Themes and Through-lines

[Boton]

Hey, Boton, I'm not sure this is the kind of thing you had in mind, but I started wondering about it today ....

 

I'm guessing most of us would agree that Sherlock's growing throughout the series, in one way or another; from sociopathic to compassionate, maybe, or from great to good, or whatever else you think the change(s) may be.

 

But what about the other way around? What is John's character arc, in what way is he changing as the story progresses? I'm finding this a little tougher to make out. I suppose you could say the trust he placed in Sherlock was a step forward for him, but since that trust was somewhat violated I'm not so sure. Anyone have any insight into this?

 

 

 

Yes, this is exactly what I was thinking (although people should feel free to take things the direction they see fit, of course!).  I actually think John's progression is a little darker.  For me, if Sherlock is on a trajectory toward being a "good" man, John is headed straight for confronting his demons.  I know they laid the groundwork for John's "addiction to a certain lifestyle" in SiP ("Want to see some more?" "Oh, God yes.") and in SiB ("You were a doctor!" "I had bad days!"), but I guess I always read it as scrappiness.  Now I think John has some serious problems to confront.  And I actually credit Sherlock with the perceptiveness to call it to John's attention in HLV in the beautiful 221B "domestic" scene.  It isn't just the "addicted to a certain lifestyle" speech, it's that little inversion Sherlock does, where he describes himself as "a sociopath who solves crimes as an alternative to getting high."  Everything up to that point says that Sherlock gets high when he can't find puzzles to solve, but he deliberately makes himself into a junkie to underline his point that maybe he isn't -- at least on paper -- the best choice John could have made for a best friend. 

 

 

 

 

And here's a weird thing for me about Sherlock.  I watch him and I don't see Benedict.  I just see this different entity, and I am able to separate Benedict from that character as if they are not even connected to each other.  I don't feel that with the others, but Sherlock is so unique.  Then again, because I play with the characters in fanfiction, they become real to me in a different way.

 

 

I know what you mean, and I do think that's the mark of an exceptional actor.  But it also makes me feel kind of....protective...of BC.  Like, it's really important for me to only form opinions of Benedict Cumberbatch from interviews with him being himself and to not import anything I might know about Sherlock or Khan or Ford or Alan Turing onto my perception of BC because I know that he chose the parts with care and submerged his own personality to better give life to his characters.  Most actors, I don't much care if I get them confused with their characters or if they get incorrect publicity, but he's one of the few that I would rather sit down with and have a cup of coffee than interview him for an article (and that's one aspect of what I do, for heaven's sake!).

 

 

 

Good point about Greg's delight in tormenting them next morning!

 

...

 

Admittedly I've never seen most of them in any other roles, but I've seen a bunch of Martin Freeman's work, and the only time he tends to pop up (in Sherlock or any of the other things) is during the Waltz -- but I suspect that's my fault, because it's just so tempting to see Freeman and Abbington sort of overlaid on John and Mary in that one scene (in the same way that I sometimes look at places in the area where I grew up and simultaneously "see" them the way they used to be).

 

I love Lestrade yelling at them as he gets them out of the drunk tank.  You can just see the thought bubble:  "Couple of stupid lightweights who caused me a bunch of paperwork....and I didn't even get invited!"

 

I see Freeman and Abbington overlaid on John and Mary every once in a while, and I think it's a case where "nepotism" really works in the show's favor.  They have that easy bodily comfort with one another that you get after more than a decade of domestic partnership.  I see it especially when she's sitting on the bed reading John's blog and has the line about "six months of bristly kisses for me and then His Nibs shows up."  I also see it a bit in HLV when Kate says "Who's Sherlock Holmes?" and Mary says, "See, that does happen."  For some reason, the tone of that makes me think there's been a moment when Freeman felt overshadowed by BC and Abbington had to knock some sense back into him.  

[sfmpco]

the way I see it, sherlock is a genius, but because of an unconscious mechanism of self defense, he's always avoided carefully all emotions: affection, friendship and such. they didn't interest him, they didn't exist for him, he didn't consider feelings anything worth bothering with.

 

 

 

 

all this until john, who changed his way of seeing things, in many ways, slowly but systematically. I also think sherlock did change john, but that's another story.

 

back on topic, sherlock is like a young child who's been alone for a long time and for the first time, discovers the joys of friendship, the lovely empowering feeling of being special to someone and of enjoying the exclusive affection that person has for you.

 

john is his friend.

 

 

Well, we don't KNOW what happened in his youth or childhood that might have skewed him so much that way.  We only see him as an adult like that, more so of course in ASIP than in HLV.  Because in HLV he is very much more emotionally involved... in fact, his emotions get the better of him when he escalates to the extreme and shoots Magnussen.  Shooting Magnussen, was in a way a type of meltdown.  This is not an argument on whether or not he felt he had no choice but to shoot but rather an illustration of him feeling on top and in complete control when he went to Appledor and realizing instead he was hanging over an abyss.  He was completely out played partly because he'd made up this whole information exchange idea when he was high on morphine.  His head was clearly not screwed on straight when he made that deal.  Why would anyone make that deal?  If Magnussed had a "copy," another copy exists too.  But Sherlock's brain went on tilt and he shot him to completely eliminate the files in Magnussen's head... but the original files still exist somewhere because Magnussen saw them somewhere and put them into his mind palace.  

 

Sherlock's seething rage escalated from zero to ten very quickly.  That's a type of meltdown.  Had he not shot Magnussen, he might have been in a little trouble but likely just would have had his wrists slapped by the government or MI6.  Nothing more.

 

I think Sherlock has such confidence in his decision making that he acts first without thinking of the consequences.

[Arcadia]

.... I also think sherlock did change john, but that's another story.

Please tell us this story, please please?

[Arcadia]

I think Sherlock has such confidence in his decision making that he acts first without thinking of the consequences.

I sort of agree, except I see it more as disregarding the consequences to himself; he doesn't seem to have much regard for self-preservation. But he can be very good at thinking through all the consequences for everyone and everything else, I would say. Except when he isn't.

[Carol the Dabbler]

He was completely out played partly because he'd made up this whole information exchange idea when he was high on morphine.  His head was clearly not screwed on straight when he made that deal.  Why would anyone make that deal?  If Magnussed had a "copy," another copy exists too.  But Sherlock's brain went on tilt and he shot him to completely eliminate the files in Magnussen's head... but the original files still exist somewhere because Magnussen saw them somewhere and put them into his mind palace.

You may be right, but I think it's also possible that Magnussen really was the only actual threat -- assuming that his case against Mary consisted of bits and pieces that he'd picked up here and there. If that's true, then even though various other people know various parts of her story, Magnussen's head may well have been the only place where it all came together.

 

If I'm right, we may never know for sure, but if you're right, the whole thing may blow up in Series 4 or 5.

[sfmpco]

 

You may be right, but I think it's also possible that Magnussen really was the only actual threat -- assuming that his case against Mary consisted of bits and pieces that he'd picked up here and there. If that's true, then even though various other people know various parts of her story, Magnussen's head may well have been the only place where it all came together.

 

If I'm right, we may never know for sure, but if you're right, the whole thing may blow up in Series 4 or 5.

 

 

Oh, I think the fat's going to hit the fire in S4.

[sfmpco]

 

I think Sherlock has such confidence in his decision making that he acts first without thinking of the consequences.

I sort of agree, except I see it more as disregarding the consequences to himself; he doesn't seem to have much regard for self-preservation. But he can be very good at thinking through all the consequences for everyone and everything else, I would say. Except when he isn't.

 

 

I agree that he doesn't have much regard for self-preservation.

[Arcadia]

...I actually think John's progression is a little darker. For me, if Sherlock is on a trajectory toward being a "good" man, John is headed straight for confronting his demons.  I know they laid the groundwork for John's "addiction to a certain lifestyle" in SiP ("Want to see some more?" "Oh, God yes.") and in SiB ("You were a doctor!" "I had bad days!"), but I guess I always read it as scrappiness.  Now I think John has some serious problems to confront....

Thanks for this, because that's how I once read John's reactions too; he was just being a bit pugnacious, out of manly pride as much as anything else. This "addicted to danger" stuff hit me out of the blue, and I'm still not sure I buy it. But it would kind of make sense to take John in a darker direction (if anything can be darker than shooting an unarmed man in the head...) -- for dramatic purposes, if nothing else. It could be interesting to see Sherlock be the sane and reasonable one for a change.

 

I see Freeman and Abbington overlaid on John and Mary every once in a while, and I think it's a case where "nepotism" really works in the show's favor.

Yup. Mary just slid right into place, for me; I had no sense of her being grafted onto the plot like I often do with new characters.

 

And I too find myself wanting to be rather "protective" of Benedict Cumberbatch. It's sorcery, I tell ya.....

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I see Benedict's interviews and I don't think "there's Sherlock or there's Khan".  I think "There's Benedict who plays these different roles.  Cool to hear/read his thoughts regarding whatever question he is answering".

[Boton]

 

 

You may be right, but I think it's also possible that Magnussen really was the only actual threat -- assuming that his case against Mary consisted of bits and pieces that he'd picked up here and there. If that's true, then even though various other people know various parts of her story, Magnussen's head may well have been the only place where it all came together.

 

Yes.  Right now, I think Magnussen is (was) the threat.  He was the one who had an organization (a multi-national news conglomerate) that was dedicated to gathering and then disseminating information about people.  I really believe that no one else had both the combined information and the power to use it like Magnussen did.  That doesn't mean another Magnussen couldn't rise up as long as the information exists, but the infrastructure would have to be rebuilt once again to gather and use it.  

 

 

 

Yup. Mary just slid right into place, for me; I had no sense of her being grafted onto the plot like I often do with new characters.

 

What's so brilliant about that casting and about Abbington's acting is that it was so important for Mary to act confident and comfortable in her new life.  I know Abbington has said she didn't know Mary's back story until she got the script for HLV, but it is really wonderful that she acts so comfortable with the Sherlock/John friendship and that she doesn't put any drag on their crime-solving activities.  Why would she?  This woman has presumably spent the last 20 years as an intelligent agent (and freelance assassin); she's not going to be flinching about the two going off to solve murders or anything.  That confidence buys her a lot of credibility, because when she freaks out in HLV, there's at least a little bit of feeling that maybe things really have escalated to an untenable spot to get her that unnerved.

[avoca]

 

the way I see it, sherlock is a genius, but because of an unconscious mechanism of self defense, he's always avoided carefully all emotions: affection, friendship and such. they didn't interest him, they didn't exist for him, he didn't consider feelings anything worth bothering with.

 

 

 

 

all this until john, who changed his way of seeing things, in many ways, slowly but systematically. I also think sherlock did change john, but that's another story.

 

back on topic, sherlock is like a young child who's been alone for a long time and for the first time, discovers the joys of friendship, the lovely empowering feeling of being special to someone and of enjoying the exclusive affection that person has for you.

 

john is his friend.

 

 

Well, we don't KNOW what happened in his youth or childhood that might have skewed him so much that way.  We only see him as an adult like that, more so of course in ASIP than in HLV.  Because in HLV he is very much more emotionally involved... in fact, his emotions get the better of him when he escalates to the extreme and shoots Magnussen.  

 

 

indeed. it's all speculations, of course. like much of the ones on forums, about details of a character that are not precisely described or shown in episodes.

 

there do are though, some things we know. the whole east wind thing, the fact big brother mycroft made sherlock's childhood a not particularly pleasant one. the fact sherlock was a very intelligent "borderline autistic" child and that caused him a few problems fitting in the so called "normal society".

 

 

.... I also think sherlock did change john, but that's another story.

Please tell us this story, please please?

 

 

 

 

...I actually think John's progression is a little darker. For me, if Sherlock is on a trajectory toward being a "good" man, John is headed straight for confronting his demons.  I know they laid the groundwork for John's "addiction to a certain lifestyle" in SiP ("Want to see some more?" "Oh, God yes.") and in SiB ("You were a doctor!" "I had bad days!"), but I guess I always read it as scrappiness.  Now I think John has some serious problems to confront....

Thanks for this, because that's how I once read John's reactions too; he was just being a bit pugnacious, out of manly pride as much as anything else. This "addicted to danger" stuff hit me out of the blue, and I'm still not sure I buy it. But it would kind of make sense to take John in a darker direction (if anything can be darker than shooting an unarmed man in the head...) -- for dramatic purposes, if nothing else. It could be interesting to see Sherlock be the sane and reasonable one for a change.

 

ehm.. my POV over john's is a little different. I think sherlock works like therapy for john.

 

john's gone through a lot, much more than he could handle, while in afghanistan.

 

he might be craving for excitement and danger, but he was rather shook up when he came back to england. and we saw clearly he's quite inhibited: he's not yet good at processing his feelings. hence the psychosomatic limp.

 

also when sherlock "dies" at the end of series 2, john's reaction is the same: he can't speak with his therapist.

 

I think sherlock, a man that paradoxically doesn't speak "for days on end", has a therapeutic influence on john.

 

through their common adventures, through enthusiasm, true admiration for sherlock's work and affection for his friend, john confronts his demons, processes his sorrow. that's how I see the words "I was so alone..."

[Boton]

 

 

through their common adventures, through enthusiasm, true admiration for sherlock's work and affection for his friend, john confronts his demons, processes his sorrow. that's how I see the words "I was so alone..."

 

Nice analysis, Avoca; I like!  Seems to fit nicely with ACD canon, where Watson was fairly messed up when he returned from the Afghan war.

[Arcadia]

ehm.. my POV over john's is a little different. I think sherlock works like therapy for john.

 

john's gone through a lot, much more than he could handle, while in afghanistan.

 

he might be craving for excitement and danger, but he was rather shook up when he came back to england. and we saw clearly he's quite inhibited: he's not yet good at processing his feelings. hence the psychosomatic limp.

 

also when sherlock "dies" at the end of series 2, john's reaction is the same: he can't speak with his therapist.

 

I think sherlock, a man that paradoxically doesn't speak "for days on end", has a therapeutic influence on john.

 

through their common adventures, through enthusiasm, true admiration for sherlock's work and affection for his friend, john confronts his demons, processes his sorrow. that's how I see the words "I was so alone..."

 

That is also an excellent interpretation, it fits very nicely. And I don't think it actually contradicts what Boton and I were saying.

 

It does raise another question in my mind, though: according to his therapist, John has (or had) trust issues.

 

Yet he's given his love to two very untrustworthy individuals -- Sherlock and Mary. And by untrustworthy, I mean that both of them have told him huge lies that most people, I suspect, could not really forgive.

 

On the other hand, I would trust both of them with my life, if I were John. Utterly.

 

So, I'm wondering if John has resolved these "trust" issues, because he knows neither Sherlock  nor Mary will ever let him down? Or, is that still something to be revisited, because he knows both Sherlock and Mary will always let him down; ie, lie to him? Or are we looking at something in between? I realize it's impossible to know without actually seeing future episodes, but speculation is welcome!

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Good questions Arcadia and I have no idea how to respond to any of them, speculation or otherwise.

[Arcadia]

Me either, that's why I left them here for someone else to adopt!

[sfmpco]

 

 

 

 

 

indeed. it's all speculations, of course. like much of the ones on forums, about details of a character that are not precisely described or shown in episodes.

 

there do are though, some things we know. the whole east wind thing, the fact big brother mycroft made sherlock's childhood a not particularly pleasant one. the fact sherlock was a very intelligent "borderline autistic" child and that caused him a few problems fitting in the so called "normal society".

 

Well, one of the things we have to look at is their age difference.  Mycroft is supposedly 8 years older than Sherlock which would have meant that Mycroft was starting university when Sherlock was just 10, which means that a genius child who already felt a little isolated now didn't even have his genius big brother around, albeit he was a rubbish big brother, so Sherlock has even more reason to feel isolated.  Sherlock would have maybe only seen Mycroft at holidays.  Mycroft likely studied languages and political science and other things that would have gotten him such a high position in the government - well, he IS the government.  

 

I have my own head canon about what happened to young Sherlock.

[sittything]

Does John really have trust issues, though?  What in the show had indicated these trust issues other than what his therapist wrote?  He trusts Sherlock fairly quickly, and moves in with him even though he knows very little about him.  I think John definitely has anger issues and other residual issues from the war, but I've never seen John as an untrusting person based on what we see from him in the show.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Does John really have trust issues, though?  What in the show had indicated these trust issues other than what his therapist wrote?  He trusts Sherlock fairly quickly, and moves in with him even though he knows very little about him.  I think John definitely has anger issues and other residual issues from the war, but I've never seen John as an untrusting person based on what we see from him in the show.

 

It might have something to do with the fact that she asked about the blog & he said it was going good even though he actually hadn't written a thing on it yet.

[Arcadia]

Does John really have trust issues, though?  What in the show had indicated these trust issues other than what his therapist wrote?  He trusts Sherlock fairly quickly, and moves in with him even though he knows very little about him.  I think John definitely has anger issues and other residual issues from the war, but I've never seen John as an untrusting person based on what we see from him in the show.

Also an excellent point! He doesn't trust Mycroft at first meeting, but then who would? But I was a little puzzled myself about the "trust issues," although I'm afraid I just took it for granted that they exist. Hmmmm.......

[Boton]

 

 

It might have something to do with the fact that she asked about the blog & he said it was going good even though he actually hadn't written a thing on it yet.

 

 

I would have had "trust issues" with that therapist as well.  He comes home from Afghanistan with clearly unresolved issues concerning his mixed emotions about death and danger (in that I'm guessing from later behavior that death horrifies him but danger energizes him, and that's hard to resolve in a war zone), and the therapist wants him to reintegrate into normal society by keeping a blog?  That suggestion practically gave ME a psychosomatic limp.

 

Sherlock was the one that saw through all that and came back to the flat to ask John along on the case in SiP; Sherlock realized that John needed danger and excitement, and solving crimes is a perfect way to do that while fighting back against the horror of death.  In fact, it makes a nice balance for the team as a whole:  Sherlock deals with the human element by blocking it out and focusing on the puzzle, while John might be motivated to face danger if he feels it helps the greater good as far as helping people/saving innocent lives.  

 

Edited to add:  But yes, I know that somehow from a story perspective, John Watson had to start a blog because ACD canon Watson was writing for The Strand.  The writing had to come into play and be modernized, because part of John's job in the story is to convey the tale of Sherlock Holmes to the reader.  

[Arcadia]

Aha! Maybe the Big Bad next time is .... John's therapist! She seems so caring but all along she's been slowly breaking down John's psyche, turning him to the dark side .......

 

Seriously, they seem to want us to believe John is benefitting from therapy ... he still goes to "top off" every once in awhile. (Considering what he's been through, I'm surprised it's only once in awhile...) Which means he trusts HER, at least. And he trusts Mycroft now it seems; he called him when Sherlock started using. Now I'm sitting here trying to think who John doesn't trust! The Woman, maybe.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Does John really have trust issues, though?  What in the show had indicated these trust issues other than what his therapist wrote?  He trusts Sherlock fairly quickly, and moves in with him even though he knows very little about him.  I think John definitely has anger issues and other residual issues from the war, but I've never seen John as an untrusting person based on what we see from him in the show.

I agree. Seems to me that John simply likes to make up his own mind about whom to trust. Sherlock? Oh God yes! (Don't ask him for a rational reason, though -- they just clicked.) Mycroft? Generally not. Therapist? In some ways, yes, but not with his really personal matters. (Yes, I realize that's probably counter-productive, but it does seem to be a realistic "guy thing.")

 

Sherlock realized that John needed danger and excitement, and solving crimes is a perfect way to do that while fighting back against the horror of death.  In fact, it makes a nice balance for the team as a whole:  Sherlock deals with the human element by blocking it out and focusing on the puzzle, while John might be motivated to face danger if he feels it helps the greater good as far as helping people/saving innocent lives.

I agree regarding "excitement," but hesitate to say that John likes or needs danger per se. Considering his experiences in Afghanistan, he's probably accustomed to accepting danger as a typical accompaniment of real-life excitement (as opposed to the manufactured kind, like roller coasters). Mostly I think he HATES feeling useless. He wants something meaningful to do, and he's sufficiently accustomed to danger that he doesn't shy away from doing what needs to be done just because it's dangerous.

 

Seriously, they seem to want us to believe John is benefitting from therapy ... he still goes to "top off" every once in awhile. (Considering what he's been through, I'm surprised it's only once in awhile...) Which means he trusts HER, at least. And he trusts Mycroft now it seems; he called him when Sherlock started using. Now I'm sitting here trying to think who John doesn't trust! The Woman, maybe.

I think John's trust is heavily situation-dependent. He trusts Ella to help him work through certain issues (but not others). He trusts Mycroft to have Sherlock's interests at heart -=- some of the time. John has been through a number of harrowing experiences, some of which were initiated by people he trusted. So of course he's wary.

 

[sittything]

Would anyone trust Mycroft right away?  Dude takes him to a warehouse at nighttime all suspect like, and then calls himself Sherlock's arch-enemy like an unhinged Mary Poppins.  lol

[Arcadia]

Not if they're sane!

[Arcadia]

I agree. Seems to me that John simply likes to make up his own mind about whom to trust. Sherlock? Oh God yes! (Don't ask him for a rational reason, though -- they just clicked.) Mycroft? Generally not. Therapist? In some ways, yes, but not with his really personal matters. (Yes, I realize that's probably counter-productive, but it does seem to be a realistic "guy thing.")

 

I agree regarding "excitement," but hesitate to say that John likes or needs danger per se. Considering his experiences in Afghanistan, he's probably accustomed to accepting danger as a typical accompaniment of real-life excitement (as opposed to the manufactured kind, like roller coasters). Mostly I think he HATES feeling useless. He wants something meaningful to do, and he's sufficiently accustomed to danger that he doesn't shy away from doing what needs to be done just because it's dangerous.

 

I think John's trust is heavily situation-dependent. He trusts Ella to help him work through certain issues (but not others). He trusts Mycroft to have Sherlock's interests at heart -=- some of the time. John has been through a number of harrowing experiences, some of which were initiated by people he trusted. So of course he's wary.

 

That's a good take on all of it, Carol, and I particularly like the "he hates feeling useless" part ... that's something that's actually been demonstrated in the show, more than once.

 

Also it has the added benefit of leading neatly back to my original question ... what is John's story arc/character development throughout the series? Anyone have any more ideas on that? So far we have "he's heading for a crisis," which sounds highly likely to me! (Although as I think about it, that may describe every character on the show, if the hints from Moftiss mean anything. )

 

Also I think we've more or less established (?) that working with Sherlock has filled some emotional need? But I'm not sure where it's gone from there. I feel like I didn't learn a whole lot about John in S3. He has a temper and an amazing capacity for forgiveness, but we already knew that. What new thing does he need to learn in order to grow as a person? Or has he already reached his final form? I would say he can't go too dark, or he wouldn't be John Watson.