Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Arcadia]

 

But in honor of continuity, I couldn't anyway because, y'know, I coughed my brains out last night.

 

  I find that logic can be over rated and all relevant as in.....what one person sees as perfectly logical...another person sees as totally idiotic.  But in any case, hope you're feeling better real soon.

 

Thanks! I'll be okay as soon as this accursed pollen leaves! Can someone please send John over with his gun to blow it away? (pun intended)

 

I think I'm not using the word right, actually. I don't mean logic as in reasoning, I'm mean the kind of logic Tolkien used when he "discovered" Middle Earth. Things happen in the Shire that don't make sense in our world, but make perfect sense to a hobbit. But if Frodo were to whip out a cell phone ... it wouldn't make any sense to us, because Tolkien didn't provide an "in-story" explanation for how such a thing could happen.

 

It's been pointed out that Sherlock's world doesn't operate quite like ours -- therefore it is, to use Tolkien's terminology, a "created world" -- and it's allowed to have its own internal logic. So Sherlock can lie like a rug and John forgives him for it, because that's how it works in Sherlockworld. And we go along, with our "willing suspension of disbelief" firmly in place; unless something happens to violate that internal logic. Such as .............. (HELP! Someone give me an example, I have no brain!!!!) As I said before, I've sorta forgotten the original complaint, if there even was one. But I know this is the explanation for something.

 

Tell you what, I'll just blame Mycroft for everything and move along.......

[T.o.b.y]

 

Tell you what, I'll just blame Mycroft for everything and move along.......

 

 

Yay! That's exactly what I do! And every time Sherlock behaves like a dick now, I shrug and go "well, with a brother like that - who can blame him..."

 

Really, I should have more sympathy with people who dislike Mary, considering how I love to hate Sherlock's big brother... Who is delightfully not-good-not-bad, come to think of it. And has great, great lines. Why isn't he my favorite character?

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

Tell you what, I'll just blame Mycroft for everything and move along.......

 

  I think Sherlock would agree with you full heartedly....seems like a logical move to me.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Speaking of inconsistencies, I usually believe everything Sherlock says, but John Watson a romantic? Seriously? Sorry, this should go in The Sign of Three thread... but anyway. What's so romantic about John's character? That seems like a canon reference out of place (the original Dr Watson is a romantic, clearly - but John?)

 

 

I suspect Sherlock means "romantic" in the sense that John has romantic relationships.  But now that you've got me thinking about it, Sherlock himself is a pretty romantic character in the sense of the old romantic novels (NOT to be confused with "romance novels").

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 Didn't Gatiss make some remark just lately comparing Sherlock somehow with Mr. Darcy?  So yes, romantic in a less hysterical and more cerebral quality.

[T.o.b.y]

I suspect Sherlock means "romantic" in the sense that John has romantic relationships.  But now that you've got me thinking about it, Sherlock himself is a pretty romantic character in the sense of the old romantic novels (NOT to be confused with "romance novels").

 

He is - he's got "the heart of a poet" and that flair for drama and adventure. John is much more down to earth in my eyes and so is Mary. I'd never think of either of them as "romantic". But maybe for Sherlock, it's enough to get married to qualify for that.

 

[Arcadia]

Speaking of inconsistencies, I usually believe everything Sherlock says, but John Watson a romantic? Seriously? Sorry, this should go in The Sign of Three thread... but anyway. What's so romantic about John's character? That seems like a canon reference out of place (the original Dr Watson is a romantic, clearly - but John?)

I think that Sherlock thinks that John romanticizes him. (In the blog, if nowhere else.) Which, ergo, makes John a romantic. I can't decide if I agree or not, at times I rather suspect it's Sherlock who romanticizes himself, and John who sees him pretty clearly.

 

I wonder if this isn't also an example of Moftiss-speak; they use a word that seems to mean one thing to mean something else. Like using "sociopath" to describe Sherlock. He obviously isn't, so in the show the word must mean something other than the dictionary definition. Maybe by "romantic" what they really mean is something like "someone who likes Sherlock."

 

Should we start a Moftiss dictionary?

Psychopath. Noun. One who is different from others.

Sociopath. Noun. One who is different from others, but possibly with more conscience than a psychopath.

Aspergers. Noun. A disease that people who are different have. Characteristics include arrogance, rudeness and heightened ability to focus on a problem.

Archenemy. Noun. Your overbearing big brother.

[Arcadia]

 

... when I first started watching this show, I thought that was one of the overarching themes ... who the heck is normal? I'd forgotten about that.

Oh, good heavens -- maybe that's why I like this show so much! (I'm serious!)

 

I'm pretty sure that's one of the many reasons I do!

[Slithytove]

The inconsistency to which I was referring (several pages ago!) was Sherlock's attitude to coincidence. In THoB, he says something to the effect that the world must be boring for people who don't believe in coincidence, when he realises that Dr Stapleton is the mum of the little girl whose rabbit disappeared. However, in TSoT, he says of coincidence "the universe is rarely that lazy", whilst trying to deduce the case of the Mayfly Man. So he did believe in coincidence, but now he doesn't.

 

That is what makes it hard to analyse the characters because there are times when they seem to do or say things purely for the purpose of the plot, regardless of whether it is inconsistent or out of character. That, I think, is why things occasionally jar and you find yourself thinking, "But he wouldn't do that!". Doesn't happen often but, when it does, it makes the characters more difficult to understand.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Or did Sherlock say that it was Mycroft who said "the universe is rarely that lazy"?  Hmmm....will have to look that up. "That line was prompted by Mycroft in Sherlock's "Mind Palace" during the toasting scene.....Mycroft who was pressuring Sherlock....until Sherlock pushed him away....rejected him....so does he really believe it?

 

   But writers often forget their own script. Tolkien's works and "lapses in memory" have been scrutinized and discussed in forums devoted to him and his works. 

 

 In-universe if Sherlock has changed his mind about coincidence maybe he encountered events between "THoB" and the "SoT" that encouraged the change?

[Arcadia]

Thanks, Slithytove! May you gyre and gimbol in the wabe.

 

Given my quote down there

|

|

v 

           you'd think I would've remembered that ...... I can only plead the effects of too much cough syrup....

[Carol the Dabbler]

... when I first started watching this show, I thought that was one of the overarching themes ... who the heck is normal? I'd forgotten about that.

Oh, good heavens -- maybe that's why I like this show so much! (I'm serious!)

 

I'm pretty sure that's one of the many reasons I do!

Yeah, I think it's pretty much a package deal. There are other shows where everybody's weird (I hate Seinfeld) and other shows written by some of the same people (Doctor Who doesn't grab me these days) and there's even a movie with the two stars of Sherlock (and here's where my examples kinda break down, because the scene with the two of them was the best part of Desolation of Smaug -- of course it's also just about the only part recognizably taken from the book, so I suppose we could chalk part of it up to Tolkien's writing).

 

 

The inconsistency to which I was referring (several pages ago!) was Sherlock's attitude to coincidence. In THoB, he says something to the effect that the world must be boring for people who don't believe in coincidence, when he realises that Dr Stapleton is the mum of the little girl whose rabbit disappeared. However, in TSoT, he says of coincidence "the universe is rarely that lazy", whilst trying to deduce the case of the Mayfly Man. So he did believe in coincidence, but now he doesn't.

Hmm -- well, in the first case he's trying to impress John, while in the second case, he's trying to impress Mycroft. So he's playing to the audience.

 

How's that?

[Arcadia]

Reaching.....

[by the sea]

 

Just for the record, Janine lied too -- did you read those tabloid headlines?

 

LOL !  We don't know that for sure !  That's something I hope we never get to find out !  

 

Anyway, back to John being romantic ... I hope I'm not too far away from the current posts ... one of the substitute words for romantic in my handy-dandy online thesaurus is "chivalrous" and I think that, in my conception of the word, it describes John right down to the ground.  According to the dictionary this is it:

 

chiv.al.ry:

 

/ˈʃɪvəlri/  Show Spelled [shiv-uhl-ree] 

noun, plural chiv·al·ries 

1.

the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms

 

John went to war to stand up for his country and his beliefs.  He can be abrasive but for the most part, he's polite enough and does understand many of the social graces.  He gives his time and personal effort freely in the cause of justice.  He's fearless and brave and can sprain people with amazing skill.

 

So ... by definition, he's a romantic !    

 

Debbie

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

LOL !  We don't know that for sure !  That's something I hope we never get to find out !

 

   We may know because in the hospital room after Janine has shown Sherlock the tabloids she does look at him kind of whistfully and say something like: Once would have been nice.

 

  And he comes back with: I was waiting until we were married.

[Slithytove]

 

 

 

... when I first started watching this show, I thought that was one of the overarching themes ... who the heck is normal? I'd forgotten about that.

Oh, good heavens -- maybe that's why I like this show so much! (I'm serious!)

I'm pretty sure that's one of the many reasons I do!

Yeah, I think it's pretty much a package deal. There are other shows where everybody's weird (I hate Seinfeld) and other shows written by some of the same people (Doctor Who doesn't grab me these days) and there's even a movie with the two stars of Sherlock (and here's where my examples kinda break down, because the scene with the two of them was the best part of Desolation of Smaug -- of course it's also just about the only part recognizably taken from the book, so I suppose we could chalk part of it up to Tolkien's writing).

 

The inconsistency to which I was referring (several pages ago!) was Sherlock's attitude to coincidence. In THoB, he says something to the effect that the world must be boring for people who don't believe in coincidence, when he realises that Dr Stapleton is the mum of the little girl whose rabbit disappeared. However, in TSoT, he says of coincidence "the universe is rarely that lazy", whilst trying to deduce the case of the Mayfly Man. So he did believe in coincidence, but now he doesn't.

Hmm -- well, in the first case he's trying to impress John, while in the second case, he's trying to impress Mycroft. So he's playing to the audience.

 

How's that?

Possible....but it was Sherlock's "inner Mycroft", which is a personification of an aspect of himself. I am also not sure he was trying to impress John in the lab, as the latter seemed baffled by the whole thing and couldn't grasp the significance of the bunny...

[by the sea]

 

 

LOL !  We don't know that for sure !  That's something I hope we never get to find out !

 

   We may know because in the hospital room after Janine has shown Sherlock the tabloids she does look at him kind of whistfully and say something like: Once would have been nice.

 

  And he comes back with: I was waiting until we were married.

 

 

Rats !  I missed that little exchange.  Well, there goes that fantasy.   I must watch that episode again.

 

Debbie

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

These episodes are like a beloved book. Every time you watch them you notice something you didn't before.

[sherlockandjohn]

Should we start a Moftiss dictionary?

Psychopath. Noun. One who is different from others.

 

Now, that explains why John asks, "Is everyone I've ever met a psychopath?"

[sherlockandjohn]

These episodes are like a beloved book. Every time you watch them you notice something you didn't before.

 

Indeed. I love that. On that note, I watched HLV again yesterday and noticed that when Sherlock wakes up after his operation, and the music goes really loud, we can hear him whispering, "Mary." I didn't notice that before (maybe I need to get my ears checked... but that's another matter ). I really like that detail. Not sure why. But anyway, it goes well with John's words, "His first word when he woke up? Mary."

 

His Last Vow has grown on me yet again. I suppose it has to do with getting used to a different setting; John being married, Sherlock being the protector, the uncovering of Mary's past. There is decidedly more character drama in this episode than in any other, the way I see it. Things are changing, and it takes some getting used to, but now that I apparently am, I enjoy the episode as it is. This does not mean I would have taken the show in that direction myself, but I'm not unhappy with it. It's a great story. I find it strange, though, to have such a new experience of it more than 3 months and 9 viewings later. Oh, there are still little things that bug me... but they have become small(er) in the greater context.

 

It occurred to me just why I believe they have brought in Sherlock the boy at the moment when Sherlock cries after having killed Magnussen. If Sherlock was only crying because of the loss of his future, why not just have Sherlock the adult cry? I personally can only explain it this way: Sherlock the boy represents innocence. So when he is shown at this critical moment, crying after having murdered a man, it emphasises the loss of innocence. Mycroft's words further emphasise this: "Oh, Sherlock. What have you done?" I'm not saying he's not crying about his future as well - he very well could be - but I firmly believe there is more to it than that, or they would not have brought in young Sherlock.

[T.o.b.y]

I always thought Sherlock as a boy was meant to be what Mycroft sees when he looks at him, not necessarily how Sherlock sees himself. And isn't only the child crying? I don't remember Sherlock himself doing so...

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

But if Sherlock is also the child.....why wouldn't the tears be on his cheeks also?  I suppose Mycroft would project them as well, I suppose....screen caps should tell....so does that mean that Mycroft sees Sherlock as an innocent? 

 

Mycroft also saw Sherlock as a soldier of sorts....London being his battle field...and had watched him being beaten....how innocent is that?

 

  Sherlock definitely has tears in his eyes as an adult before he appears as a child and the tears are in full evidence on his cheeks.

 

      http://screencapped.net/tv/sherlock/displayimage.php?album=9&pid=26779#top_display_media

[T.o.b.y]

But if Sherlock is also the child.....why wouldn't the tears be on his cheeks also?  I suppose Mycroft would project them as well, I suppose....screen caps should tell....so does that mean that Mycroft sees Sherlock as an innocent? 

 

Mycroft also saw Sherlock as a soldier of sorts....London being his battle field...and had watched him being beaten....how innocent is that?

 

Yes, that is exactly what I thought! Ugh, did Mycroft see his brother as a little boy too when he was enjoying the show in Serbia? UGH!!!

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I've kind of updated that post....it now has the screen shot of the tears.

[Slithytove]

 

 

These episodes are like a beloved book. Every time you watch them you notice something you didn't before.

Indeed. I love that. On that note, I watched HLV again yesterday and noticed that when Sherlock wakes up after his operation, and the music goes really loud, we can hear him whispering, "Mary." I didn't notice that before (maybe I need to get my ears checked... but that's another matter ). I really like that detail. Not sure why. But anyway, it goes well with John's words, "His first word when he woke up? Mary."

 

His Last Vow has grown on me yet again. I suppose it has to do with getting used to a different setting; John being married, Sherlock being the protector, the uncovering of Mary's past. There is decidedly more character drama in this episode than in any other, the way I see it. Things are changing, and it takes some getting used to, but now that I apparently am, I enjoy the episode as it is. This does not mean I would have taken the show in that direction myself, but I'm not unhappy with it. It's a great story. I find it strange, though, to have such a new experience of it more than 3 months and 9 viewings later. Oh, there are still little things that bug me... but they have become small(er) in the greater context.

 

It occurred to me just why I believe they have brought in Sherlock the boy at the moment when Sherlock cries after having killed Magnussen. If Sherlock was only crying because of the loss of his future, why not just have Sherlock the adult cry? I personally can only explain it this way: Sherlock the boy represents innocence. So when he is shown at this critical moment, crying after having murdered a man, it emphasises the loss of innocence. Mycroft's words further emphasise this: "Oh, Sherlock. What have you done?" I'm not saying he's not crying about his future as well - he very well could be - but I firmly believe there is more to it than that, or they would not have brought in young Sherlock.

That makes sense. Sherlock could certainly be crying because of the horror of what he has done, even if he felt he had to do it. CAM could well be the only person he has killed. We know he has been on the receiving end of some brutal treatment during the hiatus, and probably had to do some illegal and possibly violent things himself, but we don't know that he has ever taken a life. Committing murder could be a terrible loss of innocence.

 

Do you think it is Mycroft who sees Sherlock as a frightened child or is it the way Sherlock sees himself? Or both? It does look as if Mycroft, in the helicopter, is seeing him as his little brother in trouble. On the other hand, Sherlock did see himself as a child when he was dying. It is interesting that, in that scene, his big brother who was threatening him with parental anger was still seen as an adult whereas Sherlock was a little boy. Maybe Sherlock, deep inside, sees Mycroft as a grown-up whilst he is still the vulnerable child whom they "both thought was an idiot.". It would explain why he sees himself as a weeping child as Mycroft comes swooping in to rescue/punish him. It might also account for some of that simmering resentment he obviously feels towards his brother.....