John Watson

[Van Buren Supernova]

Humanity is definitely shadowy (hi SD), but using it to justify bad action sounds too much like... politians.. sugarcoat..and real frigging life ladden with hypocrisy.

 

Being human is complex, of course, not always rainbows and unicorns, we all have bad and dark sides, but to overcome it is the challenge to be a civilized member of society. Not by unleashing and failing to control it. It's never easy, and definitely not to be justified by saying it's okay because we are just human. There should be a limit to that.

 

Imho.

Most probably I don't get into the technicallity of the actual etymology. But just because reading that just made me feel so damn icky.

Humanity, bleh.

[Arcadia]

So here's why I liked it.

I don't see that she was making any effort to excuse John when he's a Bit Not Good (or Sherlock either).
 

But guess what? John and Sherlock both have done horrid, scary, and problematic things right from the start.

I think all she's doing is speculating on why Moftiss showed John descending to such depths. And I think her conclusion is that they wanted us to understand that John is only human too; like all humans, he has the potential to be wonderful; and like all humans, he can, and will, sometimes fail to live up to his potential.

There was a little bit of dialog in T6T that I think was extremely important ... when Mary says John doesn't make it easy for her to be who she is, because he's "so perfect". I think someone else has mentioned this, but I think that's one key to John's problem; he's bought into Mary's, and Sherlock's, (and by extension, the audience's) perception that he is supposed to be the "decent" one ... and he thinks he's not. I think guilt motivates him as much as anything else; guilt that he couldn't prevent The Fall; guilt that he is quick to anger; guilt that he's thinking of straying from his marriage. He knows he's anything but perfect, but he thinks the people he loves think he is -- or at least want him to be. So when he's not, he's letting them down, and that's the worst guilt. He probably even feels guilty about feeling guilty, because he must know that most of his guilt isn't even rational.
 
But it is very, very human. To be human is to be flawed. Hopefully, most humans strive to be the best part of themselves ... loving, kind, patient, smart, clever, selfless, etc. etc. But if someone were to actually achieve that all the time, would they even be human any more? Or would they become something else? (A saint, perhaps. ) To be human is also to fail at being our best selves. If it weren't, we wouldn't even be human. But another part of being human is to keep trying to be better than we are. To strive for perfection when you're not perfect; THAT is what's amazing and great and noble about humans. And I think that's what the blogger means when she says "John’s humanity is this: his violent streak, a certain kind of monstrosity." She's not saying we should embrace or even forgive his dark side; I think she's just saying that because it's there, it proves he's human. It proves he's not perfect, but he'd like to be; he strives for it, and that gives us a reason to admire him, and a reason to forgive him.
 

We forgive Sherlock for three reasons. One: John forgives him..... Two: [He's] a "sociopath" [and therefore can't help being like he is]. Three: he developed.
...
But why do we condemn John for the very same? ... because we don’t want to see it.
...
Just as Sherlock is capable of the softer, warmer emotions, John is capable of the more monstrous, terrible ones. We shouldn’t forget that. John is human too. We take Sherlock’s humanity in stride because that’s what we wanted, but we see John’s humanity as fallibility, as horrible and wrong.  It is horrible and wrong, just like Sherlock’s actions were, but it is still John. That’s the point of the show.

And I love that point, because it reminds me that my faith in humanity is not always misplaced. That just because humans are monstrous, they don't have to be monstrous. Like John, we can also work to be our better selves.

 

Ahhh, look at all the pretty hearts and flowers... :p

[Arcadia]

BTW, I haven't forgotten about proving John's apology (or lack thereof) but I have to go do big girl stuff right now.  I'd much rather stay here and play......

[Van Buren Supernova]

Hmm..maybe I don't explain myself clearly (and I'm not sure how).

Yah, humanity is flawed and all that, imperfect, obviously, therefore we makes mistakes. I do relate humanity, human nature maybe, to the imperfections; guilt, fear, anger, weakness etc etc, but NOT to the result of their actions especially negative ones. It turns into something else imo, and to call beating up your best friend to bloody pulp humanity, NO, in my eyes, but it's human that he feels grief and anger, NOT the result of what he does from that imperfections. That doesn't sit well with me at all.

To worse comparison, it makes me think of people harming others and then justify that it's for humanity.

 

I am not above it all, god no.

I just 'appreciate' it better when a horrible thing is done and admitted as horrible instead of justifying it as something that stands for something good as well.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I like that blog also.  Too bad it's on Tumblr (where I don't have an account), because otherwise I would have "Liked" it.  I think it makes some very good points.

 

Also, and yes, I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but since I seem to be the only person saying it, I shall repeat, because I think it's vital:  John is a doctor who knows how to sprain people (rather than break them).  I can't imagine that he aimed at any vital organs or anything fragile.  If he had actually meant to hurt Sherlock, there'd have been a ruptured spleen and/or several cracked ribs, minimum.  As it is, the next time we see Sherlock, he looks scarcely worse than he did just before the kicking.  So I think John was basically making a point (analogous to me slamming a door), rather than intending to seriously injure Sherlock.

[Arcadia]

Hmm..maybe I don't explain myself clearly (and I'm not sure how).

Yah, humanity is flawed and all that, imperfect, obviously, therefore we makes mistakes. I do relate humanity, human nature maybe, to the imperfections; guilt, fear, anger, weakness etc etc, but NOT to the result of their actions especially negative ones. It turns into something else imo, and to call beating up your best friend to bloody pulp humanity, NO, in my eyes, but it's human that he feels grief and anger, NOT the result of what he does from that imperfections. That doesn't sit well with me at all.

To worse comparison, it makes me think of people harming others and then justify that it's for humanity.

 

I am not above it all, god no.

I just 'appreciate' it better when a horrible thing is done and admitted as horrible instead of justifying it as something that stands for something good as well.

Yeah, I agree, but my point is ... she DOES say it is horrible, in that last bit I quoted. She even used that exact word. I don't think she's trying to excuse or justify John's behavior ... she's just analyzing why that scene is in the show.

 

When she says "John's humanity is ... his violent streak", I don't think she means the act of hurting Sherlock is his humanity; I think she's referring to the emotions driving the action. When he controls his violent streak, that's being more human(e); when he doesn't control it, that's being more animalistic. But the emotions that cause him to feel violent, that's part of humanity.

 

Or something. I think I'm confusing myself, now...

 

 

I like that blog also.  Too bad it's on Tumblr (where I don't have an account), because otherwise I would have "Liked" it.  I think it makes some very good points.

 

Also, and yes, I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but since I seem to be the only person saying it, I shall repeat, because I think it's vital:  John is a doctor who knows how to sprain people (rather than break them).  I can't imagine that he aimed at any vital organs or anything fragile.  If he had actually meant to hurt Sherlock, there'd have been a ruptured spleen and/or several cracked ribs, minimum.  As it is, the next time we see Sherlock, he looks scarcely worse than he did just before the kicking.  So I think John was basically making a point (analogous to me slamming a door), rather than intending to seriously injure Sherlock.

 

Good point. You're right, it does look familiar. ;)

[J.P.]

He can break every bone in your body while naming them.

Sherlock's subconscious have noticed that.

 

I also think that no one tries to excuse John.

 

The scene would work better with less violence, but the writers needed him in the hospital, and thought that maybe his system ruined by drugs wasn't enough. You see, John is not bad - he was just written this way. :P

[Van Buren Supernova]

Maybe big amount of hair gel does something to his behavior?

 

I remember I defended John to death back then when someone said he was violent. That was before Season 4.

 

Yes. Yes. It's the hair gel.

[Pseudonym]

I like that blog also.  Too bad it's on Tumblr (where I don't have an account), because otherwise I would have "Liked" it.  I think it makes some very good points.

 

Also, and yes, I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but since I seem to be the only person saying it, I shall repeat, because I think it's vital:  John is a doctor who knows how to sprain people (rather than break them).  I can't imagine that he aimed at any vital organs or anything fragile.  If he had actually meant to hurt Sherlock, there'd have been a ruptured spleen and/or several cracked ribs, minimum.  As it is, the next time we see Sherlock, he looks scarcely worse than he did just before the kicking.  So I think John was basically making a point (analogous to me slamming a door), rather than intending to seriously injure Sherlock.

 

I don't think he's thinking consciously enough to avoid injuring him. To me it looks like he loses it, that terrible red haze that descends and you have no idea what you are doing until you 'come-to.' I've had that happen to me before, and I once 'came-to' having pinned someone to a wall by their throat, it's pretty scary and when you get to that level of rage you aren't pulling your punches or carefully thinking about where to kick. Besides, kicking someone in their chest and stomach makes it pretty difficult to avoid getting anything important. We don't know what state Sherlock was in. But then this is the world where you can jump out of a first floor window from an explosion and not get a scratch so maybe it doesn't matter. ;)  

[Van Buren Supernova]

Agree. Had been angry, it's pretty scary actually because it's so difficult to control, felt blinded about what I was capable to do. I think it's very possible all logics and possible consequences are blurred at that moment.

[Arcadia]

I think I agree with both at once ... John was in a red rage, but at the same time, his (subconscious) motivation was to make Sherlock to feel pain, not to damage him. But I agree, in that state, his judgement about what would cause damage was pretty impaired.

 

In any case, I think everyone (except maybe Sherlock) realized it was not an Okay Thing to Do.

[Van Buren Supernova]

Another thing about John..

 

I am aware it's canon that we don't really know a lot about John Watson outside his connection with Sherlock.

We know a bit more from the series, but imo, it's not quite enough.

Sherlock and John have become inseparable entity and it's never complete without both. That is the reason I'm not looking at him as supporting character because he is actually essential. I'm also not looking for the whole story about John or wanting him to take over Sherlock, no, nope, maybe I just wish that there is a bit more of the backstory, just a bit, for John.

 

Most of the good story telling that I come to like have good back stories that shape characters the way they are, even the villains. Some are very deep, some are just enough, according to the relevance of the character's essence, and I love those.

 

I think there are a lot of things to be explored with John.

For instance, that his sister Harry is never in the picture of the things that are relevant in his life. Yah, she is a drunk, or was, not really sure (correct me if I'm wrong, please), beside a bit of snippet from her in the blog, she is practically non existent. But from that, she seems like she is interested in repairing relationship with John, and sounds sober, I don't think a drunk would pay a lot of attention to her estranged bother's blog, yah? Yet, John didn't have her around in wedding, Rosie or even mentioned her outside SIP. Does he still mad at her? But why is he so mad? He hates her drinking problem, but is there more to it? John seems to enjoy drinking in TSoT (or at least doesn't swear off it as something destructive that he would hate)

Unless there is an important back story, I just don't think he is that bitter and would hold grudges for so long (yah, it's tricky, I used to be confident that John is not that at all, now I have BIG DOUBT, but I'm going to look at the character as the writer's intended)

 

Army life, he doesn't seem to have any other friends, Mark Stamford is certainly not in his speed dial or relevant enough. He knows Sholto but no other army buddies, could something really bad happened eventhough it seems that he doesn't resent his military background (and it's very common that you gain good friend in those high-pressure situation). I thought he would at least appreciate the mate who pulled him from the war zone when he was wounded or those he has saved as army doctor would be in touch or something.

 

Sherlock mentioned that John had bigger share of guests in the wedding than Mary. Who are those people beside Sholto and a cousin. If they are attending his wedding in person, there is a good chance that they could be involved with Rosie (he needs all the help he could get anyway) but we only saw Molly. Molly is the godmother, yes, and as good as she is, she has her own life, obligation, not exactly the best role model with the nature of her work and people she is/was involved with.

 

He seems very alone, with Mary gone, he doesn't have anything outside Sherlock. And if his goodbye to Sherlock really materialize, what would happen? He would move to another place, taking Rosie with him, and rent a small apartment with gun in the drawer, then Sherlock becomes another Harry?

 

I would have believed that he would go all solitary (back to the jaded version of him in SIP when he thinks he had no purposes with physical limitations), if I didn't see the other John Watson's version when he happily flirting, dating, or organizing parties and dinners.

Or maybe he  could get normal life, away from London, raising Rosie and practicing medicals, gets to know normal neighbors (not Kate) and happily flirting, dating, organizing parties and dinners. Is he capable or is it what is good for him? Will he, 'miss' it and regain the tremor in his hand?

[Carol the Dabbler]

A few minor points:

 

John invited Harry to the wedding, but she didn't show up. (Mary asked about her at the reception, and that's what he said).

 

According to John's late lamented blog, he does have Army buddies that he socializes with. Maybe they account for some of those mysterious people at the wedding? He also sees Mike Stamford, according to both the blog and (at least one reference) on the show. Mike was invited to the wedding, but sent his regrets [because David Nellist was not available]. Bill Murray (who saved his life in Afghanistan) has, according to the blog, moved to New Zealand. And John's friends in general were mentioned in Many Happy Returns.

 

In short, I think John is supposed to have a pretty good social life (including girlfriends), but it's generally just not relevant in most episodes.

[Pseudonym]

Since you mentioned Many Happy Returns, I wonder why Sherlock thinks all John's friends hate him?

[J.P.]

For the same reason John't girlfriends hate him :P

[Pseudonym]

John's girlfriends hate him because Sherlock gets in their way, but I can't see Sherlock going along to any of John's 'pint with mates' nights. Plus they are less likely to be bothered if he's suddenly busy or called away. 

 

Do you think Sherlock would have been happier in the long run if he had never met John? I get the impression whilst it was possible he was a bit lonely he was getting along just fine, was perfectly happy living alone and doing his experiments etc in peace. Moriarty probably would have found him a lot harder to manipulate if John wasn't there to threaten, and it hardly seems like John was bought him any happiness in season 3 and 4. I suppose it is possible that Moriarty could have strapped the pool bomb onto Mrs H instead... as for the roof scene, I think he would have still done everything he could to save Lestrade and Mrs H from the snipers, but I think he would have been a lot cooler and more calculated about it. In the first episode you can see how surprised and happy he is that someone finds him amazing rather than freakish, but then if he had never had that he wouldn't know to miss it. John hardly expresses his amazement in the later seasons, he seems irritated by Sherlock knowing everything rather than happy, and then, conversely, peed off if he does miss something (make your mind up John!). 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Since you mentioned Many Happy Returns, I wonder why Sherlock thinks all John's friends hate him?

I take that to be basically a joke on Sherlock. He sees John's friends acting uncomfortable and correctly deduces that there's someone present that they don't like. But he assumes that it's John -- never stopping to think that he's there too. (You'd think he'd at least see the contradiction inherent in saying that John's friends hate John.)

[Pseudonym]

Lol, aw, poor universally hated Sherlock. 

[J.P.]

Do you think Sherlock would have been happier in the long run if he had never met John?

Well, he would avoid a lot of trouble, that's sure. :D

 

[Pseudonym]

Episode one: John walks into the lab, Sherlock glances at him, gets a flash of the future and recoils in horror. 

 

Since John takes Sherlock's personality so well how do you think he would go about putting him off?

[Arcadia]

Try to hit on him. ;)

[Pseudonym]

"I know you're an army doctor... and I love a man in uniform."

 

[Boton]

Also, and yes, I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but since I seem to be the only person saying it, I shall repeat, because I think it's vital:  John is a doctor who knows how to sprain people (rather than break them).  I can't imagine that he aimed at any vital organs or anything fragile.  If he had actually meant to hurt Sherlock, there'd have been a ruptured spleen and/or several cracked ribs, minimum.  As it is, the next time we see Sherlock, he looks scarcely worse than he did just before the kicking.  So I think John was basically making a point (analogous to me slamming a door), rather than intending to seriously injure Sherlock.

 

That's a really great point, Carol.  I don't know if it fits with my head canon, but I'd rather say that John is a master of strategic wounding and bruising than I would that he is that violent.

 

I think I agree with both at once ... John was in a red rage, but at the same time, his (subconscious) motivation was to make Sherlock to feel pain, not to damage him. But I agree, in that state, his judgement about what would cause damage was pretty impaired.

 

In any case, I think everyone (except maybe Sherlock) realized it was not an Okay Thing to Do.

 

I think Sherlock thought it was an OK Thing to Do because he still thought his life had no value, so he deserved to be beaten and even to die (from drug overuse, most probably) in the service of saving John.  That's the mission Mary gave him, and that's what would give value to the life that Mary saved.

[Boton]

"I know you're an army doctor... and I love a man in uniform."

 

 

 

And John runs screaming into the distance....

 

 

And a million "fix-it" fan fics are born.

[J.P.]

John headbutts Sherlock and yells "I'm not gay!", kicks some chairs and runs out cursing Stamford and his Coupling attempt. End of series.