph especially. I don't want to even consider what Sherlock's outrage at this comparison would be, but it's a bit like the message from The Last Unicorn... :lol:

 

 

[J.P.]

Re: the near-death experience

I believe I have heard stories where the persons making this experience were asked/moved (by angels or other "persons" which seem to be impersonations of some mental structures in their minds) to come back because they would have abandon their loved ones if they died. 

It seems that emotional ties are indeed the roots that keep people connected to life.

 

 

I think he took to John so quickly because, just like there can be romantic "love at first sight," there can also be a near-instantaneous click with a friend who is destined to become a soul mate.  It's not necessarily a super-rare occurrence, but not everyone gets a Watson (or a Holmes, as the case may be) in their lives.  It's a particular kind of very special relationship, and it's why I never like to dabble in the idea of Holmes/Watson (in any incarnation) as a romantic couple -- because this other kind of soul mate bond is also interesting to watch, and it's just as uncommon and just as magical as something that ends in a romantic love.  To me, the "click" happened because both John and Sherlock recognized their "other half" in this kind of soul mate friendship, and it just developed from there. 

 

Amen to that. 

Normally I hardly care about those things, but in this case all that romantic couple ... obsession really bothers me. Why people try so hard to trivialize such a beautiful relationship, making it into a just another love affaire?