Episode 3.2, "The Sign of Three"

[T.o.b.y]

I think this is why I can't watch TSoT.  And, I've been on a bit of a comparative-Holmes kick lately, watching/reading different version, and I think this is so fundamental to the Sherlock Holmes character: he feels abandonment much more deeply and fears being alone more than people would expect.  After all, canon ACD Holmes says that Watson's wedding is the one instance of Watson betraying him by leaving him alone.  TSoT is one of the most poignant portrayals of this I've seen on film/TV, because it is palpable how betrayed Sherlock feels by an event that he has been so involved in to date.  The feeling of aloneness shouldn't have come as a surprise to him, but I think it did.

 

I wonder what it says about me that I don't find this painful to watch at all. I like the ending of The Sign of Three, in fact, it is probably one of my favorite bits of television ever. I can't quite explain why... It just appeals to me and I feel as if it's never been done quite this way before. It's one of those many moments where I go "finally a TV show that represents me".

 

In many ways, I feel as if Sherlock addresses questions and topics that I care about or can empathize with or find intriguing that I haven't seen given much room or thought in a movie or a TV series before. It just really hits a nerve with me.

 

 

[Pamela]

I identified with that as well.  I've left events early, like church picnics, in the very same way, because I just didn't belong.  I never felt it was a big deal.

[Boton]

John was in and out of residence of Baker Street after Holmes's return from the Great Hiatus. You may be right, Boton, in fact a whole lot of people are really hoping to see the last of Mary as soon as possible with no baby ever in sight.

 

 

 

And I really like Mary!  I just don't like having an extra character in the Holmes-Watson dynamic.  I sort of want Moftiss to cast AA in "The Mary Watson Files" and let her move to America and solve crimes as a former CIA agent.  (Possibly with Michael Weston and Fiona Glenane from Burn Notice, but I digress.)

 

 

I think this is why I can't watch TSoT.  And, I've been on a bit of a comparative-Holmes kick lately, watching/reading different version, and I think this is so fundamental to the Sherlock Holmes character: he feels abandonment much more deeply and fears being alone more than people would expect.  After all, canon ACD Holmes says that Watson's wedding is the one instance of Watson betraying him by leaving him alone.  TSoT is one of the most poignant portrayals of this I've seen on film/TV, because it is palpable how betrayed Sherlock feels by an event that he has been so involved in to date.  The feeling of aloneness shouldn't have come as a surprise to him, but I think it did.

 

I wonder what it says about me that I don't find this painful to watch at all. I like the ending of The Sign of Three, in fact, it is probably one of my favorite bits of television ever. I can't quite explain why... It just appeals to me and I feel as if it's never been done quite this way before. It's one of those many moments where I go "finally a TV show that represents me".

 

 

 

Sometimes I think whether we run toward a fictional portrayal of a certain emotion or away from it has to do a lot with our own experiences in life and the distance we have from whatever wounds or triumphs we remember or whatever issues we have to work on in our own psyche.  For me, the emotion portrayed is just too close to being an actual fear for me, and not in a way that I feel comforted by seeing it represented on screen.  But that's the lovely thing about fiction is finding the way that these stories match up with our own lives.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Since watching BBC Sherlock and then going to back to watch Jeremy Brett's portrayal, I could wish that Homes was the "cold machine" that Watson thought of him in the books. But of course, even there, we catch glimpses of the deeply caring, lonely Holmes that was all to eager to pull Watson away from hearth and home and would pull a snit if he thought Watson was on the verge of refusing.

 

 I really do like TSoT.....but the ending is so so close to home. Weddings are dreadful affairs.

 

[Arcadia]

I think this is why I can't watch TSoT.  And, I've been on a bit of a comparative-Holmes kick lately, watching/reading different version, and I think this is so fundamental to the Sherlock Holmes character: he feels abandonment much more deeply and fears being alone more than people would expect.  After all, canon ACD Holmes says that Watson's wedding is the one instance of Watson betraying him by leaving him alone.  TSoT is one of the most poignant portrayals of this I've seen on film/TV, because it is palpable how betrayed Sherlock feels by an event that he has been so involved in to date.  The feeling of aloneness shouldn't have come as a surprise to him, but I think it did.

 

Wow. By now I've read a few ACD stories, but I haven't tackled the Sign of Four yet. That's something I don't remember anyone saying about Holmes before, that he fears being alone; that's a really lovely insight. It gives several of the scenes throughout the series more poignance than before -- the reason he wanted a flat mate to begin with, for example. Maybe he just needs people more than he's willing to admit...

 

Interesting also: in TEH, we have John feeling betrayed by Sherlock; in TSo3, we have Sherlock feeling betrayed by John? Although the word betrayal seems a bit strong here; I think Sherlock understands and is happy for John, in spite of being a bit sad for himself. Anyway, what a lovely, nuanced take on canon, as well as a subtle tit for tat.

 

 

I also think it's here where John stops being a co-equal character and Sherlock dominates the stage. It's weird, because John's right there in almost every scene, yet I have a very vague impression of him. Is it because Benedict's so dazzling in the best man sequence that I can't see anyone else very well? Or something else... maybe it's because we're learning a bunch of new things about Sherlock, but not John? At any rate, I hope it's a short-lived trend, the show feels slightly lop-sided in Sherlock's favor, and I miss John's ballast.

 

I think it's true that Sherlock is decidedly the main character in TSoT and HLV.  I think the ACD canon uses Watson as the secondary character, and Sherlock breaks that mold by making John an equal.  But there is a heritage there of Holmes being the central character.  

 

I actually think that they are taking John a little bit away from center stage in preparation for an evolution in his character.  I've said before, but I sort of expect Mary and the baby to die in the special, precipitating the Victorian era "flashback" or "coping fantasy," and John moving back to 221B in Season 4.  But I could be really wrong.

 

I have that sense as well; somewhere in S4, John is going to have his moment and it's going to knock us all off our feet. For good or bad, I don't know.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I don't mind that Anderson and Donovan are not invited, but Harry and Mike should be there. Mike, your mutual friends that you brings together!

 

According to a recent interview with David Nellist, Mike really was invited to the wedding, but he (Nellist) had a prior engagement, so he (like Mike) had to send his regrets.

 

Will we ever see Harry?  (Or will she be like Norm's wife Vera on Cheers?)  The character has great potential, so I suspect they'll wait till they can give her a significant role in an episode.

 

John never stops Sherlock drinking the eyeball tea

I once moved about a thousand miles to be in the same town as the fellow I'd been dating.  He even helped me move. Three days later, he dumped me -- but didn't bother letting me know till I realized something was fishy and confronted him.

 

About a month later, as something of a peace offering, he took me to dinner at his favorite Chinese restaurant. The waiter immediately brought out a basket of fried noodles with little pots of plum sauce and hot Chinese mustard, and we munched while we chatted. Noticing that he'd scooped up a sizable dollop of the mustard and was about to pop it into his mouth, I had a little dialog with myself: Should I tell him?  Well, it hardly seems necessary -- he's eaten here loads of times    he already knows the mustard is hot.

 

Even though John is back on friendly terms with Sherlock, he isn't necessarily going to go out of his way to save the idiot from himself.  ;)

 

Did I hear it correctly, Sherlock says John has good singing voice? I want the back story!

In full, Sherlock says, "he’s got a great singing voice -- or somebody does." He's a bit distracted at that moment, so who knows whether it's true or not -- but it would be entirely possible for John to sing in the show, since Martin Freeman has a very pleasant singing voice.

 

... a whole lot of people are really hoping to see the last of Mary as soon as possible with no baby ever in sight.

 

Am I the only person here who's looking forward to seeing some scenes with the baby?

 

Everyone seems to be expecting Mary to die because she (apparently) dies in canon.  But they've already made opera-singer Irene Adler into a domin8trix, the nondescript Mrs. Hudson into a former go-go dancer, and sweet little Mary Morstan into a former something-or-other.  What's one more plot twist -- Mary doesn't die?  They've already made her interesting; surely Moftiss can put her and the baby in a few scenes without ruining the show.  Heck, they might even manage to make things more interesting that way!

 

... I have that sense as well; somewhere in S4, John is going to have his moment and it's going to knock us all off our feet. For good or bad, I don't know.

Good, bad, whatever -- I just love when John knocks me off my feet!  Though I do hope for his sake that they don't subject him to anything else too horribly tragic.

[Van Buren Supernova]

I love this gif, it's so cool and so weird all at once.

My favorite Sherlock-ness!  

 

 

We had quite a discussion about this photo at one point, as I recall. It just looks so strange, and surely it's deliberate? But why? What is it supposed to mean? I think some people suggested it shows a gulf growing between them, but I don't see it that way ... on the other hand, I don't know what to make of it.

Good,.. I was wondering if I was alone, because it catches my attention since the very first watch.

 

 

I think that's the point of the ending though, isn't it? To make us sad for Sherlock? He's so wedded to his ideal of himself as a superior being, that he is isolated even in the moments when he is willing to come down from the heights. In other words, in order to be special, he has sacrificed the comforts of being "ordinary." Is the trade-off worth it? Don't know, but he's made his own bed, and as he walks off into the night I think he's determined to lie in it. Which is a bit tragic and a bit heroic at the same time.

 

All just part of breaking our hearts.

seem to understand that he is sad.

Maybe she didn't get him, but I'm more inclined to think she did, but decided not to act on it. Whether that's due to loyalty to Tom, or because she didn't want to risk getting hurt again, I haven't decided. Probably both. But it doesn't work out for her.

 

Wow. Now I'M depressed.

That...grr... that two guys...!   

 

 

I identified with that as well.  I've left events early, like church picnics, in the very same way, because I just didn't belong.  I never felt it was a big deal.

Same here. The noise, the people and it bores me to tears sometimes, or I prefer to hang out with friends in more private setting so we leave early together.

But in TSoT, imho, what makes it sad is Sherlock's expressions when he looks around and sees that he doesn't belong there, while I think, he was ready to try and mingle (that says a lot for him). He didn't even get his dance.

 

 

According to a recent interview with David Nellist, Mike really was invited to the wedding, but he (Nellist) had a prior engagement, so he (like Mike) had to send his regrets.

 

Will we ever see Harry?  (Or will she be like Norm's wife Vera on Cheers?)  The character has great potential, so I suspect they'll wait till they can give her a significant role in an episode.

At least I heard he will be there for the special.

 

Like Maris (Nile's wife) in Frasier?

 

 

I once moved about a thousand miles to be in the same town as the fellow I'd been dating.  He even helped me move. Three days later, he dumped me -- but didn't bother letting me know till I realized something was fishy and confronted him.

 

About a month later, as something of a peace offering, he took me to dinner at his favorite Chinese restaurant. The waiter immediately brought out a basket of fried noodles with little pots of plum sauce and hot Chinese mustard, and we munched while we chatted. Noticing that he'd scooped up a sizable dollop of the mustard and was about to pop it into his mouth, I had a little dialog with myself: Should I tell him?  Well, it hardly seems necessary -- he's eaten here loads of times    he already knows the mustard is hot.

I don't blame you. In fact, I think it's still a bit too nice just for thinking to stop it.

 

Even though John is back on friendly terms with Sherlock, he isn't necessarily going to go out of his way to save the idiot from himself.  ;)

Ouw..maybe in the past John had accidentally drink something similar..because you know how Sherlock put things around, so it's actually a revenge as well? XD I kind of like that.

 

 

In full, Sherlock says, "he’s got a great singing voice -- or somebody does." He's a bit distracted at that moment, so who knows whether it's true or not -- but it would be entirely possible for John to sing in the show, since Martin Freeman has a very pleasant singing voice.

Curious.. will get to the link later.

[Inge l-w]

Interesting corner they have painted themselves into: a more emotional Sherlock for S4or a less emotional one, based on how many times he got his fingers burned dabbling with emotions. Caring is an advantage or is Mycroft right?

Does it continue to be a series about a detective and his adventurous life or does it become a sitcom complete with Mary and baby, family outings and Uncle Sherlock trying to keep their little world safe in view of his vow?

In ACD Holmes goes on more cases on his own than with Dr Watson. Three thousand-odd cases before His Last Vow.

The Sign of Four is the best of the four novels, since half of The Study in Scarlet and The Valley of Fear are taken up by American back stories and shenanigans, and in The Hound he is there at the beginning and the end.

In the stories, he is always pottering about, involved in arcane interests, like the Polyphonic Motets of Lassus, Medieval documents, the ecclesiastical history of England, botany, zoology, music and chemistry being the more ordinary ones of his pastimes. It seems that once he chose his path in life, he accepted the loneliness and sense of separation from the rest of the world and is quite content for things to keep on like that for his entire life.

[Boton]

 

I think this is why I can't watch TSoT.  And, I've been on a bit of a comparative-Holmes kick lately, watching/reading different version, and I think this is so fundamental to the Sherlock Holmes character: he feels abandonment much more deeply and fears being alone more than people would expect.  After all, canon ACD Holmes says that Watson's wedding is the one instance of Watson betraying him by leaving him alone.  TSoT is one of the most poignant portrayals of this I've seen on film/TV, because it is palpable how betrayed Sherlock feels by an event that he has been so involved in to date.  The feeling of aloneness shouldn't have come as a surprise to him, but I think it did.

 

Wow. By now I've read a few ACD stories, but I haven't tackled the Sign of Four yet. That's something I don't remember anyone saying about Holmes before, that he fears being alone; that's a really lovely insight. It gives several of the scenes throughout the series more poignance than before -- the reason he wanted a flat mate to begin with, for example. Maybe he just needs people more than he's willing to admit...

 

Interesting also: in TEH, we have John feeling betrayed by Sherlock; in TSo3, we have Sherlock feeling betrayed by John? Although the word betrayal seems a bit strong here; I think Sherlock understands and is happy for John, in spite of being a bit sad for himself. Anyway, what a lovely, nuanced take on canon, as well as a subtle tit for tat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the line where Holmes says that his wedding was the only time Watson had ever betrayed Holmes was in one of the stories that is written from Holmes's point of view.  Someone with a better knowledge of canon than me can probably point to the story right off, but the quote is something like:  In the only selfish move in our long association, Watson had left me for a wife.  I was alone.

 

(Kind of reminds me of the line they give Greg House in "Wilson," in which he says, "If you die, I'm alone," before Wilson's surgery. But, wrong thread to go into that.*)

 

It's probably not what any rational person would consider "betrayal," but I think it is my favorite part of the Holmes background and of Sherlock: It's that emotion that we all have in which we look at something happening to a friend, and we can't help but view it from how it will affect us and our own lives.  And most of us know that's not fair, but it doesn't stop the emotion.

 

I think (in fact, I'm pretty darn sure) that, just because Sherlock is a genius, it doesn't stop him from normal human emotions, not even if he tries to suppress them.  In TSoT, Sherlock spends the entire episode doing everything - everything! - a best friend and best man should do to make his buddy's wedding perfect.  But at the end of the day, literally, he can't escape the fact that he walks out of there feeling like John's gain is his own loss.  And that kind of thing feels like betrayal:  "Hey, we were supposed to be together forever, the two of us against the world."  Probably closely followed by, "Mycroft was right; this is why I never have friends."  

 

ETA: *In fact, I think there's more to say about the House: "Wilson" parallel to Sherlock: TSoT, but it would be boring to those who didn't see both shows, so I'm taking it over to the House thread.  Join me if you'd like.

[T.o.b.y]

 

I think the line where Holmes says that his wedding was the only time Watson had ever betrayed Holmes was in one of the stories that is written from Holmes's point of view.  Someone with a better knowledge of canon than me can probably point to the story right off, but the quote is something like:  In the only selfish move in our long association, Watson had left me for a wife.  I was alone.

 

(Kind of reminds me of the line they give Greg House in "Wilson," in which he says, "If you die, I'm alone," before Wilson's surgery. But, wrong thread to go into that.*)

 

It's probably not what any rational person would consider "betrayal," but I think it is my favorite part of the Holmes background and of Sherlock: It's that emotion that we all have in which we look at something happening to a friend, and we can't help but view it from how it will affect us and our own lives.  And most of us know that's not fair, but it doesn't stop the emotion.

 

I think (in fact, I'm pretty darn sure) that, just because Sherlock is a genius, it doesn't stop him from normal human emotions, not even if he tries to suppress them.  In TSoT, Sherlock spends the entire episode doing everything - everything! - a best friend and best man should do to make his buddy's wedding perfect.  But at the end of the day, literally, he can't escape the fact that he walks out of there feeling like John's gain is his own loss.  And that kind of thing feels like betrayal:  "Hey, we were supposed to be together forever, the two of us against the world."  Probably closely followed by, "Mycroft was right; this is why I never have friends."  

 

 

From "The Blanched Soldier":

 

"I find from my notebook that it was in January, 1903, just after the conclusion of the Boer War, that I had my visit from Mr. James M. Dodd, a big, fresh, sunburned, upstanding Briton. The good Watson had at that time deserted me for a wife, the only selfish action which I can recall in our association. I was alone."

 

(Side note: I always thought it was 1893. Turns out I was ten years behind! Some fan I am... :lol:)

 

I actually think Holmes is joking here, even though it does come across as one of those jokes that were born from the truth. After all, he did react to the announcement of Dr Watson's first marriage with a "dismal groan" and a reach for the cocaine bottle.

 

When I see Sherlock leaving the wedding, though, I don't see it as being about John so much as about Sherlock himself. He did try to "fill the vacancy" - he was flirting with Janine and wanted to dance with her; was looking for her after John and Mary went off together. But because he had been pushing Janine away the whole night and pointing out other men for her to date, she had finally concluded that he wasn't interested, heeded his advice and paired off with a guy who might actually enter into a relationship with her (or just a one night stand, whatever she was looking for).

 

It's about what being Sherlock Holmes means. I have the impression that series 3 revolves around that question, with Sherlock initially trying to become more "human", more "normal", to have friends and engage with other people, but finding that it doesn't work for him and is indeed a hindrance in his beloved work. When Janine says "I wish you weren't ... whatever it is you are", she might as well say "I wish you weren't Sherlock Holmes".

 

When Sherlock walks off into the night alone, I feel compassionately sad, but also relieved in a way, because I see it as a confirmation of him accepting and embracing the fact that he is Sherlock Holmes and nothing and nobody else, and he's going to live with all that entails. It leads straight to His Last Vow, where Sherlock ends up yelling "I am a high-functioning sociopath!" at Magnussen and shoots him, which he can do precisely because he has divorced himself to a degree from human feeling and human connections, and also because he can afford to leave now - John has Mary, and so Sherlock can afford to use his Sherlock-ness to kill the enemy, keep Mary safe and suffer the consequences of his actions on his own.

 

I love this somehow. I love the very sadness of it. I could well accept this as the ending. But we all know it won't be, so it'll be extremely interesting to find out how where they go with the character(s) from here.

 

[Inge l-w]

Well, yes, but we should remember that the "Blanched Soldier" is quite a ways away from the Sign of the Four, Holmes is definitely not talking about Mary Morstan,so that was a second marriage, or a putative third, since ACD was rather perfunctory in his continuity.

Also, the beginning of his best man's speech is lifted whole from both the ending of the Sign of the Four and the beginning of The Blanched Soldier, two stories separated by two decades in actual time.

[T.o.b.y]

Well, yes, but we should remember that the "Blanched Soldier" is quite a ways away from the Sign of the Four, Holmes is definitely not talking about Mary Morstan,so that was a second marriage, or a putative third, since ACD was rather perfunctory in his continuity.

 

That's putting it mildly... :lol:

 

And of course, yes, if you take Doyle's dates seriously and don't just assume he didn't care about continuity or his characters or anything except churning out yet another Sherlock Holmes story to finance the work he was really interested in, then of course this would have to be a second (or third? or fourth? or sixth?) marriage on Dr Watson's part, because it takes places after Holmes' return and by that time, Mary Morstan is supposedly dead.

 

Supposedly. Of course, we could make up all sorts of crazy theories about Dr Watson's marital history. I've never bought into the idea that he was really married six times, I think Doyle was just sloppy about his dates and file it away with Dr Watson's wandering war wound and other inconsistencies. One fun idea I once had was that maybe Mary Watson née Morstan never died - maybe she and the doctor just had a much more tempestuous relationship than he cared to admit in his public writings and lived together on and off, with him camping out at Baker St during times when they weren't on good terms. Who knows? Whatever the original idea (and I doubt Doyle even had one), they could definitely do that on Sherlock. I'd certainly prefer that scenario to Mary dying. It's the 2000s - why not have a divorced or temporarily separated Watson who pays child support?

 

[Inge l-w]

Why not have a permanently removed time-bomb like this Mary? She is even more dangerous than the stolen underground car in TEH. I don't care how they dispose of her, but she must be Dr Watson's "sad loss" from The Empty House, or they will be making fools of us all! Could they possibly have her thrown into the nearest star, or something?

Speaking of plot holes, why should Sherlock's inbox be on Dr Watson's mobile?

[T.o.b.y]

Speaking of plot holes, why should Sherlock's inbox be on Dr Watson's mobile?

 

Two possibilities I can think of:

 

- John was looking at Sherlock's phone, not his own (and yes, I am too unobservant to know whose it actually was - I'd make a lousy detective)

- The inbox is part of Sherlock's website, which if course John can access from his own phone and has a password for

 

[jadpdr]

I am not a fan of this Mary, so whatever they plan for her demise, preferably before the birth, is much better in their scheme of "consequences" than killing off Molly, for example. She is almost Sherlock's equal in manipulation and a former assassin, to boot. Off with her head, as the Queen of Hearts would have said.

[J.P.]

The episode is... a bit difficult.

First it is quite non-linear with the constant flashbacks. It was hard to me to remember the storyline.

 

I strongly dislike how Sherlock looks during the speech. His hair is somehow different, the light is too bright and makes his face look alien (think of an overexposed photo) and his eyes look almost mad. The speech starts with some of the best lines in the series, but as it comes to the crime solving, it  falls apart. Don't know, maybe it is deliberate, just to show us Sherlock on the verge of loosing control, but there is no flow, just a row of jerks and jolts, if you understand what I say.

 

On the plus side - we get such a wide variety of those little, hard visible expressions of Sherlock's face. Played wonderfully, real tour de force by BC.

 

TOBY: wonder what it says about me that I don't find this painful to watch at all. I like the ending of The Sign of Three, in fact, it is probably one of my favorite bits of television ever. I can't quite explain why... It just appeals to me and I feel as if it's never been done quite this way before. It's one of those many moments where I go "finally a TV show that represents me".
 
In many ways, I feel as if Sherlock addresses questions and topics that I care about or can empathize with or find intriguing that I haven't seen given much room or thought in a movie or a TV series before. It just really hits a nerve with me.

 
Amen to that! It depends on my actual mood how I react to that scene. On a bad day it can send me into a deep emotional black hole. Maybe because somewhere on the basic level, my brain is indeed hard wired as one of a social animal. Otherwise why this not belonging would make me sad? Sherlock's decision could be actually logical: The world is in balance again. The murder was prevented, John had the best wedding ever, Janine has her new guy. Now it's only the noise and the people. Time to go and find some nicer place.
 
But then his face when he tries to find Janine in the crowd, and the disappointment... ouch.
 

Boton:
And I really like Mary!  I just don't like having an extra character in the Holmes-Watson dynamic.

 
I remember my first reaction was a horror. But she fits with the boys IMO, in a wonderful and surprising way. Did you notice that Sherlock is clearly jealous of Sholto but not of Mary?
 

Arcadia:
Interesting also: in TEH, we have John feeling betrayed by Sherlock; in TSo3, we have Sherlock feeling betrayed by John? Although the word betrayal seems a bit strong here; I think Sherlock understands and is happy for John, in spite of being a bit sad for himself. Anyway, what a lovely, nuanced take on canon, as well as a subtle tit for tat.

 
The reason behind Sherlock's behavior might be fear of being left. The whole preparations (the wall full of notes and plans and timetables, David, folding serviettes...) could be an attempt to show how useful he is.
 
But now I wonder how strongly guilt drives Sherlock to behave this way. Maybe at some moment Sherlock finally got the impact the Fall had on John and despite of not understanding the emotions, he wants to make it good, even if it means acting against his own interests. Through the whole episode he supports John in actually leaving him. This one time he wants to be selfless.
 

I think that's the point of the ending though, isn't it? To make us sad for Sherlock? He's so wedded to his ideal of himself as a superior being, that he is isolated even in the moments when he is willing to come down from the heights. In other words, in order to be special, he has sacrificed the comforts of being "ordinary." Is the trade-off worth it? Don't know, but he's made his own bed, and as he walks off into the night I think he's determined to lie in it. Which is a bit tragic and a bit heroic at the same time.

 

Van Buren:
what makes it sad is Sherlock's expressions when he looks around and sees that he doesn't belong there, while I think, he was ready to try and mingle (that says a lot for him). He didn't even get his dance.

 
What I find really sad is that often there is not a trade-off or a free decision. You are what you are. There is no comfort in ordinary, and trying to fit in only makes the impossibility more visible.
 

Van Buren:
Sherlock is so stressed out that he calls Mycroft and almost begs him to come to the party. Why, I'm not sure. Maybe Mycroft is the one that he is holding to for the sanity of the lifestyle he chooses, maybe he is the one that is left now that John has somebody else, maybe he just realizes that Mycroft might feel the same kind of losing when he meets John the first time, or maybe, Mycroft is the only one that really understands who he is. Redbeard. I'm not sure.

 
I don't see it as begging, he seems to be quite p.o.'d. - the question for me is more: why he thinks Mycroft should be there, (even as a spook )
Maybe this call is to remind the viewers about the caring thing before they forget about completely, enchanted by Sherlock becoming soooo human. And I would love to have an insight into Mycroft's head at this moment. He looks sad.
 

But this episode breaks my heart for him, maybe that's why despite all the funs, it's very difficult for me to watch. And at the end, it was conclusive, like what he knows and experiences before, love hurts, caring is disadvantage, it makes you fragile

 
Through the whole episode Sherlock tries to be human and selfless and immediately gets his fingers burnt. Maybe because interaction with other people on an emotional level always means burnt fingers? (you always feel pain)
 

TOBY:
When I see Sherlock leaving the wedding, though, I don't see it as being about John so much as about Sherlock himself. He did try to "fill the vacancy" - he was flirting with Janine and wanted to dance with her; was looking for her after John and Mary went off together. But because he had been pushing Janine away the whole night and pointing out other men for her to date, she had finally concluded that he wasn't interested, heeded his advice and paired off with a guy who might actually enter into a relationship with her (or just a one night stand, whatever she was looking for).

 

I am constantly surprised by his behavior towards Janine. It seems so out of character. First he indeed seems to be alarmed by the word sex, and quickly tries to call her attention to possible partners. And then he flirts at her! What was in his drinks?

 

I don't see it as trying to fill the void... even if his expression as she ask him about it is quite remarkable. I cannot help thinking he is acting. Who knows, maybe he already started his elaborate plan to get to CAM. He surely made a research for each of the guests, so he knows who Janine is. Even if he was blind to the possible meaning of CAMs telegram, he might have been on Magnussen's heels already.

 

We had quite a discussion about this photo at one point, as I recall. It just looks so strange, and surely it's deliberate? But why? What is it supposed to mean? I think some people suggested it shows a gulf growing between them, but I don't see it that way ... on the other hand, I don't know what to make of it.

 

Never was bothered by this, maybe because I see it as a trick of perspective. Sherlock sits on the edge, John slouchy leans against the bench. Plus Sherlock IS bigger than John and has a bigger head (plus the curly mop). Don't think it has a meaning.

 

More Bits and pieces later.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... maybe Mary Watson née Morstan never died - maybe she and the doctor just had a much more tempestuous relationship than he cared to admit in his public writings and lived together on and off, with him camping out at Baker St during times when they weren't on good terms.

 

I like that theory! And it fits very nicely with Victorian sensibilities. My uncle was doing genealogical research, and found his grandmother listed in an old city directory as a "widow" -- then he found his grandfather also listed, but at a different address. So she was divorced, not literally widowed -- but it wasn't polite to use the "D-word."

 

Speaking of plot holes, why should Sherlock's inbox be on Dr Watson's mobile?

 

Two possibilities I can think of:

 

- John was looking at Sherlock's phone, not his own (and yes, I am too unobservant to know whose it actually was - I'd make a lousy detective)

- The inbox is part of Sherlock's website, which if course John can access from his own phone and has a password for

 

... or:

 

- It was John's phone and John's email (or private messages), because the people were responding to John's blog -- which fits with his comment in "Scandal" that his blog was bringing in most of their clients.

 

* * * *

 

Alex is re-watching "Sign" right now, and I am hearing faint snippets from the next room. When the chat-room women are all simultaneously telling Sherlock the addresses where they met up with the Mayfly Man, it sounded to me kinda like one of them said "Godolphin Street."

 

I chose my forum name from the Holmes mystery I read most often, The Second Stain.

Thank you! I knew I'd heard that name somewhere, but could not place it.  Godolphin Street, right?

[sfmpco]

Regarding the burnt fingers analogy, I think that even if suddenly someone had come up to him after he realized he was alone as always, that he would have turned them down for a dance simply because he had instantly already made up his mind to leave and he's not terribly spontaneous.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Carol, sorry to be so particular, but Dr Watson says quite clearly :"YOUR inbox is bursting, the phone he's holding is NOT Sherlock's black iPhone 5, if I had to hazard a guess from its square camera, I would say either a Samsung or an LG model, but not the iPhone, which he uses to contact Mycroft during the reception.

And I have to agree with Godolphin, The Second Stain is one of my top five favourite stories, and possibly my favourite one with JB, right up there with The Priory School. Holmes's masterfulness is at its peak in both, look at how he forces a duke and the Prime Minister of Britain to bend to his will!

Dear Curly Fu could not carry off such force of will, despite his otherwise admirable or adorable characteristics

[J.P.]

Just another thought. Maybe his facial expression meant something different than we think. Like: Oops, I just wanted to dance with that woman. I'm starting to impersonate that "surrogatee personality" I invented for this evening. Am I out of my mind? Wake up, Sherlock!

[Arcadia]

Mmmm, I think it means what we all thought it meant at the beginning, that he was disappointed to find out even Janine had moved on and left him behind ... simply because it fits with the narrative, and him suddenly realizing he's happier without all that human interaction doesn't fit with the narrative.

 

I think it remains to be seen what, if anything, he learns about "caring" from this. He could move forward, and allow his human side more expression, or he could regress, and become more closed off than ever -- or anything in between, really. I have my theories and my preferences, but that's all; I can't begin to guess what Moftiss has in store for the poor guy.

 

I love the subtlety of this script. It's John's wedding, you would think it would be about John; but it's not, it's about Sherlock. Heck, they don't even show the nuptials!

[sfmpco]

I think he seems too thoughtful, pensive for an "am I out of my mind" sort of thing although he you see the moment he "snaps out of it" just before he looks around to see if Janine is available.

[Van Buren Supernova]

I strongly dislike how Sherlock looks during the speech. His hair is somehow different, the light is too bright and makes his face look alien (think of an overexposed photo) and his eyes look almost mad.

I won't be surprised if they did it deliberately, after all, it seems that they pay a lot of attentions to lighting.

Sherlock Holmes as best man in a wedding, not many other things that can be more alien than that.

Arguable, maybe Mycroft as best man, or NASA finally find McDonald on Pluto among the haze.

 

Maybe this call is to remind the viewers about the caring thing before they forget about completely, enchanted by Sherlock becoming soooo human. And I would love to have an insight into Mycroft's head at this moment. He looks sad.

Good catch. Why is that?

Does he feel sad for Sherlock? I think so, I always believe that he really cares for him.

 

Through the whole episode Sherlock tries to be human and selfless and immediately gets his fingers burnt. Maybe because interaction with other people on an emotional level always means burnt fingers? (you always feel pain)

I think it remains to be seen what, if anything, he learns about "caring" from this. He could move forward, and allow his human side more expression, or he could regress, and become more closed off than ever -- or anything in between, really. I have my theories and my preferences, but that's all; I can't begin to guess what Moftiss has in store for the poor guy.

 

:(  :(  :( 

On  once in a blue moon  good days, I am able to convince myself that he looks sad only because he doesn't get the chance to dance. Well, he practiced.

 

 

 

 

Anyway, he is unpredictable, who knows what is inside that curly funny head? He is Sherlock Holmes.

 

[Arcadia]

 

I strongly dislike how Sherlock looks during the speech. His hair is somehow different, the light is too bright and makes his face look alien (think of an overexposed photo) and his eyes look almost mad.

I won't be surprised if they did it deliberately, after all, it seems that they pay a lot of attentions to lighting.

Sherlock Holmes as best man in a wedding, not many other things that can be more alien than that.

Arguable, maybe Mycroft as best man, or NASA finally find McDonald on Pluto among the haze.

 

This is what I think too. Filmmakers pay a lot of attention to this kind of detail. (That's why I still think the picture of them on the bench means something; I just can't figure out what....)

[Van Buren Supernova]

When Sherlock walks off into the night alone, I feel compassionately sad, but also relieved in a way, because I see it as a confirmation of him accepting and embracing the fact that he is Sherlock Holmes and nothing and nobody else, and he's going to live with all that entails. It leads straight to His Last Vow, where Sherlock ends up yelling "I am a high-functioning sociopath!" at Magnussen and shoots him, which he can do precisely because he has divorced himself to a degree from human feeling and human connections, and also because he can afford to leave now - John has Mary, and so Sherlock can afford to use his Sherlock-ness to kill the enemy, keep Mary safe and suffer the consequences of his actions on his own.

It kind of works in reverse for me, because he is a different Sherlock, the one who now can't divorce himself from human feeling and human connection: he shoots Magnussen.

He did it all for John, seeing how Magnussen's blackmail affecting John, his life, his future, his relationship. The look when he witness Magnussen flicking John's face and the look he gives John a moment before the shooting.

Imho, he shoots M not because he is a cold-blooded Sherlock, because he feels obligated to do so, to protect John, something that he would not do in SIP.

I do get your point that shooting M is a side of original Sherlock I'm on the side of the angel but I'm capable of doing nasty things because I'm not one of them, however, I think the reasoning behind the shooting is not original Sherlock, if that makes any sense.

 

(That's why I still think the picture of them on the bench means something; I just can't figure out what....)

If you put axe on my head, I have a few theories, but I don't fully buy any of that yet:

 

1. Sherlock being nervous and uncomfortable, he sits right at the edge and his body language is alert, something that represents that he is nervous to be in the situation in this episode, foreign territory to him, that he cares about someone so much and he is aware that it's an disadvantage that is going to bite him.

He is asking about Sholto, who used to be close to John and means so much to him, yet not in the picture of John's life this few years. Maybe he represents dispensable relationship to John, that John used to be a good friend to him in the past, then he replaced Sholto with Sherlock.., now he has Mary. 

 

2. Foreshadowing of Sherlock being a bigger person for forgiving Mary and push John to do so despite him being the victim, while John is ready to disown Mary.

 

3. Something similar to what you mentioned, the growing distance between two of them.