The Psyche Behind The Character

[Arcadia]

On a completely unrelated note, I was just thinking: Sherlock seems to be one of those people who manages, intentionally or no, to hurt nearly everybody who loves him, and the amount of hurt seems to be roughly proportional to the strength of the other person's fondness. John, Irene, Janine - all got "burned" pretty badly. Molly so far has gotten away comparatively unscathed, but she's had to put up with some pretty bad behavior from him, and I do think he's broken her heart a little time and time again. His parents seem to hardly ever hear from him, when they come to visit after his two-year-long exile, he shuts the door in their faces as soon as John shows up, and god knows what they went through during his "drug years". As for Mycroft, while I do think he does Sherlock more harm than vice versa, the only times we've seen him really upset was when his little brother had caused some kind of trouble.

 

Poor Sherlock with his upturned coat collar. It's all a bit tragic, but I like it. I don't think he does it on purpose, he just... isn't very good at loving people. Or at letting people love him. One or the other. He's still a very good friend, in his own way. But you have to be brave and strong to endure that friendship...

In real life, I'd say his problem is that he loves himself so much he can't see (or care) how he affects anyone else. I think "our" Sherlock is meant to be more nuanced than that, though, as it's hard to love a character who is THAT narcissistic.

[T.o.b.y]

 

On a completely unrelated note, I was just thinking: Sherlock seems to be one of those people who manages, intentionally or no, to hurt nearly everybody who loves him, and the amount of hurt seems to be roughly proportional to the strength of the other person's fondness. John, Irene, Janine - all got "burned" pretty badly. Molly so far has gotten away comparatively unscathed, but she's had to put up with some pretty bad behavior from him, and I do think he's broken her heart a little time and time again. His parents seem to hardly ever hear from him, when they come to visit after his two-year-long exile, he shuts the door in their faces as soon as John shows up, and god knows what they went through during his "drug years". As for Mycroft, while I do think he does Sherlock more harm than vice versa, the only times we've seen him really upset was when his little brother had caused some kind of trouble.

 

Poor Sherlock with his upturned coat collar. It's all a bit tragic, but I like it. I don't think he does it on purpose, he just... isn't very good at loving people. Or at letting people love him. One or the other. He's still a very good friend, in his own way. But you have to be brave and strong to endure that friendship...

In real life, I'd say his problem is that he loves himself so much he can't see (or care) how he affects anyone else. I think "our" Sherlock is meant to be more nuanced than that, though, as it's hard to love a character who is THAT narcissistic.

 

 

I'm not sure Sherlock loves himself an awful lot. He's vain, yes. Conceited, yes. Egocentric, yes. In love with himself? Nope. Actually, if you look at the choices he makes and has made, and the way the various sides of his personality interact inside the mind palace, his relationship with himself seems to be even more complicated, and sometimes just as destructive, as that with other people.

 

I think Sherlock has two big issues with relationships. One, he was mostly brought up by his brother, who, like Moriarty, sees himself and Sherlock as a separate order of beings, far above and beyond the ordinary people down there. I often picture Sherlock standing on a rooftop, looking down at life in the city the way a scientist would study an ant hill (or a beehive, for that matter). Until recently, I don't think he really, really took into account that those ordinary beings have feelings that matter. (He doesn't even think his own feelings matter, so empathy isn't his strong suit, either).

 

Two, I don't think he believed before series 3 that people could actually love him. He doesn't take other people's feelings for him seriously. Irene, he wrote off as being basely attracted to his body and playing with his mind (which might have been true, who knows). Molly? Just a silly crush. John? Well, John needs someone to provide the adrenaline, and I guess Sherlock knew very well he admired him, but he never had a real friend before, so how would he understand anything beyond that?

 

Sherlock actually says as much during his best man's speech, and I think he was being sincere.

 

What was fascinating in the third series was we saw all that change. Even his inner Moriarty now knows people would mourn him if he died. It will be extremely interesting to see where his character goes in the future.

[Arcadia]

Now I want to give him a big ol' hug ....

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Now I want to give him a big ol' hug ....

 

The August '14 Sherlockology wallpaper makes me want to do the same thing (as well as after he shoots CAM and all the emotions running through him at that point).

[T.o.b.y]

One of the many reasons to love Sherlock:

 

This man:

 

 

is also this man:

 

[Boton]

Yes, I think there is a huge part of Sherlock that looks at people and says, "what is wrong with you that you seem to like me?"  And another part that says, "I'm not worth anything, so I'll take the hit."  

 

I think it's that last part that caused him to shoot CAM.  I still think that hearing Mary say, "People like Magnussen should be killed; that's why there are people like me" got into his brain and combined with John saying, "But why'd she have to be like that?"  He agreed with Mary, and he wanted to protect John from seeing Mary ever follow through on her belief that CAM should die.  Then, he heard that Janine was tortured by CAM and saw that Mycroft was on his way to help and could well destroy his own career, and Sherlock decided he was the least important, most expendable person there.

[Arcadia]

That makes sense ... yet I still think shooting CAM had more to do with his limbic system than any rational process. Or maybe that's just what I want to believe. Somehow it's easier for me to accept a Sherlock who murdered in of a moment of rage and revenge than one who calmly deduced it was "the only solution".

 

Also, to some degree Sherlock created the mess they were in, his sense of honor may have dictated that therefore he should be the one to suffer the fallout. Either way, I still think it was more of an emotional decision than a logical one. I think that was the point (or one of them) of S3 -- you want Sherlock to be more human? "Yeah, well, be careful what you wish for."

[Carol the Dabbler]

I still think that hearing Mary say, "People like Magnussen should be killed; that's why there are people like me" got into his brain and combined with John saying, "But why'd she have to be like that?"  He agreed with Mary, and he wanted to protect John from seeing Mary ever follow through on her belief that CAM should die....

 

I like that idea.  And it seems pretty plausible that he identified with Mary, feeling backed into a corner with only one (regrettable) way out.

 

... Sherlock decided he was the least important, most expendable person there.

 

Possibly.  (I will not dispute the theory that he has esteem issues.)  But he could have just as easily (and far more rationally) realized that he was the only person present who was able and willing to do what he believed needed to be done.

 

Somehow it's easier for me to accept a Sherlock who murdered in of a moment of rage and revenge than one who calmly deduced it was "the only solution".

Wow, I am gonna disagree with you there -- I would hate to think that Sherlock is capable of losing his temper to that extent. (Losing his temper, yes. But to the extent that he totally loses control -- heaven help us!) Could we compromise on a Sherlock who sadly and regretfully deduced that there was only one possible (though imperfect) solution?

 

[Boton]

 

I still think that hearing Mary say, "People like Magnussen should be killed; that's why there are people like me" got into his brain and combined with John saying, "But why'd she have to be like that?"  He agreed with Mary, and he wanted to protect John from seeing Mary ever follow through on her belief that CAM should die....

 

I like that idea.  And it seems pretty plausible that he identified with Mary, feeling backed into a corner with only one (regrettable) way out.

 

... Sherlock decided he was the least important, most expendable person there.

 

Possibly.  (I will not dispute the theory that he has esteem issues.)  But he could have just as easily (and far more rationally) realized that he was the only person present who was able and willing to do what he believed needed to be done.

 

Somehow it's easier for me to accept a Sherlock who murdered in of a moment of rage and revenge than one who calmly deduced it was "the only solution".

Wow, I am gonna disagree with you there -- I would hate to think that Sherlock is capable of losing his temper to that extent. (Losing his temper, yes. But to the extent that he totally loses control -- heaven help us!) Could we compromise on a Sherlock who sadly and regretfully deduced that there was only one possible (though imperfect) solution?

 

 

I do agree that he also thought he was the one who was willing and able to do what was done. I don't mean to suggest shooting CAM was a low-self-esteem festival; merely that Sherlock could clearly see the ties that others had to hold them to this life, whereas he was relatively recently off two years chasing Moriarty.  He knew he could come and go and people would proceed with their lives.  

 

I think Sherlock did kill CAM (I really never think of it as "murder," although I guess it technically is) in a fit of rage, but it was a rage that was a logical conclusion from everything that had preceded the act.  As HLV progresses, we see intellectual options grow fewer and fewer, until when they stand on the Appledore terrace, there is no way to stop CAM other than kill him.  And Sherlock was angry -- that John and Mary could be hurt, that Janine had been hurt, that Mycroft could be harmed politically if not physically.  And the only option there was to shoot.  There was an element of premeditation there, but just barely -- just a few seconds of running the options and realizing that there was one solution left.

[Arcadia]

Wow, I am gonna disagree with you there -- I would hate to think that Sherlock is capable of losing his temper to that extent. (Losing his temper, yes. But to the extent that he totally loses control -- heaven help us!) Could we compromise on a Sherlock who sadly and regretfully deduced that there was only one possible (though imperfect) solution?

Thinking about it. :P

 

My biggest problem is I can't get the annoying little voice of Moffat out of my head, going "he doesn't regret it...."

[Arcadia]

There was an element of premeditation there, but just barely -- just a few seconds of running the options and realizing that there was one solution left.

Only one solution left that would produce the outcome Sherlock wanted, you mean. There were other solutions, but they all resulted in CAM remaining a menace. Which could have been an even more gut-wrenching story ... how do you hold your world together when the enemy cannot be defeated? Too close to the real world to make entertaining TV, I guess. Heck, I'm depressed just thinking about it.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Wow, I am gonna disagree with you there -- I would hate to think that Sherlock is capable of losing his temper to that extent. (Losing his temper, yes. But to the extent that he totally loses control -- heaven help us!) Could we compromise on a Sherlock who sadly and regretfully deduced that there was only one possible (though imperfect) solution?

Thinking about it. :P

 

My biggest problem is I can't get the annoying little voice of Moffat out of my head, going "he doesn't regret it...."

 

I doubt that he does spend any time regretting it afterwards.  He thought it through as thoroughly as time allowed and chose what appeared to be the best course of action -- bad guy gone, everyone else saved (well, himself sent off to almost certain death, but hey, you can't win 'em all).  Continuing regret would be a waste of his time and energy.

 

[Shadow Dweller]

 

There was an element of premeditation there, but just barely -- just a few seconds of running the options and realizing that there was one solution left.

Only one solution left that would produce the outcome Sherlock wanted, you mean. There were other solutions, but they all resulted in CAM remaining a menace. Which could have been an even more gut-wrenching story ... how do you hold your world together when the enemy cannot be defeated? Too close to the real world to make entertaining TV, I guess. Heck, I'm depressed just thinking about it.

 

 

Poison and some misdirection to lead toward certain people to shoulder the blame :D 

[Arcadia]

I doubt that he does spend any time regretting it afterwards.  He thought it through as thoroughly as time allowed and chose what appeared to be the best course of action -- bad guy gone, everyone else saved (well, himself sent off to almost certain death, but hey, you can't win 'em all).  Continuing regret would be a waste of his time and energy.

I can't reconcile that person with the man who was in tears immediately after pulling the trigger, though. Still thinking.

[T.o.b.y]

I think Sherlock did kill CAM (I really never think of it as "murder," although I guess it technically is) in a fit of rage, but it was a rage that was a logical conclusion from everything that had preceded the act.  As HLV progresses, we see intellectual options grow fewer and fewer, until when they stand on the Appledore terrace, there is no way to stop CAM other than kill him.  And Sherlock was angry -- that John and Mary could be hurt, that Janine had been hurt, that Mycroft could be harmed politically if not physically.  And the only option there was to shoot.  There was an element of premeditation there, but just barely -- just a few seconds of running the options and realizing that there was one solution left.

 

I still think he realized he had to kill Magnussen right after it turned out the vaults existed only in his head, and that the only reason he waited until Mycroft's arrival to do so was that he needed a lot of impartial witnesses to make sure that it would be clear John had nothing to do with it. Remember, when he was analyzing Mary's actions at CAM tower, he said she couldn't shoot Magnussen after she took out Sherlock because her own husband would have become a suspect, so he considers these things.

 

Also, I don't think rage was his main motivation for the killing. I think it was a rational decision and he merely used his rage to carry it through. Okay, maybe it was really an emotional decision and he used his intellect to justify it to himself, but I doubt he'd ever see it that way. And because Sherlock Holmes is my big hero of reason, I prefer the first version, too.

 

 

[Boton]

 

I doubt that he does spend any time regretting it afterwards.  He thought it through as thoroughly as time allowed and chose what appeared to be the best course of action -- bad guy gone, everyone else saved (well, himself sent off to almost certain death, but hey, you can't win 'em all).  Continuing regret would be a waste of his time and energy.

I can't reconcile that person with the man who was in tears immediately after pulling the trigger, though. Still thinking.

 

 

And I think I can reconcile it.  To me, Sherlock decided that his friends -- John, Mary, Janine, Mycroft -- were worth losing his own life over, whatever that "loss" would ultimately mean.  He analyzed the situation, let rage carry him through it, and was devastated by what the situation had come to, but it was his only solution.  And continuing to regret it as far as the tarmac scene would be a waste of his energy.

 

For me, sometimes being a "hero" (even if he doesn't think of himself as such) means sacrificing yourself for others.  As we've suggested upthread, leaving CAM alive to continue to use the Appledore vaults is not an option even worth considering.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thank you, Boton -- that's much better thought-through than anything I'd have been likely to come up with, and it makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Bendydoodle Cantaloupe]

 

 

I doubt that he does spend any time regretting it afterwards.  He thought it through as thoroughly as time allowed and chose what appeared to be the best course of action -- bad guy gone, everyone else saved (well, himself sent off to almost certain death, but hey, you can't win 'em all).  Continuing regret would be a waste of his time and energy.

I can't reconcile that person with the man who was in tears immediately after pulling the trigger, though. Still thinking.

 

 

And I think I can reconcile it.  To me, Sherlock decided that his friends -- John, Mary, Janine, Mycroft -- were worth losing his own life over, whatever that "loss" would ultimately mean.  He analyzed the situation, let rage carry him through it, and was devastated by what the situation had come to, but it was his only solution.  And continuing to regret it as far as the tarmac scene would be a waste of his energy.

 

For me, sometimes being a "hero" (even if he doesn't think of himself as such) means sacrificing yourself for others.  As we've suggested upthread, leaving CAM alive to continue to use the Appledore vaults is not an option even worth considering.

 

 

     “Name one hero who was happy."

     I considered. Heracles went mad and killed his family; Theseus lost his bride and father; Jason's children and new wife were murdered by his old; Bellerophon killed the Chimera but was crippled by the fall from Pegasus' back.

     "You can't."

         -Madeline Miller

[Shadow Dweller]

 

     “Name one hero who was happy."

     I considered. Heracles went mad and killed his family; Theseus lost his bride and father; Jason's children and new wife were murdered by his old; Bellerophon killed the Chimera but was crippled by the fall from Pegasus' back.

     "You can't."

         -Madeline Miller

 

 

Kal-El / Clark Kent / Superman  :lol:

[Arcadia]

Sam Gamgee, Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf the White. Uh ... Robin Hood, Bigwig, John T. Chance, Harry Bailey, The Scarecrow, Nausicaa, Han Solo ... I'd name some real life heroes (Capt. Phillips, John Glenn, Mother Teresa) but I don't actually have any way of confirming they are/were "happy" .... and of course we could argue whether any of them are heroes....

[Arcadia]

 

 

I doubt that he does spend any time regretting it afterwards. He thought it through as thoroughly as time allowed and chose what appeared to be the best course of action -- bad guy gone, everyone else saved (well, himself sent off to almost certain death, but hey, you can't win 'em all). Continuing regret would be a waste of his time and energy.

I can't reconcile that person with the man who was in tears immediately after pulling the trigger, though. Still thinking.

 

And I think I can reconcile it. To me, Sherlock decided that his friends -- John, Mary, Janine, Mycroft -- were worth losing his own life over, whatever that "loss" would ultimately mean. He analyzed the situation, let rage carry him through it, and was devastated by what the situation had come to, but it was his only solution. And continuing to regret it as far as the tarmac scene would be a waste of his energy.

 

For me, sometimes being a "hero" (even if he doesn't think of himself as such) means sacrificing yourself for others. As we've suggested upthread, leaving CAM alive to continue to use the Appledore vaults is not an option even worth considering.

 

Thank you, Boton -- that's much better thought-through than anything I'd have been likely to come up with, and it makes perfect sense to me.

It makes perfect sense to me too, and I wish I could come up with as sensible a response! I've been trying for quite a while, but it keeps wandering off into my personal beliefs about taking a life, and unanswerable musings on the written word vs. performance, and I don't really want to go there, so screw it. :P I get what you all are saying, I just ... what? Wish the episode had ended differently, I guess.

 

 

One thing: I think Sherlock IS still feeling regret at the airport. Not about murdering CAM, exactly, but regret that he's in a cleft stick of his own making, fueled mostly by hubris and possibly by drug use. Sherlock's still learning how to be human, right? And one of S3's lessons seems to be humility; if he'd had some, he might have avoided being decked by John in TEH, he might have avoided getting shot, and he might have avoided the direct and disastrous confrontation with CAM. CAM was well ahead of him every step of the way; Sherlock refused to accept that; and he barrelled in and created a no-win situation. Yeah, I think he regrets that. And if he doesn't, I will on his behalf.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I get what you all are saying, I just ... what? Wish the episode had ended differently, I guess.

I know what you mean, and I wish some things had gone differently too -- but we've been wishing that for about a year now. I think we've gotten a lot further by coming up with new ways to look at what did happen.

 

Sherlock's still learning how to be human, right? And one of S3's lessons seems to be humility; if he'd had some, he might have avoided being decked by John in TEH, he might have avoided getting shot, and he might have avoided the direct and disastrous confrontation with CAM....

Is humble the opposite of over-confident, smug, and patronizing?  If so, I definitely agree in the case of the shooting.  I hadn't noticed the parallels with the other two incidents before, but you have an excellent point.

 

It's my philosophy that the true problem is not in making the mistake, but rather in failing to learn from it.  Hopefully Sherlock will have learned something from those three incidents by the time Series 4 comes along.

 

[Arcadia]

Is humble the opposite of over-confident, smug, and patronizing?

Close enough!

[Shadow Dweller]

Found this interesting line about the probably pairing of Irene Adler/Mycroft Holmes:

 

"In this AU Mycroft would be a more - lato sensu - “corruptible”, vulnerable character. In this AU it would be possible for Irene Adler to seduce him, to play with his need for intellectual challenge and his solitude and his longing for a kindred spirit (after all, she always knows what people like…), and to overwhelm his other defences."

 

I actually agree with thenorwoodbuilder and I am thinking about the same thing with Myriarty, my favourite slash pairing in SHERLOCK. 

[SherlockedCAMPer]

An interesting take on the mind of Mycroft, AU as it is.