Arcadia

Okay, gonna keep stirring the pot here.... Are some lives forfeit because we as a society deem that the evil done by some persons is greater than the evil of taking lives? Obviously, yes, we as a society have and will continue to make that judgement. Over such things are wars fought. But is it different if an individual makes that decision, rather than "we the society"? Can an individual have the "authority" to decide who deserves death? Should one? If yes, where does that authority stop? If no, what should the consequences be for that individual if they take a life anyway? Analyze and discuss. Papers due Friday at 3 p.m. Points will be taken off for poor spelling.

This is just the best thing all day.

But why is Harrison out of uniform? This is yet a different timeline.

My last one! Thanks Tim.

Was that the one with the soundtrack by Clannad? I LOVED that show.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tree

So many great responses! It's Christmas! No counter arguments here, just was a new idea to me and was curious how it played out for others. But I will address a few points... I thought of this as well, as it would explain why he seems so ... dejected(?). Then again, it could be more acting... Oh no, there was no panic there. He'd obviously thought it thru. The only question is ... when? Especially since Irene Adler is a blackmailer as well, but that doesn't seem to bother him... Maybe that's one reason I have so much trouble with the idea that the only solution to CAM is to kill him ... yes, he's odious, ruthless and amoral, but that describes half the politicians on Capitol Hill. That doesn't excuse killing them, however. You play their game, instead, and bring them down in other ways. I guess I wanted Sherlock to defeat CAM with his brain, not his barbarity. (KHAN!!!!!!) Of course, something like that would probably require a great deal more than one episode.... Yah, sorry, after I posted that I looked at the topic heading. Ooops. Oh well. Does it bother me what he did to Janine? Sure, but it's different ... there's no ambiguity as to whether he was being heroic in that moment or not. He was being a louse, we all knew it, even he knew it on some level, he paid for it in the end, and knew he deserved it. And they sort of declared a truce afterwards -- if Janine can forgive him, I'm not gonna quibble. I quite liked Janine, she seemed to be another one who "accepts" Sherlock. I sorta hope they'll end up as friends -- either that, or we never see her again. Not too much in favor of adding more people to the cast, actually.

Our lead actor is on board. http://www.radiotimes.com/news/standard.aspx?slug=2013-12-12%2Fbenedict-cumberbatch-id-like-to-do-a-musical Maybe it's time to start a Kickstarter campaign!

And their conversation while they're smoking in the garden would be hard to explain away. Still, it's an intriguing theory, innit?

Ehrmahgerd.

Von Ryan's Express. A painting.

Okay, let me fan the flames some more. (Warning: my friends call me "The Instigator." :-) I was just responding to a different thread (Best Episodes) and it reminded me of this. Earlier, someone (Radcap, I believe) had a theory that Sherlock had figured out early on that CAM kept all his data in a mind palace. Sherlock's morphine "addiction", his defeated posture when he learned the glasses were just glasses -- those were just a ruse to make CAM think Sherlock was not a threat. Sherlock's goal was to get into Appledore and confirm that the data existed only in CAM's mind. IF this theory were correct -- it means Sherlock meant all along to shoot CAM. That's why he made sure John had brought his gun. In other words, the murder was premeditated. If this were true -- would it make a difference in how you felt about it? That is, is it okay for Sherlock to shoot someone in a moment of rage -- but not in cold blood? The outcome is the same -- the removal of CAM -- and the motive is the same -- protecting one's friends -- but one is a spontaneous act of desperation, the other is carefully planned in advance. Does it make a difference? ALSO -- what if Mycroft was in on it all along? I've long thought it suspicious that he would bring his laptop FILLED WITH STATE SECRETS with him at Christmas. So let's suppose Mycroft was in on it. That means he-who-is-the-British-government approved of Sherlock's plan. If this were true, would THAT make a difference? Now it's not premeditated murder, it's a state-sanctioned assassination. When I thought of this, I was shocked, because for some reason for me it does make a difference. Sherlock shooting someone in a rage: bad. Sherlock committing premeditated murder; this is so awful I can't even contemplate it, even tho it fits the known facts really, really well. State-sanctioned murder? Suddenly I don't feel as bad. Or rather, I still hate it, but at least now Sherlock doesn't bear full responsibility for it. Gawd, the heart is a funny ol' thing, isn't it? What do y'all think?

Or is Sherlock faking the inferiority in order to get to Magnussen? Someone around here had a theory that Sherlock suspected CAM kept everything in a memory palace, and Sherlock was just pretending to be defeated so he could get into Appledore and confirm it. I don't suppose we'll ever know one way or the other, but it's an interesting idea.

I think that's why that scene was such a gut-punch for me ... I always hurt when my heroes are reduced to the level of the villians. (I'm such a romantic...)

Okay, I think I've broken the internet -- suddenly I'm being told I can't upload files larger than 38kb? Yet all of my other uploads were bigger than that. What or who have I offended?

Is Moriarty in there too? He's one of the spiders waiting down below.

Oh. That. :-)

Happy Days. Happy Days or WKRP in Cincinnati?

skin

A Study in Pink. A towel.

http://www.vulture.com/2014/01/sherlock-finale-postmortem-steven-moffat-interview.html Am I a horrible person if I add I would have shot Magnussen if I could and dared? It was all I could do to contain myself not to try and reach inside the TV and throttle the guy. I'd have killed Moriarty, too, if I could. Magnussen and Moriarty are villains, they were made to be vanquished. Thank goodness people like them aren't possible in real life (I devoutly hope). I'd never, ever kill a real person and my imagination is not up to creating full-blooded villains, but if Moffat had let Magnussen walk away, I bet my brain would have spent the next few months dreaming up elaborate assassination plans. No, of course Sherlock won't be "haunted by guilt". God, this is Sherlock Holmes, not the good Samaritan. He's not an angel, only on the angels' side, remember? It was all he could do to feel a little sorry for what he'd put John through after The Fall, I seriously doubt he'll waste any time worrying about Magnussen. If anything, he might feel defeated because he was driven to resort to such a messy, crude, not clever way of getting rid of him. "These are dangerous boys"... awww. That sounds kind of... indulgent. Like a fond parent talking about his rowdy sons. Well, for me, it's not about whether someone deserves to die. It's about whether any individual has the "right" to take a life. I wish I could remember which novel this is in, but as one author put it: The injunction is "Thou shalt not kill." It's not "Thou shalt not kill unless there's some mitigating circumstance." The character who said this had just offed a bad guy. He was protecting someone and felt he had no other choice -- but he acknowledged that he had violated a higher law. That's all I'm looking for ... some recognition that it's wrong for humans to play God. (And I want to point out that I don't practice any particular religion. I just believe in the sanctity of life, and religious language is the only thing I have at hand to try to explain what I mean.) The alternative to shooting Magnussen is not to let him walk away -- it's to have Sherlock use his "beautiful gifts" to turn the tables on this scumbag and destroy his ability to destroy others. THAT solution would've had me on my feet and cheering. Having said that, I think HLV might be my favorite episode to date, because I had SUCH a powerful emotional response to it, and I love when fiction does that, even if I don't agree with it. I thought it was a beautifully done bit of drama. Hope they're not all like that from now on ... I don't think my heart can take it!

Maybe he's afraid the same thing will happen to Sherlock that happened to "the other one."

And yet I think if the show were exactly what it were at the beginning, I'd feel that it had lost steam. Growing up is such a two-edged sword, even for a tv show!