Is John really Sherlock's best friend?

[J.P.]

But if John wanted to educate Sherlock, he would have to change his methods. Look at the "gay" scene with Jim: all what John says is "it wasn't kind" and our genius, who can be amazingly thick when it comes to interpersonal relations, still have no idea why. Or how he could do better.

 

As the restaurant scene: Sherlock has no gall, he just doesn't think about such things. As he arrives in the room and see John he looses most of his temper though, but not enough to just turn around and wait for a better moment. The whole farce with the false waiter occurs IMO out of Sherlocks helplesness. He suddenly doesn't know what to do, and this must be quite confusing.

 

It is very chilidish behaviour, but I can somehow relate to Sherlocks lack of patience. He just want to surprise John whom he haven't seen for 2 years - John wanted Sherlock to stop being dead, so he should be happy about the return, shouldn't he?

[Inge l-w]

If we go by emotional intelligence, both characters are definitely stunted, one has probably deleted all information about it from his brain, and the other has issues with family (Harriet and who knows who else). As for crashing the dinner, that is an interesting little plot problem : "You always know!" accuses Sherlock, and instead of Mycroft's telling him it's for two, so the logical deduction concerning John "I'm not gay" Watson would be it is a date, Mycroft sidesteps and starts talking about St. Emilion years. (What is so special about a 2001 standard claret as opposed to a 2000?) If Sherlock had been given that bit of information, the scene would not have been so funny. John's initial reaction is perfectly normal, amazement turned to ire to pure bloodimindedness, but his continued unforgiving attitude despite his 'best friend' status becomes questionable as they progress to little takeaway places and Sherlock's explanations more specific.

[T.o.b.y]

 

Sherlock didn't just jump to save John, Mrs. Hudson and Lestrade - he planned and carried out a method of bringing Moriarty down, and in the midst of it all, John's life was put in jeopardy. So of course Sherlock would jump to save his friends - but his main goal from the beginning had been concerning Moriarty. My point here is that Sherlock wasn't being selflessly heroic - he was being clever and logical, as usual.

 

That's what I think as well. And I like it that way. I kind of like that he played us all for suckers - "oh look at Sherlock heroically sacrificing himself", and in reality, he was just being F***ing brilliant and ruthless as always. We can't say we weren't warned. He told us not to make a hero out of him...

 

In my opinion, what Sherlock did to John there was about the worst kind of thing you can do to a friend, and if John had never forgiven him, I'd have found that completely understandable, only it would have been the end of the series, so John had to come round, and by the time the wedding takes place, I think he's genuinely happy to have Sherlock back and also acknowledges that, in his own understated way. But he does.

 

I don't think Sherlock had much of a clue that he was being cruel or even doing wrong, at least not until after he had seen John at his grave, and then he probably thought okay, fine, he wants me to be alive, I'll stay alive and return and all will be okay again, piece of cake.

 

At the pool, John agreed to die if necessary if that was what it took to take Moriarty down. So Sherlock probably assumed John would agree to any plan that successfully got Moriarty and his criminal organization out of the way, and hey, this one is much better than aiming a gun at explosives, because nobody dies, except Moriarty, accidentally, and that wasn't quite Sherlock's fault.

 

Sherlock is also (more than) a little empathy impaired. He doesn't begin to understand John's grief, and it isn't logical, anyway - he's not really dead and he'll come back, and once he is back, the whole thing is really funny - isn't it ?! I'm not sure whether Sherlock ever fully understood how horrible his little stunt was. I think he finally accepted that what he did was a bit not good by general standards and that John was hurt, but I bet he still laughs about it in secret when nobody is watching and I have a sneaking suspicion that he's not really terribly sorry in his heart of hearts. Not because he's malicious, but because there are things he really honestly does not understand.

 

I guess what I am trying to say is that while Sherlock wasn't intentionally being evil, any amount of resentment on John's part is justified, and the man who accepts the kind of apology he got on the train and makes the offender best man at his wedding with the added information that he loves him as much as his intended bride is a very, very good friend and decent, forgiving, understanding human being indeed.

[J.P.]

Maybe, at some point John will also laugh about it.

 

Quoting myself, because a thought popped up in my head on my way home:

 

They are both self centered gits. Maybe that's why they can go along without killing one another.

 

I can imagine that someone with a different personality couldn't live with Sherlock. Someone who would take care of him, make his bed and his dishes, and then would be upset about not getting anything in exchange. That's why I think Molly wouldn't be a good partner for him. I imagine John does things like this from time to time, but not with the intention of doing things for Sherlock. He does them for himself and shares with Sherlock. They seem to be very self-sufficient in a certain way. I don't know how to describe it... It's not like they are clinging to one another, just reach their hands out. 

 

I also think they never tried to change one another. 

[Arcadia]

 

I also think they never tried to change one another. 

That's a very keen observation. Maybe that's one of the things that makes them "best" friends?

 

I've been following this thread with interest but haven't got time to respond to as many things as I'd like, maybe later. But I will say that I think it's pretty hard to quantify friendship. It's different for everyone, isn't it? So to say John is or isn't a "best" friend, that's a pretty tough call ... because what Sherlock needs or wants from a friend may not be that same thing that I need or want from a friend ... ? Hopefully I'll have some more time to think later on, I'm still not sure how I feel about this. It's an interesting topic.

[T.o.b.y]

 what Sherlock needs or wants from a friend may not be that same thing that I need or want from a friend ...

 

I don't think Sherlock himself knows what he wants from a friend. Originally, he had persuaded himself that he didn't want any friends at all. John just sort of... happened. Sherlock also has no clue how to be a friend. I thought it was at the same time hilarious and terribly heartwarming how in series 3 he went from making no effort at all to totally overdoing it, from becoming an obsessive wedding planner to gunning down the man who threatened John's wife.

 

[sfmpco]

Because Sherlock Holmes is a great man.  And one day, if we're lucky, he might even be a good one.

[Shadow Dweller]

I still think that anyone clingy and or doormat would suffer terribly with Sherlock Holmes and their relationship would quickly become poisonous slash imbalanced. :lol:

[jadpdr]

Absolutely agree, but the reverse also holds true. To what lengths will the emotionally handicapped person who has had it drilled into him since childhood that "caring is not an advantage", go to protect an essentially deeply traumatized and slightly mentally imbalanced so-called 'best friend'?

[Shadow Dweller]

The problem with baby steps is, sometimes it is too little and sometimes it is too much. Moderation is best.

 

About 'caring is not an advantage', we did not know whether that is constantly the norm or Mycroft tried to warn Sherlock off from become too attached to Irene Adler because he know that she will use then discard Sherlock like a mere tool.

[Shadow Dweller]

The problem with baby steps is, sometimes it is too little and sometimes it is too much. Moderation is best.

 

About 'caring is not an advantage', we did not know whether that is constantly the norm or Mycroft tried to warn Sherlock off from become too attached to Irene Adler because he know that she will use then discard Sherlock like a mere tool.

[J.P.]

To me it seems bo be overall attitude of Mycroft. He is showing it also when Sherlock calls him during the wedding. Then there is Readbeard.

[sittything]

I've always assumed that the whole "caring is not an advantage"...  "sentiment is a chemical defect found on the losing side" thing is nothing new.  I don't know if Mycroft has used those exact words before, but I feel like this is something that Mycroft has drilled into Sherlock's head since childhood.

 

I wonder if some people view John as "kind, caring, cuddly, and normal" because of Martin Freeman.  I don't really know how Martin Freeman is in real life, but those are all attributes that I could see attached to him.  He just looks and comes across as a genuinely nice guy, and even when he's playing a messed up person like John Watson, I feel like it could be hard for him to shed that affect.  

 

 

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I've always assumed that the whole "caring is not an advantage"...  "sentiment is a chemical defect found on the losing side" thing is nothing new.  I don't know if Mycroft has used those exact words before, but I feel like this is something that Mycroft has drilled into Sherlock's head since childhood.

 

I can totally see that drilled in from at least the time of Redbeard (if not before over some other incident & then nailed in with Redbeard).  Mycroft being his annoying self trying to help his brother grieve (or not grieve as the case may be construed) over Redbeard having to be put down.

[sherlockandjohn]

This is all so interesting. Where to begin...

 

 

While understanding John's anger in TEH 100%, I also wanted him to eventually get to the point of acknowledging openly how happy he is to have Sherlock back. This doesn't quite happen - but, reading between the lines, it kind of does in the bomb-on-train scene. John says "I wanted you not to be dead." He's basically saying that Sherlock is horrible for having kept him in the dark, but when all is said and done he's just incredibly happy that Sherlock didn't die - and still really, understandably, angry that the man hadn't said anything back then!

 

There is a little line of Sherlock in that scene that might be overlooked, because John is raging all over the place. And it is also only one sentence that sound sincere among other words basically mocking John about his declaration: I DIDN'T KNOW YOU CARED. Which is true: Sherlock cannot read between the lines, and John never communicatd this clearly.

 

I wouldn't say that Sherlock's line "I never knew you cared" is necessarily overlooked... For my part, I just interpret it differently than you do, I think. Sherlock is having a laugh at John's expense, making fun of his emotional declaration. At first, this made me really angry with Sherlock - I felt he still owed John a heartfelt apology - but quite frankly it is kind of funny that John makes a big speech every time he expresses his feelings. Yeah, I think I can see it from Sherlock's perspective

 

Also, I reiterate, Sherlock has twice thrown his reputation and his good name away, not to mention his very life, to keep Dear John safe: what he gets in return is blank stares, angry put-downs and quite a bit of ingratitude. As relationships go, it is very, very one-sided (forget all tags and interpretations).

 

I think John has defended, protected and put up with quite a lot from Sherlock. He's not perfect, by any means, but he obviously loves his friend. I will say, though, that my opinion of John has changed... I used to see him as this incredibly forbearing and caring person, but I'm starting to see that some of that forbearance is a result of loving the life that Sherlock provides... and in return for that life, John accepts that he has to put up with certain things from the detective. Like being drugged for experimentation!

 

As the restaurant scene: Sherlock has no gall, he just doesn't think about such things. As he arrives in the room and see John he looses most of his temper though, but not enough to just turn around and wait for a better moment. The whole farce with the false waiter occurs IMO out of Sherlocks helplesness. He suddenly doesn't know what to do, and this must be quite confusing.

 

It is very chilidish behaviour, but I can somehow relate to Sherlocks lack of patience. He just want to surprise John whom he haven't seen for 2 years - John wanted Sherlock to stop being dead, so he should be happy about the return, shouldn't he?

 

I like that interpretation - haven't thought of the scene quite like that before. It makes sense, considering the moment of hesitation when Sherlock sees John.

 

Sherlock is also (more than) a little empathy impaired. He doesn't begin to understand John's grief, and it isn't logical, anyway - he's not really dead and he'll come back, and once he is back, the whole thing is really funny - isn't it ?! I'm not sure whether Sherlock ever fully understood how horrible his little stunt was. I think he finally accepted that what he did was a bit not good by general standards and that John was hurt, but I bet he still laughs about it in secret when nobody is watching and I have a sneaking suspicion that he's not really terribly sorry in his heart of hearts. Not because he's malicious, but because there are things he really honestly does not understand.

 

I'd say you were right about Sherlock having a private laugh about the whole thing... except he does, in TSoT, apologise again. Though I don't know if that's just to please John... Could be.

[J.P.]

 

I wouldn't say that Sherlock's line "I never knew you cared" is necessarily overlooked... For my part, I just interpret it differently than you do, I think. Sherlock is having a laugh at John's expense, making fun of his emotional declaration. At first, this made me really angry with Sherlock - I felt he still owed John a heartfelt apology - but quite frankly it is kind of funny that John makes a big speech every time he expresses his feelings. Yeah, I think I can see it from Sherlock's perspective

 

I needed a while to hear it properly, and notice that Sherlock's expression changes. Suddenly and just for a moment he looks sincere, almost begging. 

 

 

Watching the scene in slow motion is another little treat - observing John's face where anger and laughing show both at once. He cannot help a smile at the end.

[Inge l-w]

Dear J.P., that whole sequence was Sherlock's last-ditch attempt to be forgiven by putting them both in a life-threatening situation, since John in the bonfire was just coming out of his drugged state and could not quite register Sherlock's desperation in pulling it apart. Also, Mary's appeal to Sherlock makes sense if she is not English, as he tells her in HLV, so she may not know the location, while he has an A-Z of London "tucked away somewhere in there", exactly like his foreknowledge of the off-switch. But Mary is quite definitely throwing a spanner in the works by interposing her presence and very effectively driving a wedge between them by the end of the episode, when she plays hostess in 221B, and the desperate genius lets her, because she has shown that for him to get back into John's good books, he needs to go through her, his blind spot already in place.

[T.o.b.y]

Dear J.P., that whole sequence was Sherlock's last-ditch attempt to be forgiven by putting them both in a life-threatening situation, since John in the bonfire was just coming out of his drugged state and could not quite register Sherlock's desperation in pulling it apart. Also, Mary's appeal to Sherlock makes sense if she is not English, as he tells her in HLV, so she may not know the location, while he has an A-Z of London "tucked away somewhere in there", exactly like his foreknowledge of the off-switch. But Mary is quite definitely throwing a spanner in the works by interposing her presence and very effectively driving a wedge between them by the end of the episode, when she plays hostess in 221B, and the desperate genius lets her, because she has shown that for him to get back into John's good books, he needs to go through her, his blind spot already in place.

 

That's an interesting interpretation... Never thought about it that way. My impression always was that the writers took quite some trouble to establish Mary not as a divisive figure but a mediator. But as so often, what we are actually shown is ambiguous.

 

We never did see Mary talk John round, did we? All we were shown was how she teased him about the blog and shaving off the mustache. In the end, the boys worked some of their issues out on their own and just let the rest be, like men often do.

 

To be fair to Mary, how on earth would you manage a relationship with a man who has a best friend like Sherlock? She had to make him respect her, and fast, or he'd walk all over her and dismiss her like he did with John's previous girlfriends. I don't like how she interacts with Sherlock at all, but it works, and I can't imagine what else would.

 

[J.P.]

I don't even thing it was Sherlock who repelled John's girlfriends. I imagine it was hard for them to be the "second best" in his life. And probably John wasn't that serious about keeping the relationships. But I kind of feel sorry that Sarah didn't manage to stay. She was still around after the circus after all. She probably saved Sherlock's life. She even managed to impress him. :D

 

As for Mary - I liked her immediately. I liked how she managed to tame Sherlock. I don't know if her behavior was sincere or manipulative - in either way she is very good. 

[sfmpco]

[Inge l-w]

Dear J.P., Mary was made into a likeable person, but she has been unmasked as very manipulative, shrewd and ruthless. Unless Sherlock decides that he does not need any emotional ties and goes his lonely way, much as he left the party in SoT, she will find ways to keep them apart, her greatest weapon being the putative baby, because if she loses that hold on Dr Watson, I wouldn't put it past Mycroft to engineer her disappearance double-quick, seeing how she has affected his little brother's health (Mycroft must know who shot Sherlock), his sense of self-worth and his abilities as a cool reasoner. In which case, I and Zain would definitely feel relieved, always based on Dr Watson's "sad loss" remark in The Empty House, which, in Victorian and Edwardian times did not mean separation or divorce.

[T.o.b.y]

Dear J.P., Mary was made into a likeable person, but she has been unmasked as very manipulative, shrewd and ruthless. Unless Sherlock decides that he does not need any emotional ties and goes his lonely way, much as he left the party in SoT, she will find ways to keep them apart, her greatest weapon being the putative baby

 

Why would Mary want to keep the boys apart? Seriously, what would she gain from that? Emotional aspects aside, Sherlock is a huge asset. We know, or at least we know if we choose to believe Sherlock is right, that she is on the run from somebody or a group of somebodies, maybe even a whole organization. An ally like Sherlock is extremely valuable, especially since she's got a child on the way and a husband to worry about, now, too. All she needed to do was make sure he understood right away that she is not some interchangeable girlfriend of John's whose name he needn't bother memorizing and as soon as he got that, there was no reason to antagonize him.

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Y'all are WAY ahead of me!  Rather than go crazy trying to catch up, I'm going to comment on just a few things for now. My apologies if I'm covering things that have already been beat to death in the intervening pages, but I generally fixate on things that nobody else considers of major importance, so hopefully that'll also be the case here.
 

I have from the very beginning never understood why anybody thinks of John as either "kind", "caring", "cuddly" nor "normal". I think he's a pretty damaged individual and has some serious issues, above all with emotion and displays of emotion. No wonder all his relationships before Mary were failures.

But a] he's a man, and b] he's British -- oh, and c] he's a doctor, and d] he's a soldier. In which of those contexts would his role models have been paragons of emotional expression? Admittedly, he's reserved, but he's a good-hearted man -- and I repeat, man. Even the most emotionally-aware man will never be a woman.

Male characters written by women (e.g., Lord Peter Wimsey) can be marvelously in touch with their feelings and perceptive about the feelings of others, but those are men the way women wish they were, not the way they are. Sherlock and John (as we see them on television) are written by men, based on stories written by a man over a hundred years ago, when British men were really reserved!

I think that pretty well explains the Johnlock phenomenon, at least to my satisfaction. Women look at Sherlock and they look at John, and what's not to like? So they project their own reactions on the two characters.

 

And I kinda suspect that most of John's previous girlfriends left because they got tired of competing with Sherlock for his attention.  And I don't believe that John has a strong preference for spending time with Sherlock, all things being equal -- it's just that Sherlock is pretty high maintenance, and John has a strong sense of duty.
 

... what does John Watson MD do when he finds himself dealing with some very strong emotion? It seems to me from what we have seen of him before that when in doubt, he resorts to anger.

... as an army man who tends to rely on hierarchy and the stability it brings, when his commanding officer is out of his depths, that means the situation is really dire, and he becomes scared, and when John is actually scared or sad, it comes out as anger.

Again, that seems to me like a fairly typical male reaction. I don't know how it translates across the pond, but from what little I know about British men, that's not an unusual reaction.
 

John is incapable of forming deep bonds with nice, normal, wholesome people; he is, because of the way he is and the experiences he had made, drawn to a certain type of person whom he can connect with on some unholy level but who necessarily ends up hurting and betraying him because of that very darkness that made the connection possible.

 
That's one way of looking at the character. But I think it's equally valid to say that, due to John's natural personality and/or his medical and army training, he's far more capable than average of dealing with "dangerous" people. So while he's not necessarily drawn to them, neither does he shy away from them as most people would. Which leaves people like Sherlock with people like John for friends.
 

 SHERLOCK’S TERRIBLE SENSE OF SELF WORTH AND HOW MARY MAYBE EXPLOITS IT

Thanks for that link, J.P. I definitely agree with the first half of the title! Not sure about the second half, will have to think about that.
 

At the end when he begs for John’s forgiveness, he’s shocked when John calls him ‘The best and wisest man I have ever known’. Unfortunately, it’s a vague description for a man who needs specifics. ‘Best’ can mean anything, and ‘wise’ probably just refers to his intelligence.

Actually, it means that Moftiss have read Conan Doyle. ;)  ("Best and wisest" is a direct quote.)
 

... one of the worst scenes in show history: Sherlock telling John that of course he wanted an dangerous, clever psychopath for a wife, because isn’t that what he loves about his best friend? He never even gets to hear John say he’s angry with his wife for shooting Sherlock. All John ever explicitly mentions is her past and her lies. Ouch.

Well, of course John doesn't tell Sherlock that he thinks Mary's horrible for shooting Sherlock. He might have done so -- but Sherlock kept repeating that it was not a problem, that she had in fact saved his life. After a few objections, John probably gave up arguing. Besides, Sherlock was there; John wasn't.

But I agree about the idiocy of Sherlock's analysis of John's feelings for Mary, as well as the author's analysis of his assumptions.
 

... when Sherlock’s life is falling apart around him in TRF, John’s idea of comfort is to call him an ‘annoying dick’.

Frankly, I've always interpreted that as an understated expression of admiration and solidarity -- and I believe Sherlock interpreted it that way as well, considering how he stops accusing John of believing the stories and sort of glows at him.

But other than those bits, I mostly agree with you J.P.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Carol,

What a perceptive analysis!

Which brings me right back to square one: being male lets you be more aggressive but not show emotion. The 'best friend' manages to lose on both counts, his anger and simmering resentment against Sherlock SHOW feelings, and deep-seated at that, especially during their first encounter.

What he does not show is forgiveness and a sense of relief that after all his grief was pointless. Is that what he holds against Sherlock the most?

Being a man should not prevent the good doctor from realising the scale of his so-called best friend's sacrifice in order to protect his very few friends, whom he could probably count on the fingers of one hand. DI Lestrade is also in a hierarchy, also a man, but his first reaction to yet another snarky remark "You have been letting things slide", is right after the expletive, a bear hug, to which the emotional misfit does not even know how to respond, if you watch how Sherlock's hands remain practically at his sides, but there is a tiny smirk of satisfaction on his face, at least.

The entire S3 shows Sherlock's attempts to get back into Dr Watson's good graces as he keeps on explaining and apologising ( for being foolish enough to believe that friendship matters?), he even kicks his own parents out the moment Dr Watson makes his appearance, but the creators have chosen to show the good doctor as an egotistical, petty-minded, unforgiving, uninteresting little man, thus not only parodying the very core of the Holmes-Watson duality, but also (up to now) driving a divisive wedge between them in Mary ( a scheming, ruthless former agent) and the putative baby.

[T.o.b.y]

And I kinda suspect that most of John's previous girlfriends left because they got tired of competing with Sherlock for his attention.  And I don't believe that John has a strong preference for spending time with Sherlock, all things being equal -- it's just that Sherlock is pretty high maintenance, and John has a strong sense of duty.

 

:lol: You really think John puts up with Sherlock rather than finding himself a nice steady girlfriend and moving out in series 1 and 2 just because of duty? No way. He's a good man, agreed, but not that selfless. Part of the problem of course is Mycroft, who threatened / pressured John into staying with Sherlock on Christmas eve and search the flat for drugs instead if going out with whatsherface (see, even I forgot her name), and another part is that John can't even remember whether the woman has a dog or whether that was his last affair.

 

The sad (?) truth is, at least in my humble opinion, that sex aside there is nothing the women John used to go out with could offer him that beat being back on the battlefield with Sherlock. Mary is the first person to show up who is just as extraordinary, just as dangerous, unpredictable and mysterious as Sherlock, and she has the added advantage of being sexy and loving. Mary is perfect for John, not in spite but because of her past and her double identity and all that mess. She can offer both, domestic bliss and excitement. I think part of what bothers some fans about her and what makes the ending of series 3 believably sad is that with Mary around, Sherlock is rather superfluous as far as John is concerned.

 

It will be so interesting to see where they take the characters from here. We won't find out in the special, I bet, so it's at least another year's wait. *Sigh*...

 

What he does not show is forgiveness and a sense of relief that after all his grief was pointless.

 

I think that does come across a bit in The Sign of Three, though. Sherlock isn't a very ideal choice for a best man, but it's really important to John to officially recognize the fact that he is his best friend and to give him a defined place in his and Mary's life. You wouldn't take so much pains to show someone you haven't forgiven at all and are not happy to have around that you love them, would you?