John Watson

[Boton]

I don't think it matters much for the narrative how much was planned in advance, it can still hold together in universe.

 

I suppose as long as Moftiss put more thought into their continuity than ACD did, they are fine.  :lol:  :P

[Shadow Dweller]

But that doesn't explain, to me at least, why Sherlock was the poor sod who took the brunt of it.

He is conveniently there, although I don't say that it is right to use innocent bystander as your emotional punching bag.

[Boton]

"You always hurt the ones you love." It's kind of part of being someone's closest emotional support - you take the "abuse" along with the benefits.

 

[Pseudonym]

What benefits does Sherlock get though? A distant friendship? When John finds Sherlock in the crack house isn't it mentioned that they haven't spoken for a while?

[Boton]

Now that we're at the end of S4, which is either the end of the show or the end of a very robust prologue, I would say that what Sherlock gets from the relationship evolves over time. However, generally speaking, what he gets is a friend. In SiP, he said he didn't have friends - Mycroft was the closest thing, and he was classified as an archenemy.  John steps in and is willing to put up with an awful lot of Sherlock quirks, and that means a lot.

 

As far as the month-long separation before the smack house, I don't worry about that too much.  John had just gotten married and moved house; friendships go through periods of greater and lesser contact.  

[Pseudonym]

But it's hardly the type of close friendship that most people would be willing to accept abuse for. Seems like a very inequal relationship in that regard. Pre-fall I can imagine they were closer and Sherlock got a lot of out it, and post TFP it may (eventually) be closer than ever, but between it's a bit like hanging onto a friendship that's drifting and not all that close. 

 

Ah I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of the whole beating thing again, and I don't think I'm ever going to get to a point where I think it's okay. The idea of lingering resentment makes it a bit more understandable, which is why I would have preferred them highlight that if it were meant to be an issue, but I'm never going to think any friendship is worth that kind of cost. 

[Boton]

 

Ah I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of the whole beating thing again, and I don't think I'm ever going to get to a point where I think it's okay. The idea of lingering resentment makes it a bit more understandable, which is why I would have preferred them highlight that if it were meant to be an issue, but I'm never going to think any friendship is worth that kind of cost. 

 

Nah, I get you.  I am never going to think that any fantastic potential flatmate is worth shooting a suspect serial suicide-encourager over either, so I will always think John was being reckless and mean there as well.  I'm willing to stipulate that neither of them are entirely psychologically stable; maybe this keeps them together.   ;)

[Shadow Dweller]

We see things through the lens of our own perspectives and the results get filtered (and maybe reshaped) through our way of thinking. Some people prefers to deal with emotions by analyzing like how they deal with problems (internal processing), some prefers to inflict them on the environment. Everyone have their own limits of dealing with in the moment and whatever method they choose to do it always bears consequences (to pay) later.

[Arcadia]

In situations like this, I always think of my father's dictum (and I probably am paraphrasing a little bit); just because you understand something doesn't mean you have to believe in it. For me, this is one of those cases ... I understand (I think) why John blamed Sherlock, and I understand (I think) the point of that scene in the narrative. It was the biggest betrayal John has made of their friendship ... and they survived it. In those terms, don't think it's relevant (in terms of the narrative) whether he was angry with Sherlock before this episode or not. Moffat wanted to make a point about their relationship -- it can endure anything -- and this is how he chose to make it.
 
Understanding that, though, doesn't mean I find it acceptable, nor do I think we're meant to. I think we're meant to see that John is a more deeply flawed man than we previously were witness to. And narratively speaking, I do find that acceptable; but only because I assume we are seeing his lowest point, and the rest of his story will be about his climb out of the abyss. Which it has been, so far. All one episode of it.
 
But I agree I would prefer it if all the episodes seemed to lead naturally from one to the next, without this sense of blatant retconning that now seems to hang over the whole thing. The only thing I can think of is that I tend to view the series as a narrative whole, whereas Moftiss tends to view it as a series of loosely related films. The overall arc isn't as important to them as it is to me; it's more like they're taking established characters and playing around with them to see what they can make them do without breaking them. We could argue all week about whether they've avoided breaking them or not, but I'm wondering if I shouldn't shift my expectations slightly as far as continuity goes.
 
The problem is, I'm used to programs like Star Trek and Buffy, and books like LOTR, where internal consistency is the rule rather than the exception. I seem to remember that Star Trek even had a person who was in charge of continuity. So I'm a bit spoiled in that regard. But it occurs to me that may not be the norm any more (if it ever was. The original Battlestar Galactica, e.g., could have cared less about continuity.) Tbh, I watch so little TV now, I'm not even sure what it's like anymore. From the outside looking in, it appears to me to be mostly about smut and graphic violence, these days. :( Story comes second. Or third. Somewhere down there.

[Pseudonym]

IMHO, since modern fans are more likely to go online, form huge communities and spend their time debating whether things make sense or not I think creators, especially fanboy type creators like Moftiss, should be spending more time on continuity rather than less. But, you know, if wishes were fishes. 

 

I also think about folks who are not fans, just casual viewers, turning in and going, 'is that famously loyal and stalwart Doctor Watson beating up Holmes? WTF?'

[T.o.b.y]

But it's hardly the type of close friendship that most people would be willing to accept abuse for. Seems like a very inequal relationship in that regard. Pre-fall I can imagine they were closer and Sherlock got a lot of out it, and post TFP it may (eventually) be closer than ever, but between it's a bit like hanging onto a friendship that's drifting and not all that close.

 

Ah I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of the whole beating thing again, and I don't think I'm ever going to get to a point where I think it's okay. The idea of lingering resentment makes it a bit more understandable, which is why I would have preferred them highlight that if it were meant to be an issue, but I'm never going to think any friendship is worth that kind of cost.

I read an interview with Martin Freeman somewhere, and I wish I could still find it, where he talked about John in S4 and it sounded as if there was a lot of lingering resentment at the bottom of his behavior. He said something like deep down inside John knows perfectly well Mary's death isn't really Sherlock's fault but the event acts as a kind of catalyst for all the anger and hurt he has felt as a result of Sherlock's behavior and treatment ever since they met to boil up into this big toxic stew.

[Arcadia]

IMHO, since modern fans are more likely to go online, form huge communities and spend their time debating whether things make sense or not I think creators, especially fanboy type creators like Moftiss, should be spending more time on continuity rather than less. But, you know, if wishes were fishes.

Oh, I quite agree that's what I would prefer. And for all I know that's what they think they're doing, but they're not very good at it. ;) Or I'm just too picky. And really, it's not as screwed up as some shows I've seen. 

 

I also think about folks who are not fans, just casual viewers, turning in and going, 'is that famously loyal and stalwart Doctor Watson beating up Holmes? WTF?'

 

Not if they watched the previous episode, no, I wouldn't think so. In spite of my complaints about continuity, it's not like John's reaction wasn't signaled at the end of T6T. Or in TEH. Or ASiB. I just never expected John's temper tantrums to be taken seriously, I always thought it would be a joke. Sure makes me look at those other scenes in a different light now too, which I think is kind of neat ... here I was laughing about it (and still do) and wow, look what it led to. I like twists like that, as long as they make sense.

 

 

But it's hardly the type of close friendship that most people would be willing to accept abuse for. Seems like a very inequal relationship in that regard. Pre-fall I can imagine they were closer and Sherlock got a lot of out it, and post TFP it may (eventually) be closer than ever, but between it's a bit like hanging onto a friendship that's drifting and not all that close.

 

Ah I dunno, I'm just trying to make sense of the whole beating thing again, and I don't think I'm ever going to get to a point where I think it's okay. The idea of lingering resentment makes it a bit more understandable, which is why I would have preferred them highlight that if it were meant to be an issue, but I'm never going to think any friendship is worth that kind of cost.

I read an interview with Martin Freeman somewhere, and I wish I could still find it, where he talked about John in S4 and it sounded as if there was a lot of lingering resentment at the bottom of his behavior. He said something like deep down inside John knows perfectly well Mary's death isn't really Sherlock's fault but the event acts as a kind of catalyst for all the anger and hurt he has felt as a result of Sherlock's behavior and treatment ever since they met to boil up into this big toxic stew.

 

 

Was it this one, Toby? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/podcasts/sherlock-martin-freeman-on-john-and-sherlocks-complicated-relationship/?utm_source=tumblr&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=sherlock_2017

 

There's both an audio and a transcript. Martin says this:

Martin: Oh, because I blame him for the death of my wife. And so, I think all the stuff that I felt about Sherlock anyway as John is being given voice and is being given full rein.

Because, you know, Sherlock has always pissed John off. Always. As well as loving him, he also wants to slap him quite a lot of the time, and I think this is John’s way of giving vent to that.

He’s allowing the loss of his wife to give him license to go, “Yeah, and it’s your fault, you f***er. It was you. You said you would look after her and you didn’t.” And of course, like most of those things, it’s misplaced because what John’s really thinking is, “I couldn’t look after her. I didn’t stop her from dying, but rather than dealing with that, I’m going to blame you.”

[Boton]

 

 

There's both an audio and a transcript. Martin says this:

Martin: Oh, because I blame him for the death of my wife. And so, I think all the stuff that I felt about Sherlock anyway as John is being given voice and is being given full rein.

Because, you know, Sherlock has always pissed John off. Always. As well as loving him, he also wants to slap him quite a lot of the time, and I think this is John’s way of giving vent to that.

He’s allowing the loss of his wife to give him license to go, “Yeah, and it’s your fault, you f***er. It was you. You said you would look after her and you didn’t.” And of course, like most of those things, it’s misplaced because what John’s really thinking is, “I couldn’t look after her. I didn’t stop her from dying, but rather than dealing with that, I’m going to blame you.”

 

 

I think that's a very logical explanation and a very understandable and human reaction from John.  In some ways, Sherlock has been there for every event (that we know about) that has changed the Watsons' marriage, in an escalating spiral of madness.  He announced Mary's pregnancy, he revealed Mary was an intelligence agent who killed people in the line of work, and then he was the beneficiary of Mary's gesture to save him. John didn't get a say in any of those things, plus he blamed himself for inaction and for an emotional affair, and it was easier to take that out on Sherlock than himself.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I think it's the "John didn't get a say in any of that" that bugs me most about both S3 and S4.

 

[Boton]

Maybe that's where the emotional affair came from? I don't condone it, and it is one of the elements of S4 that bothers me, but I could see how a feeling of loss of control would lead someone to take control anywhere and any way they could.

[T.o.b.y]

I think John being under the strain of being a new father is enough. Don't condone it either but lots of men have affairs at that time in their lives and many marriages fall apart (never have a kid to save your marriage). In John's case, add the difficult relationships with both Mary and Sherlock and it's really no wonder he was longing for a little carefree flirting and smooching, maybe more.

 

He's such an upright, conscientious man to be beating himself so much over the head for it all. Most people wouldn't bat an eyelash, especially since it never went anywhere. Yes, it wasn't nice, it wasn't right and I wouldn't like it if my husband did it but it's understandable in his situation.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Exactly.

 

I think an awful lot of people hold fictional character to a far higher standard than they use in real life. That made sense back when fiction was more idealized, but nowadays it's more realistic, so a more realistic standard would be appropriate.

[Boton]

At least John seemed to understand the actual problem with his emotional affair.  The problem was that his wife was getting up in the middle of the night to feed the baby, and John was texting some random that he met on the bus.  

 

I know lots of men stray in some way after the birth of a child, but in this case, I have to say I'm holding John to a lower standard than I would my husband.  I'm at least making an effort to understand John's motives; if Mr. Boton ever did such a thing, he would, at minimum, be sleeping in the driveway until the winter came.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Only *until* winter? Seems like you'd be missing the best opportunity to make your point.

[Boton]

Only *until* winter? Seems like you'd be missing the best opportunity to make your point.

 

I'm not an animal; I'd give him the car keys back when winter hit so that he could at least sleep in the truck cab. (I, of course, would remove the battery so he couldn't *leave* or anything.)  :P

[Pseudonym]

Question - if John met Sherlock later on, once he's got his life back on track, was working regularly as a doctor, perhaps had a steady girlfriend, would he have also told Sherlock to piss off? Is it only because they meet when John's life is so empty and grey that John is quite so fascinated and enamoured by him?

[Boton]

Question - if John met Sherlock later on, once he's got his life back on track, was working regularly as a doctor, perhaps had a steady girlfriend, would he have also told Sherlock to piss off? Is it only because they meet when John's life is so empty and grey that John is quite so fascinated and enamoured by him?

 

Great question, Pseud!

 

I think we are meant to understand from SiP that John gets "very loyal, very quickly" because of his rocky transition out of the military.

 

On the other hand, I would like to think that those two are meant to be together on some cosmic level, and no matter what, they would wind up as friends.  So I would like to think that they would have wound up friends. 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Maybe not like in Pink, but one way or another, yeah.

[Pseudonym]

I hope they would still be friends. I don't know though. Holmes and Watson should of course always be destined to be great friends, but I'm not really sure if that's true with this version of Watson. I've read some great stories where they meet in different ways, but they seem to have a more forgiving John.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Holmes and Watson should of course always be destined to be great friends, but I'm not really sure if that's true with this version of Watson. I've read some great stories where they meet in different ways, but they seem to have a more forgiving John.

 

I think "our" John is in general very forgiving -- he's still friends with Sherlock! -- but as we've seen in S3 and S4, he does have his limits.  Doesn't everybody?

 

It irks me when some people (not you) go on and on about what a jerk John is, simply because he isn't totally OK with everything that Sherlock dishes out.  Admitted, Sherlock usually has perfectly good reasons for what he does, but that doesn't necessarily make it any easier to take.  And true, John isn't always fair.  But it's my impression that these people think John should put up with literally anything Sherlock chooses to do, simply because Sherlock is the great Sherlock Holmes.  To which I say, phooey!