Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Mycroft]

The best episode of Sherlock yet, easily for me.

 

So, Moriarty. In the canon he has a younger brother, also called 'James' confusingly enough, Arthur Conan Doyle was famously poor with his continuity. I wonder if they're going to make him his twin brother. It would explain 'Richard Brook' and 'Jim from I.T'. For me, Jim Moriarty wouldn't go through the trouble of dating Molly and getting close to Kitty Riley, it's too much leg work for a mastermind consulting criminal, like he said in 'The Great Game', he doesnt like getting his hands dirty. Maybe he got his brother to do it for him?

 

I still think that the actual Moriarty died on the roof in 'The Reichenbach Fall' though. And this could be his brother getting revenge.

 

One explanation of some of the facts.

 

 

Mycroft

[T.o.b.y]

 

So John has enough on his plate as it is. I think it's hard to stomach, because it removes the focus from the Sherlock/John friendship to the John/Mary romance.

 

What John / Mary romance? Seriously, I don't find their relationship very romantic. I don't think it's even all that interesting. How could it be - we've never seen much of it. We don't know how they met, how they fell in love, what they have in common, what little private jokes and memories they share, how the honeymoon went, what happened during the months of silence - did John still live at home or did he camp out at Baker St? Did he miss her? Did she miss him? Why and how?

 

Mary really has been no more than a plot device to bring out certain aspects of John and Sherlock's character and relationship and to enable certain dramatic scenes, like the shooting of Sherlock and that awesome trip into his subconscious.

 

I'm not saying I want a big romance. I don't, actually. I want to watch "Sherlock", not "John and Mary". And that's exactly what we've gotten so far. I only think the writers could have been a bit nicer to Mary, made us understand her a bit more and and made her a bit more interesting.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

As for "the two men can return to the business of being soul mates bound for all eternity", I'm all for that, I just don't see why it would require the loss of Mary. John could very well be Sherlock's best friend and Mary's loving husband - that part has worked out fine so far. The focus would not have to shift away from the two men either to give us more insight into Mary. Look at how well they portray Molly, and she has even less screen time and certainly doesn't interfere with the friendship I think we all love, even though she has almost no connection to John at all.

 

 

  None of Watson's wives got in the way of Holmes's and Watson's relationship in the canon....I have faith that Mofttiss will get around this as well.

[T.o.b.y]

 

 None of Watson's wives got in the way of Holmes's and Watson's relationship in the canon...

 

Fox, you know a lot more about the original than I do - where do we actually learn that Watson got married a second time? I have read all the stories, but I never spotted another marriage than that to Mary Morstan.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

 

This journey into darker character traits does not sit all that well with me. Though a part of me finds it compelling, I also find myself crying a bit inside; like I've lost something of John that I loved. Well, well... Hopefully series 4 will bring about brighter times for me!

 

Oh, poor you. It is always hard to discover an interpretation of a character that one has grown quite fond of is not entirely accurate or that the character has been developed in ways that don't fit it. But if you look back on the earlier episodes, I think you'll find that the hints were all there. I have always thought of John as just as "damaged" as his best friend, in his own quiet way, but then, I am rather drawn to darkness. I also appreciate the wide range of tone this show manages, from comedy to romance to psycho thriller drama and back again. It's a fun ride and they've managed to make it all hold together somehow.

 

 

Thanks, it's nice to get a little sympathy and I do see the signs now. They were just never focused on like in HLV, so the romantic in me interpreted the characters in one way, and now I'll have to reconsider. Though, in all fairness to myself, I wasn't exactly lead to consider the darker side of John - because whenever it's brought up in previous episodes, it's in a much more fun setting. The writers could have given me a better heads-up But I guess they hadn't exactly planned this years ago.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

 

So John has enough on his plate as it is. I think it's hard to stomach, because it removes the focus from the Sherlock/John friendship to the John/Mary romance.

 

What John / Mary romance? Seriously, I don't find their relationship very romantic. I don't think it's even all that interesting. How could it be - we've never seen much of it. We don't know how they met, how they fell in love, what they have in common, what little private jokes and memories they share, how the honeymoon went, what happened during the months of silence - did John still live at home or did he camp out at Baker St? Did he miss her? Did she miss him? Why and how?

 

 

Well, I use the word 'romance' in lack of a better word. Could have just said 'marriage', but my point is that John doesn't react violently to Mary having shot Sherlock - and that part hurts just a little bit, even though your explanation makes perfect sense.

[Janie]

So, I finally got to the last post (you talk soo much, people!) and I can now say something about this episode. It will be short for now because I'm about to watch it for the third time. 

I absolutely loved it. I'll write more tomorrow

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Fox, you know a lot more about the original than I do - where do we actually learn that Watson got married a second time? I have read all the stories, but I never spotted another marriage than that to Mary Morstan.

 

 

Okay, Watson met and married Mary Morstan between "The Sign of Four" and "The Final Problem" and died during "The Great Hiatus".  A second wife in mentioned in "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" and "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier."  Never named, never described. The same goes for a third wife mentioned after "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" in Oct. 1902.

[Zain]

So, watched the episode for the second time.

Took me a bit, especially since the first time felt like a punch in the face.

Still can't understand why John thinks it's okay to forgive Mary her recent crimes. It's not good not to deal with the past, but alright. I buy the "letting that be" excuse. Her recent crimes, however, are as much his issue as her future. That's no privilege, mind you.

 

I agree with whoever stated hat a few posts before me: It is actually a fairly sad thing that Sherlock is able to forgive her that quickly. If we hadn't seen his parents, I'd surely wonder what kind of abuse he was used to if getting shot by your best friend's wife wasn't that much of a deal to him.

 

On another note since that discussion leads nowhere;

anybody any good guesses on season four?

 

Actually I wonder whether what we saw in HLV was what happened.

 

First of all things, Mycroft, despite his statement that "Magnussen is under his protection", seems to have been looking for an opportunity to get rid of him.

Magnussen himself tells Sherlock just that. I do not think Mycroft ever faced Magnussen before, not in an antagonistic way. Lady Smallwood awfully quick thought of Sherlock after stating that nobody ever tries to stand up to Magnussen. I suppose she was thinking of Mycroft; it would explain why her thoughts turned to Sherlock.

Here I go a bit "wild" with speculation: I don't believe she truly thinks Sherlock will stand up to Magnussen. He hasn't enough power to do that. She knows Magnussen and his modus operandi well, even investigates him - why would she assume he'd accept Sherlock as an intermediary?

I guess it wasn't her plan. Lady Smallwood used Sherlock. As an intermediary to get to Mycroft. Mycroft reacted almost horrified when Sherlock told him that he was on a case involving Magnussen. He did not know. In the episode, it seems to me like Lady Smallwood and Mycroft work rather close together, she even calls him by his first name. Why not go to Mycroft? Because he wouldn't agree to take the risk. So she went to Sherlock... I think she used him as leverafge, to get Mycroft into the game. To make him move from his comfy chair of blissful ignorance towards Magnussen's meddling. Lady Smallwood must have known that Sherlock does not possess enough power or connections to truly get to Magnussen but would take up the challenge. Sherlock even knows that he needs an official invitation, otherwise he'll never get into Appledore. His power isn't far-reaching enough. His first break-in depends on a lot of coincidences falling together. It's more desperate and a one time chance than anything else.

No. I think Lady Smallwood used him. This episode seems to center around Mycroft, at least when it's about Magnussen. 

 

The second thing I found odd:

Mycroft calls Magnussen a necessary evil, not a dragon for Sherlock to slay.

Then he states that Sherlock has more utility at home (England) because here be dragons. I wonder, however, what Mycroft's referring to. Sure, normally you'd think he was talking about the assignment Sherlock just declined (unknown territory, dangerous). However, Sherlock reacts rather peculiar. He stops in his movement, then looks towards Mycroft. What if Mycroft means that Magnussen is a dragon, just simply not one for Sherlock to slay? 

I also think Mycroft is calling Sherlock on his bluff; the "perhaps there was something in the punch" line could be interpreted as dramatic irony, I am less inclined to see it as suc, on a second viewing. It just fits too much with the heavy subtext conversation they are having. Always seems like smoking connects them, thinking of the morgue scene in ASiB. To me, it sounds like Mycroft tells Sherlock that he knows what going on. I can imagine that Mycroft is more than suspicious of the reason why Sherlock would bring Higgins to their family home. Let's not forget he's even more clever than Sherlock. And I believe Sherlock realizes that when he tells him to go have some more. So why does Mycroft go back in? I doubt he'd trust his brother to drug him with nothing more to go on than an educated guess what he's planning.

Which brings me to another speculation: What if Mycroft was in on the plan? What if the smoking scene is nothing more than Mycroft reminding Sherlock of the boundaries of their plan? That he is not to take on Magnussen on his own. That this is rather Mycroft's dragon to slay. There's a warning, in this dialogue. Mycroft tells Sherlock that he'd hate to lose him (which would happen if he were to do anything outside their plan to Magnussen, because then he couldn't protect him from the backlash).

 

Actually, Magnussen lays out exactly that; he tells Sherlock straight in the face that this is something Mycroft would stage. The laptop with the GPS tracker is in Magnussen's hands. It's Mycroft's carte blanche he's been waiting for. 

I believe that Magnussen is quite right. This was staged, to a certain degree. I doubt Mycroft was aware of the leverage Magnussen has got on Mary. And this leads to Sherlock abandoning their plan.

 

I also think it's possible to pinpoint the moment Sherlock abandons the actual plan. It's when he realizes that he is running out of options to get Mary out of this affair. Mycroft's plan more than likely was to get a hold of Magnussen's archive. Which is not of material existence. Sherlock can't smuggle out Mary's file. If Mycroft takes Magnussen, there's no chance to get to him again. There must be a reason why Sherlock waited until Mycroft's arrival. It's clear that he came to the conclusion that he needs to kill Magnussen before he stepped outside. What has he got to gain from waiting for his brother's arrival? Mercy? No. Sherlock wanted to be seen. There mustn't be any doubt that it was him that killed Magnussen. I can only think of one reason: So that John wouldn't be suspected. If John were under suspicion, they'd probably screen Mary, too. No. Sherlock had to wait for witnesses otherwise his plan to get Mary out unscathed were to fail.

 

Mycroft definitely is shocked when Sherlock shoots Magnussen. I believe he thought their original plan to still be active. Why ask Sherlock and John to stand back? It's not the criminals you ask to stand back. Why not ask Magnussen to get away from them? The "innocent" is more likely to cooperate. I believe to this point Mycroft was acting upon the belief that this was the end of their plan. They found his laptop in Magnussen's possession. As Magnussen laid it out before, while iz would hit the news, Sherlock would be exonerated. There would be no lasting damage besidethe one to his image, and even that is uncertain. Magnussen would have been whisked away by M.I.6. I doubt Moriarty ever saw a lawyer during his stay with M.I.6. Why would Magnussen get the chance to tell people about Sherlock's part in the scheme?

The real problem arises when Sherlock strays from the plan.

Mycroft's first reaction: Shout twice not to shoot Sherlock. Twice. Why would he be this shocked about the shot and the further betrayel by his brother if he had been drugged against his knowledge, got his laptop stolen by Sherlock and thought that Sherlock had sold him out? The sort of panic he suddenly feels tells a different story. I'd like to think that he saw this plan already as "worked out" when Sherlock, seemingly without reason, shoots Magnussen.

His words are as following: "What have you done now?" His reaction to the shot. Now. Not "what have you done" referring to the entire day. It's the shot that Mycroft did not anticipate.

 

Yes, some might seem a bit more far-fetched but at least it's something to go on. And it makes him seem less harsh than the episode paints him. I always saw Mycroft as a very strict (to others and himself) and ruthless person whose one weakness was named Sherlock. He's not kind towards his brother but his eyes rarely stray from him.

 

I further like to believe that he sent Sherlock away to protect him. Sherlock killed somebody in front of lots of witnesses. Sent away in the name of queen and country means that he was exonerated and not to be further punished for his crime. Mycroft's efforts might not be to show Sherlock the errors of his ways, but to spare him from life-time imprisonment. If he was to be dragged in front of a jury, there's no chance he'd walk free. Mycroft essentially nipped that in the bud. Sherlock walks free. And I believe he was ready to call him back before these six months were up. Mycroft was awfully quick to phone Sherlock after Moriarty's message presented him with the opportunity to get him back. I believe Mycroft was playing with the odds that he'd get an opportunity sooner or later to call his brother back. If he had gone to prison, there'd be no easy way out. The short span between the message and the phone call tells me that Mycroft didn't even spare a minute or two to think about the pros and cons of calling Sherlock back. He saw the potential, and used it. There was no ill will in him that made him send Sherlock on that mission.

 

On a second viewing, I think this episode proves even more than every episode before that Mycroft would even risk his job to protect his younger brother.

I can't take much joy from the Watson solution but this at least gets me interested in the next season. I don't say everything will turn out the way I presented it. But I sincerely hope there was more to this case than met the eye. 

 

I also think it could be interesting to give the third brother theory a go. Would have to rewatch the Sherlock/Mycroft interactions. If there was truly a third brother, apparently only Mycroft knows of his existence. Or Sherlock erased him, which would make for an interesting turnabout. 

[T.o.b.y]

Well, I use the word 'romance' in lack of a better word. Could have just said 'marriage', but my point is that John doesn't react violently to Mary having shot Sherlock - and that part hurts just a little bit, even though your explanation makes perfect sense.

 

The way John responds to his best friend is very interesting in general. He's never been effusive and his concern for him has generally taken the form of anger. He did react strongly to Sherlock being shot - in his own way. Remember when he asked. "Who shot him?" He looked livid there. But he soon realized that question wasn't going to do any good at that point, he went into a practical, dead-calm, in-control doctor mode and just made sure Sherlock got proper medical attention. John doesn't often waste energy on emotion, especially not in tight situations.

 

When it comes to realizing that it was Mary who shot Sherlock, the focus is much more on why she could do something like that in the first place and John's feeling of betrayal, because Sherlock has clearly survived and already delivered his explanation of the event which vindicates Mary's behavior there. Sherlock simply isn't John's problem at that moment and until the ambulance arrives, I think he didn't realize that Sherlock shouldn't have left the hospital in the first place. And when he does, he's just not the type who would get all gushy and "oh my god what have you done" concerned. He'd swear under his breath and go back to doctor-mode.

 

(I'm not surprised that some people get the impression John might have harbored some not-quite-so-simply friendly feelings for his friend at some point, because he is so embarrassed in general when it comes to showing affection for him - it took him ages and some effort to tell Sherlock why he wanted him as his best man, it took a supposed death and a bomb threat to get him to say anything nice about him and on feeling the impulse to hug him at the wedding, he asks his wife to stop him - and he gets so annoyed when people assume he's gay. It's not my interpretation of his character, but I do have to admit it's a plausible idea.)

[Sherlock_luvr]

Well said, Zain! Makes a lot of sense. 

 

I don't want them to have some hidden brother, though. But I would like that line of dialogue explained at some point so we know what Mycroft was talking about. He said 'other one', right? People are just assuming that 'one' meant brother. It's been a few days since I've seen the episode:)

[T.o.b.y]

 

Okay, Watson met and married Mary Morstan between "The Sign of Four" and "The Final Problem" and died during "The Great Hiatus".  A second wife in mentioned in "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" and "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier."  Never named, never described. The same goes for a third wife mentioned after "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" in Oct. 1902.

 

But... those stories don't take place in the order that they were published! For example, "The Hound of the Bakservilles" was written after "The Final Problem", but takes place before Holmes' (supposed) death. The adventures are just cases Dr Watson pulls out of his notebook, sometimes years after they actually happened. Isn't it likely that all those references to a wife refer to Mary Morstan?

 

[T.o.b.y]

anybody any good guesses on season four?

 

I have taken the liberty of starting a thread for that:

http://www.sherlockforum.com/forum/topic/1942-what-would-you-like-to-see-in-series-4/

 

I have given up on trying to predict what will happen next. This show is unpredictable and series 3 has killed my trust in the writers and their decisions. So I turned it into a wish list, because at least I know what I want (sometimes).

 

[leanne_maybe]

/>

The best episode of Sherlock yet, easily for me.

 

So, Moriarty. In the canon he has a younger brother, also called 'James' confusingly enough, Arthur Conan Doyle was famously poor with his continuity. I wonder if they're going to make him his twin brother. It would explain 'Richard Brook' and 'Jim from I.T'. For me, Jim Moriarty wouldn't go through the trouble of dating Molly and getting close to Kitty Riley, it's too much leg work for a mastermind consulting criminal, like he said in 'The Great Game', he doesnt like getting his hands dirty. Maybe he got his brother to do it for him?

 

I still think that the actual Moriarty died on the roof in 'The Reichenbach Fall' though. And this could be his brother getting revenge.

 

One explanation of some of the facts.

Mmm...that would be very interesting....because where have we heard of a brotherly relationship like that before? One mastermind, but doesn't like getting his hands dirty, so sends in his brother? :-)

[leanne_maybe]

/>

So, watched the episode for the second time.

Took me a bit, especially since the first time felt like a punch in the face.

Still can't understand why John thinks it's okay to forgive Mary her recent crimes. It's not good not to deal with the past, but alright. I buy the "letting that be" excuse. Her recent crimes, however, are as much his issue as her future. That's no privilege, mind you.

 

I agree with whoever stated hat a few posts before me: It is actually a fairly sad thing that Sherlock is able to forgive her that quickly. If we hadn't seen his parents, I'd surely wonder what kind of abuse he was used to if getting shot by your best friend's wife wasn't that much of a deal to him.

 

On another note since that discussion leads nowhere;

anybody any good guesses on season four?

 

Actually I wonder whether what we saw in HLV was what happened.

 

First of all things, Mycroft, despite his statement that "Magnussen is under his protection", seems to have been looking for an opportunity to get rid of him.

Magnussen himself tells Sherlock just that. I do not think Mycroft ever faced Magnussen before, not in an antagonistic way. Lady Smallwood awfully quick thought of Sherlock after stating that nobody ever tries to stand up to Magnussen. I suppose she was thinking of Mycroft; it would explain why her thoughts turned to Sherlock.

Here I go a bit "wild" with speculation: I don't believe she truly thinks Sherlock will stand up to Magnussen. He hasn't enough power to do that. She knows Magnussen and his modus operandi well, even investigates him - why would she assume he'd accept Sherlock as an intermediary?

I guess it wasn't her plan. Lady Smallwood used Sherlock. As an intermediary to get to Mycroft. Mycroft reacted almost horrified when Sherlock told him that he was on a case involving Magnussen. He did not know. In the episode, it seems to me like Lady Smallwood and Mycroft work rather close together, she even calls him by his first name. Why not go to Mycroft? Because he wouldn't agree to take the risk. So she went to Sherlock... I think she used him as leverafge, to get Mycroft into the game. To make him move from his comfy chair of blissful ignorance towards Magnussen's meddling. Lady Smallwood must have known that Sherlock does not possess enough power or connections to truly get to Magnussen but would take up the challenge. Sherlock even knows that he needs an official invitation, otherwise he'll never get into Appledore. His power isn't far-reaching enough. His first break-in depends on a lot of coincidences falling together. It's more desperate and a one time chance than anything else.

No. I think Lady Smallwood used him. This episode seems to center around Mycroft, at least when it's about Magnussen.

 

The second thing I found odd:

Mycroft calls Magnussen a necessary evil, not a dragon for Sherlock to slay.

Then he states that Sherlock has more utility at home (England) because here be dragons. I wonder, however, what Mycroft's referring to. Sure, normally you'd think he was talking about the assignment Sherlock just declined (unknown territory, dangerous). However, Sherlock reacts rather peculiar. He stops in his movement, then looks towards Mycroft. What if Mycroft means that Magnussen is a dragon, just simply not one for Sherlock to slay?

I also think Mycroft is calling Sherlock on his bluff; the "perhaps there was something in the punch" line could be interpreted as dramatic irony, I am less inclined to see it as suc, on a second viewing. It just fits too much with the heavy subtext conversation they are having. Always seems like smoking connects them, thinking of the morgue scene in ASiB. To me, it sounds like Mycroft tells Sherlock that he knows what going on. I can imagine that Mycroft is more than suspicious of the reason why Sherlock would bring Higgins to their family home. Let's not forget he's even more clever than Sherlock. And I believe Sherlock realizes that when he tells him to go have some more. So why does Mycroft go back in? I doubt he'd trust his brother to drug him with nothing more to go on than an educated guess what he's planning.

Which brings me to another speculation: What if Mycroft was in on the plan? What if the smoking scene is nothing more than Mycroft reminding Sherlock of the boundaries of their plan? That he is not to take on Magnussen on his own. That this is rather Mycroft's dragon to slay. There's a warning, in this dialogue. Mycroft tells Sherlock that he'd hate to lose him (which would happen if he were to do anything outside their plan to Magnussen, because then he couldn't protect him from the backlash).

 

Actually, Magnussen lays out exactly that; he tells Sherlock straight in the face that this is something Mycroft would stage. The laptop with the GPS tracker is in Magnussen's hands. It's Mycroft's carte blanche he's been waiting for.

I believe that Magnussen is quite right. This was staged, to a certain degree. I doubt Mycroft was aware of the leverage Magnussen has got on Mary. And this leads to Sherlock abandoning their plan.

 

I also think it's possible to pinpoint the moment Sherlock abandons the actual plan. It's when he realizes that he is running out of options to get Mary out of this affair. Mycroft's plan more than likely was to get a hold of Magnussen's archive. Which is not of material existence. Sherlock can't smuggle out Mary's file. If Mycroft takes Magnussen, there's no chance to get to him again. There must be a reason why Sherlock waited until Mycroft's arrival. It's clear that he came to the conclusion that he needs to kill Magnussen before he stepped outside. What has he got to gain from waiting for his brother's arrival? Mercy? No. Sherlock wanted to be seen. There mustn't be any doubt that it was him that killed Magnussen. I can only think of one reason: So that John wouldn't be suspected. If John were under suspicion, they'd probably screen Mary, too. No. Sherlock had to wait for witnesses otherwise his plan to get Mary out unscathed were to fail.

 

Mycroft definitely is shocked when Sherlock shoots Magnussen. I believe he thought their original plan to still be active. Why ask Sherlock and John to stand back? It's not the criminals you ask to stand back. Why not ask Magnussen to get away from them? The "innocent" is more likely to cooperate. I believe to this point Mycroft was acting upon the belief that this was the end of their plan. They found his laptop in Magnussen's possession. As Magnussen laid it out before, while iz would hit the news, Sherlock would be exonerated. There would be no lasting damage besidethe one to his image, and even that is uncertain. Magnussen would have been whisked away by M.I.6. I doubt Moriarty ever saw a lawyer during his stay with M.I.6. Why would Magnussen get the chance to tell people about Sherlock's part in the scheme?

The real problem arises when Sherlock strays from the plan.

Mycroft's first reaction: Shout twice not to shoot Sherlock. Twice. Why would he be this shocked about the shot and the further betrayel by his brother if he had been drugged against his knowledge, got his laptop stolen by Sherlock and thought that Sherlock had sold him out? The sort of panic he suddenly feels tells a different story. I'd like to think that he saw this plan already as "worked out" when Sherlock, seemingly without reason, shoots Magnussen.

His words are as following: "What have you done now?" His reaction to the shot. Now. Not "what have you done" referring to the entire day. It's the shot that Mycroft did not anticipate.

 

Yes, some might seem a bit more far-fetched but at least it's something to go on. And it makes him seem less harsh than the episode paints him. I always saw Mycroft as a very strict (to others and himself) and ruthless person whose one weakness was named Sherlock. He's not kind towards his brother but his eyes rarely stray from him.

 

I further like to believe that he sent Sherlock away to protect him. Sherlock killed somebody in front of lots of witnesses. Sent away in the name of queen and country means that he was exonerated and not to be further punished for his crime. Mycroft's efforts might not be to show Sherlock the errors of his ways, but to spare him from life-time imprisonment. If he was to be dragged in front of a jury, there's no chance he'd walk free. Mycroft essentially nipped that in the bud. Sherlock walks free. And I believe he was ready to call him back before these six months were up. Mycroft was awfully quick to phone Sherlock after Moriarty's message presented him with the opportunity to get him back. I believe Mycroft was playing with the odds that he'd get an opportunity sooner or later to call his brother back. If he had gone to prison, there'd be no easy way out. The short span between the message and the phone call tells me that Mycroft didn't even spare a minute or two to think about the pros and cons of calling Sherlock back. He saw the potential, and used it. There was no ill will in him that made him send Sherlock on that mission.

 

On a second viewing, I think this episode proves even more than every episode before that Mycroft would even risk his job to protect his younger brother.

I can't take much joy from the Watson solution but this at least gets me interested in the next season. I don't say everything will turn out the way I presented it. But I sincerely hope there was more to this case than met the eye.

 

I also think it could be interesting to give the third brother theory a go. Would have to rewatch the Sherlock/Mycroft interactions. If there was truly a third brother, apparently only Mycroft knows of his existence. Or Sherlock erased him, which would make for an interesting turnabout.

I think both of these plans make perfect sense and fit in with what we have seen. Certainly the dialogue in the garden really backs that up - I agree that the reference to 'something in the punch' was a knowing comment.

 

I do like 'the most powerful man in England' who '*is* the British Government, hiding his smoking from his mother though!

[T.o.b.y]

 

I do like 'the most powerful man in England' who '*is* the British Government, hiding his smoking from his mother though!

 

 

Yes, "Mummy" seems to have a lot of power in the Holmes clan

 

By the way, the original Mr Holmes did hint that he probably inherited his talent from the mother's side.

 

[Karie]

 

Fox, you know a lot more about the original than I do - where do we actually learn that Watson got married a second time? I have read all the stories, but I never spotted another marriage than that to Mary Morstan.

 

 

Okay, Watson met and married Mary Morstan between "The Sign of Four" and "The Final Problem" and died during "The Great Hiatus".  A second wife in mentioned in "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" and "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier."  Never named, never described. The same goes for a third wife mentioned after "The Adventure of the Illustrious Client" in Oct. 1902.

 

 

If wife #2 was never named or described, how do we know she's not the same person as wife #3? Did it ever mention unnamed wife #2 dying or leaving? 

I've really got to get back to reading these stories. Once the speculation dies down from season 3, maybe I'll get back to them. Of course, I'm also looking forward to the fanfiction that will be coming out about HLV and beyond. When canon fails me, I look to fanfic to fix it. 

[Ally.C]

Mycroft!  I don’t know when exactly it happened, but over this series I’ve really fallen for his character. I think it was probably the Operation scene in The Empty Hearse. I think that scene told us a lot about why he is the way he is and how Sherlock learned to be who he is from watching his brother. Goodness, I loved the scene.

 

I’ve had a bit of a nagging feeling since I first watched HLV that there was something more to Mycroft in this episode than was let on. As soon as he told Sherlock not to go after Magnussen I was worried. Part of me had a dreadful feeling that the death in this episode might be his, as they had done so much building on his character this series.

 

I wonder, since Mycroft was so insistent on Sherlock not going after Magnussen, if he might have known it would end badly for Sherlock. Mycroft is a very outwardly cold character, but we see obvious sentiment for his little brother. Despite Mycroft’s preaching that “Caring is not an advantage” he was there for Sherlock when he returned to play games with him, in TsoT he mentioned he would being seeing more of Sherlock ‘like old times’ and almost giving Sherlock an opening to come to him when the inevitable heartbreak of involvement happened.

 

With all this in mind and knowing Magnussen was a blackmailer, I wonder how much Mycroft knew about Magnussen, about the ideas of the ‘Pressue Point’ and I wonder if Mycroft knew that the easiest way to get to him was through Sherlock. If you go against Magnussen, you’ll find yourself against me – was that on a governmental level (Such as Flight 007 and the Coventry Conundrum being ruined in aSiB? A bigger plan against Magnussen that Mycroft didn’t want Sherlock to muck up?) or was that simply knowledge from Mycroft that he knew he was the end game and that Mycroft would do all he could to keep Sherlock from Magnussen because he know Magnussen would be willing to do anything to Sherlock to get to Mycroft?

 

Someone said this quote earlier and I think it fots a lot of my feeling about this hiatus. “Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.” I can’t help but feel like there was some motivation driven by this in Sherlock pushing John to forgive Mary (also, that John loves her – yes – and Sherlock seems to get that and he loves John, that’s undeniable in whatever sense of love, but she is dangerous). And now I wonder how much of that was true of Mycroft’s “protection” of Magnussen.

[Karie]

From tumblr:

 

 

When I think about someone like Magnussen existing in the real world, I just get really worried about how he would describe my porn preference. 

 

 

 

 

Terrifyingly true. 

[leanne_maybe]

/>

Mycroft! I don’t know when exactly it happened, but over this series I’ve really fallen for his character. I think it was probably the Operation scene in The Empty Hearse. I think that scene told us a lot about why he is the way he is and how Sherlock learned to be who he is from watching his brother. Goodness, I loved the scene.

Me too! Mycroft has really developed as a character and he has hidden depths, and a heart in there somewhere...! I feel sorry that he is no-one's 'pressure point'....I don't think he is listed as Sherlock's, but I think Sherlock would rescue him if it came to it,wouldn't he? Once he'd got over the shock....!

[sh_fan]

I thought I'd add this video I saw today in which, during the interview, Moffat was asked if Moriarty is really dead, and he says, "he is."  Then, when further asked if he could have somehow survived what happened in TRF, he says, "how do you fake that?" (meaning, blowing your brains out)

 

I have to say those are repeated, definitive statements.  If Moriarty comes back now, I don't see why anyone should ever listen to a Moffat interview again.

 

http://watch.accesshollywood.com/video/sue-vertue-steven-moffat-talk-working-with-benedict-cumberbatch-martin-freeman-on-sherlock/2566183279001

[BLS_Pro]

It's been claimed that Mary should be condemned as a murderer (or attempted murderer) because she went to kill CAM.  The (HIGHLY debatable) claim has been made that she did not fear for her life and so her action was unjust and unjustified.  It was plain morally wrong.

Strangely, however, the same condemnation - of Sherlock and his actual (rather than simply attempted) 'murder' of CAM - has been nearly completely absent.  In fact, many have cheered at Sherlock killing CAM.  Yet Sherlock acted no differently than Mary was about to act.   Interestingly, some have excused/applauded Sherlock because he is a socipath/psychopath/fill-in-clinical-term-here.  And the complaint against Mary has been made there simply shouldn't be more of that type in the series (certainly not loved by John). 

What I haven't really seen is a view that Sherlock's action was an act of justice - ie was morally "right".  The show goes out of its way to demonstrate that CAM engages in what he explicitly describes as "ownership" of people.  There is a term for such "ownership": subjugation - or more plainly, slavery.  One can easily make the argument that force used in defense against it is an act of justice, not a violation of justice.  In fact one can point out that is the very reason blackmail is against the law.  IT is the initiation of force against individuals.  And it is recognized that the government properly acts to defend against this initiation of force.  As such, both Mary and Sherlock were simply defending themselves against CAM's attempt to subjugate them.

I suspect many reacted quite negatively to the visceral depiction of CAM's injustice (ie the display of his ownership of John and Sherlock) - and cheered at Sherlock's subsequent killing (not murder) of CAM because, at some level, they 'get' the justice of Sherlock's action.

[Ally.C]

It's been claimed that Mary should be condemned as a murderer (or attempted murderer) because she went to kill CAM.  The (HIGHLY debatable) claim has been made that she did not fear for her life and so her action was unjust and unjustified.  It was plain morally wrong.

 

Now, after this episode I'm not a big Mary fan, but I wouldn't condemn her for trying to kill CAM. I actually think I might have more respect for her if she had offed him.

 

I think I would have celebrated whoever got rid of him. It's not going to kill CAM that has me judging her in an ill light.

[BLS_Pro]

Also interesting is the idea that Mary is being uniquely "selfish" when she declares CAM's actions would break John - meaning she would lose him.  Indeed, when you threaten to destroy a man like that, you would indeed lose him - just as you would lose him if you put a bullet in his brain.  It is to prevent losing John that both Mary and Sherlock act.  Both are acting "selfishly" because neither wants to lose John.  Both value John's life and do not want to see it lost. 

[BLS_Pro]

 

Now, after this episode I'm not a big Mary fan, but I wouldn't condemn her for trying to kill CAM. I actually think I might have more respect for her if she had offed him.

 

I think I would have celebrated whoever got rid of him. It's not going to kill CAM that has me judging her in an ill light.

 

I'm glad you appear to believe both Mary and Sherlock's attempts to kill CAM were just/right.

 

Of course because Sherlock and John arrived, Mary couldn't kill CAM.  That would have led to the damage to John she was trying to prevent BY killing him.  And it's also why she had to incapacitate (as opposed to just wound) Sherlock.  If Sherlock had been able to talk, he would have been the instrument by which CAM would have supposedly broken John.  Understanding and sharing that motivation (valuing John's life so highly) - is why Sherlock forgave her that action against him.  He certainly would not have forgiven just anyone who shot him.  They would have to have a damn good reason for doing so.  And Mary certainly had one.