Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Zain]

In fact, why did she let him in, if CAM was still there? Why would she risk him coming back downstairs and finding Sherlock there without permission? A lot of employers might be indulgent if someone had just proposed, but CAM hardly falls into that category. I can't imagine she would dare to do it, practically as soon as he left the room.

 

 

Another question:

Why did she answer the camera? The card was corrupted, yes. But didn't she know Magnussen was already in the penthouse? (Which he shouldn't have been)

 

 

Btw, something to think about:

Someone suggested something rather strange. But it adds up. So either a coincidence or a hint?

When Mary hunts Sherlock down with the gun, she passes the Henry VIII hotel before getting to the Empty Houses.

His daughter: Mary I of England. Who suffered a phantom pregnancy.

 

Something fanfiction authors will rejoice in. Fix it fic already has been experimenting with that, or at least her faking it.

 

A present to the fandom? Red herring? Hint? Coincidence?

[Carol the Dabbler]

Back to CAM's still-warm chair -- it occurs to me that we can't assume it was his behind that warmed it.  Could have been Janine being uppity or the guard taking a load off.  In which case, some of our assumptions would need adjusting.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

And since there is another way out of the Pent House, the way Mary came in, CAM must have used it at times, maybe Janine thought that he had.

[Slithytove]

But the way that Mary entered must go through the reception area, because she takes out Janine and the guard. If she entered straight into the room where CAM was, she would have had to go past him, go downstairs, attack Janine and the guard, and go back up again. Which doesn't make sense.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I think someone posted earlier that she could have held a gun on one or more. Being a trained sniper, she would have scoped out the whole set up earlier. Possibly getting her hands on the building plans, at least that's how it works in a lot of movies anyway. She would know all the ins and outs. So she could have entered into the upstairs suit and come down.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Or she could have come up a back staircase that skirted the office area, thus giving her the option of going in there or not.  The big question seems to be, why did she?  Or, to look at it from another angle, where was Magnussen?

 

I'm intrigued by the suggestion that Janine may have been in on it, maybe just pretended to be out cold, and her scalp had merely been scratched to produce a bit of blood (would probably be hard for even a doctor to tell the difference without shaving her head).  So maybe Mary wasn't fooling Janine after all, maybe they were in cahoots all along -- for some as-yet-undisclosed reason.  Sounds like good fanfic fodder!

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

That it does!  Janine was not cowed by Magnussen, not to the point that she saw herself as a less of a person, hopeless and powerless. It would be just like two strong women to cook something like this up against a man they both had to hate. Like was posted earlier, Janine had backbone, this would have been a good way to get some of her own back.

[Zain]

I like that theory, too. For fanfictions. It's really crazy^^ And funny.

 

Janine let Sherlock in because it was the best solution to make her appear innocent. After all, Mary was about to kill Magnussen. If she hadn't let him up and later his body was to be discovered, it would be a tad suspicious. And the reason Mary asks if John is with him is that they agreed in advance that Janine would "get around" to hold him off long enough so that he wouldn't see Mary's face, just her stature from behind when making her escape. But John wasn't planned. When John then enters the room too, Janine has to improvise and keep him busy. Mary notices Janine's absence, and concludes what happened.

Something like that.

[sherlockandjohn]

I wonder about Mycroft's take on Sherlock and John's friendship after the events of HLV. He once believed that John would change Sherlock, but didn't know if it would be for the better or for the worse. Wonder what he thinks now? After all, Sherlock did just kill someone for the sake of keeping John and Mary safe.

 

Something we will probably never know, but it's an interesting thought. It would make sense for him to dislike John's effect on Sherlock, but so would the opposite. On one hand, Sherlock becomes a murderer and throws away his own future because of sentiment. On the other hand, he is a happier man for the 'warmth and constancy' of John's friendship.

[Slithytove]

The idea that Janine is part of Mary's scheme makes more sense than having Mary break into his penthouse, come downstairs, knock out Janine and the guard and then go back upstairs. Why not go straight for CAM, do what you came for, and then leave? Why go into the reception area at all?

 

On the other hand, if it was a plot between the two women, why invite Sherlock in to witness everything? It seems very risky. Easier to pretend she was unconscious when CAM was killed, as there would be nothing to link her to the killer.

 

Re. Janine and CAM, we don't know what their relationship was like. We know she sold her story to his rivals (after she quit?) but we also know she let him flick her eye, as he did John's. I know people put up with a lot from unpleasant bosses, but why would she let him go that far? It implies he had some hold over her, but that had presumably vanished by the time she sold her story.

[Slithytove]

I wonder about Mycroft's take on Sherlock and John's friendship after the events of HLV. He once believed that John would change Sherlock, but didn't know if it would be for the better or for the worse. Wonder what he thinks now? After all, Sherlock did just kill someone for the sake of keeping John and Mary safe.

 

Something we will probably never know, but it's an interesting thought. It would make sense for him to dislike John's effect on Sherlock, but so would the opposite. On one hand, Sherlock becomes a murderer and throws away his own future because of sentiment. On the other hand, he is a happier man for the 'warmth and constancy' of John's friendship.

Is he happier?

 

I think we all get the impression that John is probably his first real friend - in canon, of course, there's Victor Trevor, but I don't imagine he is on a par with John - and the most meaningful relationship of his life. This opens him up to companionship and all the happiness that that entails. Even if you believe his feelings for John are purely platonic, it is evident that the connection is deep and meaningful, adding a dimension to Sherlock's life that did not previously exist. It humanises him.

 

On the other hand, it opens him up to pain as well. Until he met John, did he feel lonely? Or did he just stay in his happy, isolated little bubble? When John is threatened, Sherlock is frightened. When John hits him and won't forgive him, he knows what it is like to be rejected. Clearly he knows what loneliness is now, with John gone from 221B and Sherlock no longer the most important person in his life. Being more human means being more easily hurt.

 

On balance, I would say Sherlock accepts the pain because the happiness outweighs it. He wants to stay in a relationship with John even though, throughout S3, we see it can be emotionally difficult. But Mycroft? The man whose mantras are " caring is not an advantage" and "don't get involved." Mycroft seems terrified of getting hurt. (I wonder why?). I don't think Mycroft would understand that it is worth caring even if your heart gets broken.

[T.o.b.y]

Is he happier?

 

Good question. I guess if "Sherlock" is "about" anything other than fun and adventure and laughs (or as Sherlock put it, murder and mayhem), it is the question of whether caring is an advantage or not, whether it is worth the vulnerability it brings with it - or the other way around, whether isolation is worth the "protection" it gives.

 

There's no definite answer, of course, but it's interesting and I think rather unusual to be stated as a question at all; usually popular stories defend the "caring" side whole-heartedly, don't they?

 

Concerning Mary and Janine: It would have been really cool if Janine had let Mary in as well and been her ally in the attempt to kill (or threaten?) her boss, but I doubt it, because I don't think she would have let Sherlock in if she had been.

 

 

[sherlockandjohn]

True, 'Sherlock' deals with the advantages and disadvantages of caring, however it does support the advantages far more, I would say.

 

And as to whether or not John's friendship makes Sherlock happier - of course it does, but it's true that it's also cause for pain. It may very well be that Mycroft thinks the disadvantage of caring isn't worth it, but Sherlock does.

[Zain]

True, 'Sherlock' deals with the advantages and disadvantages of caring, however it does support the advantages far more, I would say.

 

 

 

Does it really support the advantages?

In the end, Sherlock's alone on the plane. While he might have fond memories, he's just as alone as in the beginning of ASiP. But now he knows what it's like to not be alone. It's a conundrum. What makes a person happier: Having known happiness and then being bereft of it, or never knowing happiness and thus not missing it?

There's no real answer, I fear.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

I think it's perspective. There's that old line that goes: It's better to have loved and lost then to never have loved at all.  I know people that believe that to be true.  Me? Absolutely not, I can't agree. I can only think of the lines from the Simon and Garfunkel song: If I had never loved, I never would have cried. A stone feels no pain. An Island never cries.

 

  Maybe I'm just more like Mycroft.

[T.o.b.y]

I think it's perspective. There's that old line that goes: It's better to have loved and lost then to never have loved at all.  I know people that believe that to be true.  Me? Absolutely not, I can't agree. I can only think of the lines from the Simon and Garfunkel song: If I had never loved, I never would have cried. A stone feels no pain. An Island never cries.

 

  Maybe I'm just more like Mycroft.

 

Maybe... at least that seems like Mycroft's kind of philosophy.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I went looking for "the secret of Leinster Gardens," and found it here, on Google Maps satellite view.  (If it comes up in map mode, just click on "Satellite.")  I assume it'll center on the right spot for you, but if it insists on centering on the red "A" map pin (which is where Google thinks #24 is), you'll need to scroll down (south) a couple of clicks.  The fake houses are pretty obvious, straight across from the side street called Craven Hill Gardens.

 

[Arcadia]

 

Until he met John, did he feel lonely? Or did he just stay in his happy, isolated little bubble?

I don't think we're meant to think he was happy in his isolated little bubble ... practically the first thing he does after meeting John is ask him to come play with him ("Want to see some more?") That struck me as a person who was seeking friendship, not looking to avoid it (in spite of what he may tell himself. It's interesting, because what Sherlock says about himself, and what others say about him, is so often at odds with what we are shown about him. It's pretty cool, actually.) At any rate, isolation itself can arouse pretty negative emotions.

[T.o.b.y]

I don't think we're meant to think he was happy in his isolated little bubble ... practically the first thing he does after meeting John is ask him to come play with him ("Want to see some more?") That struck me as a person who was seeking friendship, not looking to avoid it (in spite of what he may tell himself. It's interesting, because what Sherlock says about himself, and what others say about him, is so often at odds with what we are shown about him. It's pretty cool, actually.)

 

Isn't it? And he was also actively looking for a flat mate whereas he does not give the impression otherwise of being the kind of person who lets anybody even near his "lair". If it really was only about saving money and he did not like company at all, he would also have stuffed all his things into his one room at Baker St and locked himself in there most of the time, but in fact he "lives" mostly in the shared area and his bedroom, from what we have seen of it, is rather bleak.

 

[Arcadia]

 

 

 

And he was also actively looking for a flat mate whereas he does not give the impression otherwise of being the kind of person who lets anybody even near his "lair". If it really was only about saving money and he did not like company at all, he would also have stuffed all his things into his one room at Baker St and locked himself in there most of the time, but in fact he "lives" mostly in the shared area and his bedroom, from what we have seen of it, is rather bleak.

 

 

Of course, the explanation could also be that he really craves an audience....

 

We are never quite sher ... er, sure ....

[Arcadia]

 

I guess if "Sherlock" is "about" anything other than fun and adventure and laughs (or as Sherlock put it, murder and mayhem), it is the question of whether caring is an advantage or not, whether it is worth the vulnerability it brings with it - or the other way around, whether isolation is worth the "protection" it gives.

Yeh, that (and does isolation really protect one from pain?), also there's a lot of subtext about accepting/valuing/loving people even if they're "different." Luv it, luv it, luv it.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

True, 'Sherlock' deals with the advantages and disadvantages of caring, however it does support the advantages far more, I would say.

 

 

 

Does it really support the advantages?

In the end, Sherlock's alone on the plane. While he might have fond memories, he's just as alone as in the beginning of ASiP. But now he knows what it's like to not be alone. It's a conundrum. What makes a person happier: Having known happiness and then being bereft of it, or never knowing happiness and thus not missing it?

There's no real answer, I fear.

 

 

Only the answer each one of us must find for ourselves. Personally, I think we need both happiness and pain, both mountains and valleys, to shape us, make us unique human beings. The humanisation of Sherlock makes him both more happy and more sad.

 

Whether or not the writers think that's an advantage, I guess I can't know for sure... Is a friendship like the one Sherlock and John have worth the pain of, for example, being sent into exile and eventual death? What if the alternative is living your whole life without the warmth of friendship?

 

You're right; they are tough questions to answer. However, 'Sherlock' for me is not about answering that question. It is, all in all, a positive story of friendship; not a sad story of the disadvantages of caring. There is always hope. The moment they should take out all hope of love and happiness from the show - which I don't think will happen - I would quit watching it.

[sherlockandjohn]

True, 'Sherlock' deals with the advantages and disadvantages of caring, however it does support the advantages far more, I would say.

 

 

Allow me to quote Sherlock himself:

 

"John, I am a ridiculous man, redeemed only by the warmth and constancy of your friendship." One of my favorite quotes.

 

Or this: "To the best of times, John."

 

I think the sentiment in that goodbye scene in HLV is as I've heard in a song: "If it has to end, I'm glad you have been my friend in the time of our lives." Sentimental? Yes. But real, and I support it.

[sherlockandjohn]

I think it's perspective. There's that old line that goes: It's better to have loved and lost then to never have loved at all.  I know people that believe that to be true.  Me? Absolutely not, I can't agree. I can only think of the lines from the Simon and Garfunkel song: If I had never loved, I never would have cried. A stone feels no pain. An Island never cries.

 

  Maybe I'm just more like Mycroft.

 

It's definitely about perspective. Caring can be a great cause of pain for yourself, and those who've had to suffer much of it may not agree with me that caring is an advantage.

 

And, of course, there's another question in it: Isn't it always an advantage for the person you care about, even if it should be a disadvantage for yourself?

[Slithytove]

Both Sherlock and Mycroft's emotional make up is.....well, "abnormal" may be too strong a word. Let's say "unusual."

 

Both seem to have cocooned themselves in protective isolation. They convinced themselves that not only did they not care for others, they actually could not care. (Remember the morgue scenes in ASiB.). Love for John gradually induces Sherlock to creep out beyond his self-imposed barriers. Mycroft remains aloof. Who is happier? Hard to say.

 

The conventional view is that love is always worth the pain, and most of us believe it. Most people, after a break-up or a death, feel that "If I never loved, I never would have cried" but we don't want to live like that for the rest of our lives. But most of us are not the Holmes brothers.

 

Imagine how incredibly painful it must have been for Sherlock to discover that, contrary to all that he had been told (by Mycroft?), he did have a heart. He gets to enjoy the warmth of John's friendship - but he also gets to experience the hurt, the fear and the sadness that comes with it. Yes, he was looking for a flatmate but did he expect to make him such a big part of his life? Did he even realise he had been lonely until he met John?

 

I think we see - most clearly in TSoT - that Sherlock feels that caring for someone is worth the risk of getting hurt. Mycroft, watching from the sidelines, clearly does not. Not only does he stay isolated, he urges Sherlock to do the same. What happened to the brothers to give them the idea that love is "a chemical defect"?

 

There is a meta by Wellingtongoose that suggests that the Holmes parents had to be ordinary to produce such extraordinary children. Gattiss says it makes sense, because Sherlock was always " a bit indulged." I am not convinced. To have two men with such emotional withdrawal..... I feel there must have been some trauma in their past that convinced them that the only way to avoid pain was to close down their feelings and convince themselves they did not care.