Episode 3.1, "The Empty Hearse"

[Zain]

 

 

SHERLOCK (voiceover): I knew I didn’t have long. I contacted my brother; set the wheels in motion.

 

This also makes sense in the context above. Jim's suicide forced Sherlock into action. He has to contact Mycroft to fake his death. To jump. Which hadn't been planned as anything more than a safeguard, just in case. It also explains the amount of time that passed.

Let's have a look at the time frame. John leaves for Baker Street. Sherlock confronts Moriarty. John returns. Sherlock jumps.

We don't know for sure how long John took to get to Baker Street and back to Bart's. It is unlikely he was this fast. There must have been at least 5 to 10 minutes between Jim's suicide and John's return. Plenty of time to position everybody after deciding on this particular escape path.

This part, his jump, was not planned. Or yes, it was a possible plan, but it wasn't the one they would have chosen if Jim hadn't forced Sherlock's hand.

 

Of course there's a major flaw in my theory, but please bear with me for now. To sum up the big contradiction:

I before established this possible scenario: Sherlock hadn't intended to jump. After all, Mycroft had taken care of all three snipers. No need to jump.

On the other hand, I just reasoned that Sherlock had to jump because of Jim's suicide. After all, John's sniper was still there.

 

 

For now, I'll make a complete new assumption. Sherlock hadn't intended to jump. And when he had to jump, he hadn't intended to do so in front of John.

Yes, it makes sense that he would need a witness. Or that John needed to mourn for real, otherwise people might not be convinced of Sherlock's demise. In TEH, Sherlock never explains why John had to be there. It is quite possible that John simply had arrived too early.

 

 

 

The taxi pulls up. Sherlock takes his phone from his pocket and sees a reply to his earlier text: 

 

LAZARUS IS GO

 

Sherlock received the confirmation that everyone was in position shortly before John arrived. It's not like he waited for him. If "Lazarus is go" means that John had arrived on the scene, it would have been quite redundant. Sherlock saw him arrive from the rooftop. John wasn't part of the plan. In fact, his arrival is problematic. Because he brings another obstacle with him: A sniper. Who suddenly poses a threat. If John hadn't rushed back to Bart's, that sniper wouldn't have become a problem. Like the other two snipers, he then would have had to rely on other sources to confirm Sherlock's fall. Because he came to Bart's, too, Sherlock now has to jump for real. That's why that third sniper couldn't be taken care of like the other two snipers. He was on the scene. A mere text message wouldn't convince him. 

Sherlock thus has to deceive both, John and the sniper.

We mustn't forget that the sniper can't have arrived that much earlier than John. He couldn't have known for sure that John would return to Bart's. He must have followed him to Baker Street, and when John headed back, he must have rushed back, too. Mycroft couldn't have anticipated the exact house and window the sniper would choose to shoot from. I suppose it was also an unlucky angle which allowed the sniper to observe the fake jump more closely than John.

 

 

ANDERSON: And what about the sniper aiming at John?

SHERLOCK: Mycroft’s men intervened before he could take the shot. He was invited to reconsider.

 

We know that he didn't retreat because of Sherlock's jump but because of Mycroft's sniper that threatened him. The fall thus hadn't convinced the sniper. He had to be invited to "reconsider." 

 

 

 

At this stage, I want to question Sherlock's words, however:

 

 

 

SHERLOCK: Everything was anticipated; every eventuality allowed for. It worked ... (he smiles slightly) ... perfectly.

 

This one sentence is characterization (too much pride to admit his mistakes), as well as a reminder how unreliable a character's narration can be. We know for sure that at least one thing hadn't been anticipated: Jim's suicide. Thus, we have to question Sherlock's narration. He could have left out crucial details. Such as the reason why he cried at the rooftop. Had he, for example, not been sure he would hit the airbag? Or had he not known for certain whether Mycroft had taken care of John's sniper? During Sherlock's narration, he never mentions how he felt at the different stages of the plan. We have to assume he left out details.

 

I hope that helps. And that you liked it, sherlockandjohn 

That's my take on the fall.

 

Btw, when I looked over the script, I found something quite interesting:

Why exactly did we assume Sherlock's work was done with? Mycroft actually pulls him out of Serbia with these words:

 

 

 

Now listen to me. There’s an underground terrorist network active in London and a massive attack is imminent. Sorry, but the holiday is over, brother dear.

 

Mycroft pulls him out because he needs Sherlock in London. Not because Sherlock's work is finished. Maybe that's why they try to cover up Sherlock's motives. It is part of season four's plot. It also would explain the Eastern Europe references spread throughout season three. There are still a couple of loose threads. Later, Sherlock states:

 

 

 

SHERLOCK: Moriarty’s network – took me two years to dismantle it.

MYCROFT: And you’re confident you have?

SHERLOCK: The Serbian side was the last piece of the puzzle.

MYCROFT: Yes. You got yourself in deep there ... (he checks his report) ... with Baron Maupertuis. Quite a scheme.

SHERLOCK: Colossal.

 

 

Sherlock doesn't answer Mycroft's question, he bypasses it. So, is there a link he had figured out but not eliminated?

 

Maupertuis, meanwhile, is a nice reference to "Rat." Most people assumed the word referred to "The Giant Rat of Sumatra." Maupertuis' case meanwhile involved The Netherlands-Sumatra company. It is a nice cross-reference. But doesn't make sense in that context. Why would the company be situated in Serbia? If I am not mistaken, Watson rushed to France because Holmes became sick after that particular case.

So they deliberately put it somewhere else, somewhere in Eastern Europe. The old man, John's patient, had a Russian accent, too, hadn't he? Are there any meta essays on the Eastern Europe references? I don't know of any (yet).

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

You make a lot of interesting points, far too many for me to comment on, so I'll restrict myself to a couple of minor puzzlements:

 

Sherlock also claims to have known of all three snipers, and that Mycroft had taken care of two of them. John's sniper was the only one who gave them grief. Let's ask ourselves: Why? What did make him different from the other two snipers? In my opinion, it was his position. He was near the "scene." The other snipers relied on outside information. They didn't see Sherlock jump with their own eyes. John's sniper must have been in the unique position to see the fall.

 

(emphasis added by me)

 

But isn't John's sniper the only one that Mycroft says he DID take care of?  (Presumably for the reason you mention, that he had a ringside seat on Sherlock's fall.)  That would presumably leave the other two watching the television for news bulletins (as you imply later).

 

Btw, when I looked over the script, I found something quite interesting:

 

My heart skipped a beat there, but I assume you're referring to somebody's transcript of the episode?

 

[Zain]

Yep, Ariane de Vere's transcript. Sorry if I got your hopes up for a second

 

And of course, you are right. i didn't express myself that well. When I wrote "Mycroft had taken care of them", I simply tried to express that they were no concern to the plan. They could be tricked quite easily.

[Carol the Dabbler]

True.  They'd presumably believe the television and newspaper reports.

 

Which leads me to wonder why there was apparently no photographic or video coverage of Sherlock's fall.  They wouldn't want reporters on the scene, of course -- they'd be worse than snipers -- but couldn't one of the Network have (anonymously) posted a carefully-angled cell-phone photo or video on a newspaper website?  Sherlock stood on the edge of the roof for some time before he stepped off, so it would have been only natural for a passer-by or someone in a nearby building to have done so.  And it would have gone a long way toward making sure the public was convinced.

 

Oh, well -- maybe they did, and it just didn't make it into either TRF or TEH.

 

Come to think yet again, how come nobody in a nearby building noticed the damn airbag?  Was it a Sunday, and nobody was at work?

 

[sherlockandjohn]

Good question about the other buildings, Carol.

 

Zain; thank you for your thorough walk-through of the fall. There are definitely some points I hadn't considered, like Sherlock asking for a "moment" to himself in order to let Mycroft's men know that there were three snipers. It makes perfect sense. And so does the fact that John's arrival wasn't necessarily anticipated. It was possible, but Sherlock hadn't wanted or needed John to be there. However, because he was, the sniper became an issue. I hadn't thought of the possibility that the sniper had actually seen Sherlock jump, but again - it makes perfect sense. Quote: "Mycroft's men intervened before he (the sniper aiming at John) could take the shot." Sherlock does not say that they intervened before he jumped, but before the sniper could take the shot. The reason they had not been able to intervene sooner was that they first had to find the sniper.

 

I find it a possible scenario. So; what if they hadn't found the sniper in time? Yikes!

[sherlockandjohn]

I must admit I loved the nods towards the fan theories - they seemed so affectionate.

 

Don't you think that Sherlock's assumption that John will happily welcome him back is just bravado? There is an interesting meta at http://archiveofourown.org/works/1115589 which explores Sherlock's character regression/progression in TEH, and I have to agree with the suggestion made by the writer, Kizzia, that Sherlock has clung to the idea of John throughout the hiatus and is terrified by the idea that John might have moved on. So he covers up his fear with arrogance, just as he covers his fear of rejection and John's grief with childish humour. Makes sense to me.

 

I have now read Kizzia's thought on Sherlock, and it was highly interesting. I cannot wait to re-watch TEH with these thoughts in mind. I cannot say for sure that Gatiss had all of this in mind when writing the episode, but I do feel Kizzia's interpretation makes a lot of sense.Thanks for posting the link!

[Slithytove]

 

 

I must admit I loved the nods towards the fan theories - they seemed so affectionate.

 

Don't you think that Sherlock's assumption that John will happily welcome him back is just bravado? There is an interesting meta at http://archiveofourown.org/works/1115589 which explores Sherlock's character regression/progression in TEH, and I have to agree with the suggestion made by the writer, Kizzia, that Sherlock has clung to the idea of John throughout the hiatus and is terrified by the idea that John might have moved on. So he covers up his fear with arrogance, just as he covers his fear of rejection and John's grief with childish humour. Makes sense to me.

I have now read Kizzia's thought on Sherlock, and it was highly interesting. I cannot wait to re-watch TEH with these thoughts in mind. I cannot say for sure that Gatiss had all of this in mind when writing the episode, but I do feel Kizzia's interpretation makes a lot of sense.Thanks for posting the link!

I thought it was interesting. There are some thought-provoking metas on archiveofourown.org. I don't agree with all of them - like the pro-Mary ones! - but they are food for thought.

 

Zain's TRF makes a lot of sense, which is more than I can say for the original. Do Moftiss not care about plot holes, do they have revelations in store which will explain everything or are they relying on the fans to work out some coherent explanations? I fear it may be the latter. As resolutions to cliffhangers go, TEH was almost as cheeky as the episode of Dallas, years ago, where a previously dead character emerged from the shower and informed his startled wife that the previous series had been a dream.

 

I would like to have been at the meeting where the brothers came up with the LAZARUS plan. "So, IF Jim tries to make me jump off the roof....and IF he isn't there to watch me....and IF I can let you know what threat he is using to coerce me....." and, presumably, "IF John dashes back from Baker Street in time....and IF the sniper is still at large....then this is what we'll do...."

 

That's some remarkable forward planning!

[sherlockandjohn]

No kidding! But then again, Mycroft and Sherlock are pretty remarkable people.

[Carol the Dabbler]

 

 

I would like to have been at the meeting where the brothers came up with the LAZARUS plan. "So, IF Jim tries to make me jump off the roof....and IF he isn't there to watch me....and IF I can let you know what threat he is using to coerce me....." and, presumably, "IF John dashes back from Baker Street in time....and IF the sniper is still at large....then this is what we'll do...."

 

How many scenarios did Sherlock say they had worked out?  Lemme check -- first he tells John and Mary

 

I calculated that there were thirteen possibilities once I’d invited Moriarty onto the roof.

 

... and later he tells Anderson

 

There were thirteen likely scenarios once we were up on that roof.

 

(Thanks to Ariane DeVere's transcript for those quotes.)

 

OK, so 13.  That's not a power of 2, so apparently  they considered some combinations to be either impossible or implausible.  But note that just four yes-no factors will have 16 combinations.  And you've already mentioned five factors.  Seems like Sherlock must've done a good bit of winging it, regardless of what he claims.

 

P.S.:  You mention not liking the pro-Mary metas that you've seen, and I can certainly sympathize with you, considering my general reaction to the anti-Mary metas.  But you seem to have done far more reading than I have, so I'd be interested in knowing your pick of the best-thought-out meta from each camp, if you can recall after all that reading.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

 

...Seems like Sherlock must've done a good bit of winging it, regardless of what he claims.

 

I think so, too. His words to Anderson about having everything planned and then work out perfectly may be true when it comes to the actual rooftop scenarios, but not to everything that precedes that incident. And even on the rooftop, the 13 scenarios are probably just the most likely.

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

 

 

... His words to Anderson about having everything planned and then work out perfectly may be true when it comes to the actual rooftop scenarios, but not to everything that precedes that incident. And even on the rooftop, the 13 scenarios are probably just the most likely.

 

 

It would seem logical to prepare for the most likely scenarios, yes -- but Sherlock told Anderson that he had not anticipated Moriarty's suicide, and yet they had a named scenario ready to cover it.  I wonder if they had thought that Sherlock might have to kill Moriarty?  That could account for the "Lazarus" scenario.

 

[Zain]

I actually figured Lazarus was a direct reference to the biblical Lazarus. Who rose from the dead. So I thought it was the code name for the one of those 13 plans that had Sherlock really fake his death. Instead of simply walking away.

[sherlockandjohn]

I always had the same thought, Zain.

[Slithytove]

 

I would like to have been at the meeting where the brothers came up with the LAZARUS plan. "So, IF Jim tries to make me jump off the roof....and IF he isn't there to watch me....and IF I can let you know what threat he is using to coerce me....." and, presumably, "IF John dashes back from Baker Street in time....and IF the sniper is still at large....then this is what we'll do...."

How many scenarios did Sherlock say they had worked out? Lemme check -- first he tells John and Mary

 

I calculated that there were thirteen possibilities once I’d invited Moriarty onto the roof.

... and later he tells Anderson

 

There were thirteen likely scenarios once we were up on that roof.

(Thanks to Ariane DeVere's transcript for those quotes.)

 

OK, so 13. That's not a power of 2, so apparently they considered some combinations to be either impossible or implausible. But note that just four yes-no factors will have 16 combinations. And you've already mentioned five factors. Seems like Sherlock must've done a good bit of winging it, regardless of what he claims.

 

P.S.: You mention not liking the pro-Mary metas that you've seen, and I can certainly sympathize with you, considering my general reaction to the anti-Mary metas. But you seem to have done far more reading than I have, so I'd be interested in knowing your pick of the best-thought-out meta from each camp, if you can recall after all that reading.

I have read some intelligent, cogent pro-Mary arguments but my gut reaction is still, "No, what she did was so wrong.". For me, she was damned the moment she shot Sherlock. You can't shoot someone just because he is a witness. Even worse if he is unarmed, offering help and is a friend. I can still appreciate a good argument, though.

 

I wanted to post links but kept losing them - I am a dumb bunny where computers are concerned - so I will just mention the authors and titles.....

 

To start with something already discussed, there is Wellingtongoose's defence of the "surgery" theory ( though it is on tumblr, not on archiveofourown) which can be compared to Let's Play Murder by cookieswillcrumble, which takes the opposite line. I am prejudiced, of course, but I think the latter is more convincing. Basically it boils down to "Bad luck hitting the inferior vena cava" vs "What did you expect when you shot someone in the abdomen? He was lucky the bullet didn't hit his heart."

 

One of the best pro-Mary metas is A Defense of Mary Morstan by azriona. Tammany writes interesting metas and there are pro-Mary chapters in Dramatic Through-lines And Narrative Arcs: What Is The Central Concern? There is also Mary And Sherlock And The Undoing (Or Not) Of TSoT by tilted syllogism, which argues that Mary's affection for Sherlock was real, despite HLV. There are also a couple of sympathetic metas which try to tie Mary's past to ACD's The Yellow Face,though I think this would be hard to include in the show, given the difference in 19th and 21st attitudes to race.

 

Anti-Mary metas include Mary - Did She Shoot To Save Sherlock? by curlyfuchuck, The A.G.R.A problem: What Was On The Bloody Flash Drive? by nothingislittle and The Problem With Mary by xistentialangst. One of the best of the anti camp, I think, is Penitence, Paradox And Psychopathy: Why Mary Is A Bit Not Good by TheConsultingActor.

 

Zain has also written a very good meta called His Last Vow, which I recommend....

[T.o.b.y]

I would like to have been at the meeting where the brothers came up with the LAZARUS plan. "So, IF Jim tries to make me jump off the roof....and IF he isn't there to watch me....and IF I can let you know what threat he is using to coerce me....." and, presumably, "IF John dashes back from Baker Street in time....and IF the sniper is still at large....then this is what we'll do...."

 

 

Right. If Sherlock really did not expect Moriarty to die (or be otherwise absent when he jumped), The Fall really makes very, very little sense.

 

Actually, I've begun to suspect that was the part where Sherlock did not tell Anderson the truth. Come to think of it, we've never heard Sherlock or Mycroft confirm that Moriarty is dead, right? Mary learned it from John, apparently.

 

Perhaps series 4 will make more sense of The Reichenbach Fall, after all! And maybe, maybe the fact that Moriarty is still around will prove to be better for the overall plot than I had so far considered. I sure hope so.

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

The overall plot?  Gee, that'd sure be nice! 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

We just watched this episode over the weekend, and I'm wondering how Lord Moran's control box communicated with the bomb train.  He carried it around in a briefcase, so I don't see how it could have been hard-wired.  And John demonstrated that cell-phone signals, at least, could not penetrate into that tunnel.  All I can think is that either a] the control box sent signals via sonar waves or something of that sort, or b] it communicated via wireless transmission to another box hidden in or near the underground, which was in turn hard-wired to the bomb train.

 

I'm not real happy with either of those, though.  Can anyone propose a c] ?

 

[Zain]

c) Plot hole.

I fear I can't propose anything that will make you happy. Maybe someone else, though.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Well, yeah, I suspect you're right.  (You want a nice clockwork plot, watch Elementary.     )

 

Would be interesting to see if anyone can come up with a plausible in-universe explanation, though.

 

[Caya]

Lord Moran wasn't called The Rat for nothing ... the control box sent a signal to a cage (further up in the tunnel system, so it would receive wi-fi) containing a trained rat, who then scampered down to press a button that started the bomb sequence?

 

Well it was worth a shot .

[Carol the Dabbler]

Nothing wrong with a low-tech solution! 

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Also there were those charges set up in the shaft...they were blinking....yes?  No?....but anyway....they had to be wired to the main bomb....maybe they also designed to pick up the wi-fi signal and carry it down to the main bomb in the car?

[Carol the Dabbler]

That's true -- that was apparently an air shaft that lead up to the Parliament chambers, so perhaps a wireless signal would be able to reach that particular area.  Thank you, Fox -- I believe that's the most logical suggestion yet!

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I just ran across this on the internet: There really is/was an abandoned Sumatra Road tube station -- sort of.  It's located well north of Westminster and it would have been called North End.  But it really was more or less abandoned before it ever opened and (most oddly) it really is fairly near a street called Sumatra Road.

 

The real Sumatra Road is well outside Central London, something like 6 miles from the supposed location.  It's marked by the red "A" pin near the top-left corner of this map.  Hampstead Heath, the actual site of the abandoned station, is at the top-center of the map.  For comparison purposes, the real 221B Baker Street is near the southwest (lower-left) corner of Regent's Park (the large park near the center of the map), and Parliament is just west (left) of the loop of the Thames at the very bottom of the map.

 

You can read more about the would-be station's varied history here.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

They really do like adding real details to their Holmes/London.  So very cool. Thank you for the information and links, Carol!