John Watson

[Arcadia]

Myc Bond. Sounds like a brand of adhesive. :P

 

We actually don't know if the brothers never have taken a chance.

 
Ok, fair enough ... technically we don't know. (But it's implied....) So let me rephrase my statement: IF the Holmes brothers have never taken the chance of sharing themselves with someone, they have no way of knowing whether being detached is actually "better." They're just guessing, like everyone else.

[Pseudonym]

He's one of those people who seems cold and uncaring but you show him a bit of affection and he's glued to you.  :D

[Arcadia]

Oh, for ..... 

[Pseudonym]

It's true. 

[Boton]

Now I keep picturing Mycroft in that old superglue commercial where the guy superglues his hard hat to an I-beam....

[J.P.]

He's one of those people who seems cold and uncaring but you show him a bit of affection and he's glued to you.  :D

Dang! don't give me ideas!

[Van Buren Supernova]

Ok, fair enough ... technically we don't know. (But it's implied....) So let me rephrase my statement: IF the Holmes brothers have never taken the chance of sharing themselves with someone, they have no way of knowing whether being detached is actually "better." They're just guessing, like everyone else.

Well, wise man says it's okay because you don't know what you are missing, therefore you won't be affected by it.

 

I think they have educated guesses, and solid ones because they only need to look around and see all the miseries, foolishness and illogical things people so in the name of 'sharing themselves with someone'. It's not even rare. In fact, I believe Sherlock knows a lot of it from the way he reads his clients. Mr. Windibank, oscillated client on pavement, revenge murder, adultery related crimes. They know and they choose (or try) not to get involved because they think it's not worth it.

 

That reminds me that almost every friend I know had tried to smoke before. Even when they don't make it as a habit, they want to try just out of curiosity, even a puff or two. Beside being a very curious person, I don't have a single desire to do so, why would I? I know the facts, there are enough information out there and it's not something I can't live without. Nevermind the euphoria, possible advantage in social professional situation etc. I think it's just they don't care for the negative risks.

 

What makes me roll my eyes on that scene is because I regard John higher than just average 'friend' who disturb you with those kind of questions, after so called knowing you for so long yet thinks they have better idea about what your life should be. It's like every friend I avoid, every annoying cousin, uncle and auntie I avoid in family gathering. Seriously.  

 

Now I keep picturing Mycroft in that old superglue commercial where the guy superglues his hard hat to an I-beam....

There is a commercial like that??? XD I'd love to see that. At least it'd make me feel less stupid that I glued my hands and..uhm..teeth together.. those are nasty glue!

[Arcadia]

 

Ok, fair enough ... technically we don't know. (But it's implied....) So let me rephrase my statement: IF the Holmes brothers have never taken the chance of sharing themselves with someone, they have no way of knowing whether being detached is actually "better." They're just guessing, like everyone else.

Well, wise man says it's okay because you don't know what you are missing, therefore you won't be affected by it.

 

I think they have educated guesses, and solid ones because they only need to look around and see all the miseries, foolishness and illogical things people so in the name of 'sharing themselves with someone'. It's not even rare. In fact, I believe Sherlock knows a lot of it from the way he reads his clients. Mr. Windibank, oscillated client on pavement, revenge murder, adultery related crimes. They know and they choose (or try) not to get involved because they think it's not worth it.

 

That reminds me that almost every friend I know had tried to smoke before. Even when they don't make it as a habit, they want to try just out of curiosity, even a puff or two. Beside being a very curious person, I don't have a single desire to do so, why would I? I know the facts, there are enough information out there and it's not something I can't live without. Nevermind the euphoria, possible advantage in social professional situation etc. I think it's just they don't care for the negative risks.

 

What makes me roll my eyes on that scene is because I regard John higher than just average 'friend' who disturb you with those kind of questions, after so called knowing you for so long yet thinks they have better idea about what your life should be. It's like every friend I avoid, every annoying cousin, uncle and auntie I avoid in family gathering. Seriously.

 

I like the first line. Very Zen. :smile:

 

I don't know, I feel the need to defend John here, possibly because no one else does :( but also because I simply love the passion with which he delivers his little speech. He's in so much pain, drowning in guilt, yet still believing he was better off having had Mary in his life. And he's tired of seeing his friend alone and b*llsh*tt*ng about something he knows nothing about. (I would contend that observing other people's relationships and being in one yourself are not the same thing.)

 

Does that make John "right"? Can't say. Is Sherlock "right?" Same. It doesn't matter, though, because this scene is not about Sherlock for a change, but about John, and what he's feeling. I love it, I think it's one of Martin's best performances. So I get all protective.

 

 

Now I keep picturing Mycroft in that old superglue commercial where the guy superglues his hard hat to an I-beam....

There is a commercial like that??? XD I'd love to see that. At least it'd make me feel less stupid that I glued my hands and..uhm..teeth together.. those are nasty glue!

 

Yeah, but the guy in the hard hat does it on purpose.

[J.P.]

VBS, I suspect the instincts are to blame. The sexual drive is AFAIK listed as 3. most important human need, after momentary security and food. I've seen women who were raped and still wanted to have sexual partners (whom they feared).

 

And then there is the herd instinct, we as species are hardwired for it, because for thousands and thousands of generations being alone meant a certain death.

 

And, apparently normal people are willing to give up a lot for them, as the instincts are always stronger then logic. We must be defective!

 

I never ever thought about trying to smoke. Maybe because nobody wanted me to do so. And if they did, I wouldn't care.
And in my whole life I have witnessed only one couple that made me think a marriage (or any long term relationship) can be worth all the effort.

 

What in the end makes me wonder why the heck Holmes brothers were led to their smoking habits. I can imagine some scenarios for Sherlock (like p***ing off his bro) (and it's in the canon), but Myc?

 

But we are in the wrong place again. Poor John.

[Pseudonym]

 

Does that make John "right"? Can't say. Is Sherlock "right?" Same. It doesn't matter, though, because this scene is not about Sherlock for a change, but about John, and what he's feeling. I love it, I think it's one of Martin's best performances. So I get all protective.

 

Where as I think John is not the one who needs protecting here. Most of this episode was about 'saving' John - it's about time he was actually pleasant to the man he beat the shit out of. But I think you said before this is one of you're favourite episodes? Where as I have so many problems with it I doubt I'll ever watch it again. 

[gerry]

What about all the previous times before Sherlock contributed to Mary’s death where John has been loyal to Sherlock or Sherlock’s be unpleasant to well, everyone? Sherlock’s no angel. I thought it was about time that Sherlock did the supportive friend role myself.

[Arcadia]

 

What in the end makes me wonder why the heck Holmes brothers were led to their smoking habits. I can imagine some scenarios for Sherlock (like p***ing off his bro) (and it's in the canon), but Myc?

 

 

I don't smoke (and have never wanted to) either, but don't smokers claim it relieves stress?

 

 

 

Does that make John "right"? Can't say. Is Sherlock "right?" Same. It doesn't matter, though, because this scene is not about Sherlock for a change, but about John, and what he's feeling. I love it, I think it's one of Martin's best performances. So I get all protective.

 

Where as I think John is not the one who needs protecting here. Most of this episode was about 'saving' John - it's about time he was actually pleasant to the man he beat the shit out of. But I think you said before this is one of you're favourite episodes? Where as I have so many problems with it I doubt I'll ever watch it again. 

 

 

Yeah, and one of my other favorites, HLV, has scenes I really hate too. I'm weird. :p

[Pseudonym]

No he isn't, but he also doesn't beat up people he professes to care about. If this final scene wasn't in the same episode as the morgue scene it wouldn't bother me so much, it's just having it with that I think god, enough already. 

[Van Buren Supernova]

 

There is a commercial like that??? XD I'd love to see that. At least it'd make me feel less stupid that I glued my hands and..uhm..teeth together.. those are nasty glue!

Yeah, but the guy in the hard hat does it on purpose.

 

Wait... I detect something here...I think you are indicating something about me here... hold on...

what could it be.. what could it be.. I give up. I'm no Sherlock Holmes. Busy gluing stuffs and body parts. Brb.

 

 

VBS, I suspect the instincts are to blame. The sexual drive is AFAIK listed as 3. most important human need, after momentary security and food. I've seen women who were raped and still wanted to have sexual partners (whom they feared).

 

And then there is the herd instinct, we as species are hardwired for it, because for thousands and thousands of generations being alone meant a certain death.

 

And, apparently normal people are willing to give up a lot for them, as the instincts are always stronger then logic. We must be defective!

 

I never ever thought about trying to smoke. Maybe because nobody wanted me to do so. And if they did, I wouldn't care.

And in my whole life I have witnessed only one couple that made me think a marriage (or any long term relationship) can be worth all the effort.

I can testify that happy marriages exist, but doesn't mean it's the way to go for everyone.

I guess I'm just annoyed that John seems to know Sherlock less and less after HLV-TLD. And no, I don't imply that John should 'cater' for Sherlock's quirkiness, but understand it because as, possibly his only friend, patronizing is the last thing Sherlock needs.

John was the person who could look through his abrasive behavior, compared to other's piss-off. He seems to understand Sherlock more than others, starting from wanting to share a flat with him, protecting each other. Fun times. 

 

 

I don't know, I feel the need to defend John here, possibly because no one else does :(  but also because I simply love the passion with which he delivers his little speech. He's in so much pain, drowning in guilt, yet still believing he was better off having had Mary in his life. And he's tired of seeing his friend alone and b*llsh*tt*ng about something he knows nothing about. (I would contend that observing other people's relationships and being in one yourself are not the same thing.)

But that's not what I get though from the scene. I would probably looking at it the other way around that John also BS-ing something he doesn't understand enough, but while Sherlock is defensive, at least in that scene, John is ...judgemental, imo.

Well, I think, John probably reflects his suggestion to himself, something about treasuring something you have before it's too late.

Because it's clear enough that he didn't and regrets it. One way to look at it, is to feel bad for him because it must be horrible, having that kind of regrets that you have to bear all your life, which I suppose more on your stance. The other way is to look at it, he is using it as a way to patronize other, whether he means it or not (it could very well be just an outlet, but I still don't condone this kind of outlet because it is very personal) and saying something like ..that would complete you as a human being.

What? I think I'd take offense of anyone who think they know what kind of human being I aspire to be that cater to his standard.

 

 

P.S. To add, he knows, and he saw, although not everything, about how Irene messed up Sherlock back then.

He even mentioned dangerous, lunatic etc yet still pushing the idea. Anddddd... that reminds me of those annoying advice to others I mentioned earlier.. don't be picky..time's up... So apparently it's better to grab anything than being alone.

[Pseudonym]

'Judgemental.' Yup, that's what I see too.  

 

It starts off about John, then veers off into a few digs at Sherlock, who, to his credit, doesn't rise to it, and then goes back to John. 

[Arcadia]

 

 

There is a commercial like that??? XD I'd love to see that. At least it'd make me feel less stupid that I glued my hands and..uhm..teeth together.. those are nasty glue!

Yeah, but the guy in the hard hat does it on purpose.

 

Wait... I detect something here...I think you are indicating something about me here... hold on...

what could it be.. what could it be.. I give up. I'm no Sherlock Holmes. Busy gluing stuffs and body parts. Brb.

 

:whistle:

 

 

 

VBS, I suspect the instincts are to blame. The sexual drive is AFAIK listed as 3. most important human need, after momentary security and food. I've seen women who were raped and still wanted to have sexual partners (whom they feared).

 

And then there is the herd instinct, we as species are hardwired for it, because for thousands and thousands of generations being alone meant a certain death.

 

And, apparently normal people are willing to give up a lot for them, as the instincts are always stronger then logic. We must be defective!

 

I never ever thought about trying to smoke. Maybe because nobody wanted me to do so. And if they did, I wouldn't care.

And in my whole life I have witnessed only one couple that made me think a marriage (or any long term relationship) can be worth all the effort.

I can testify that happy marriages exist, but doesn't mean it's the way to go for everyone.

I guess I'm just annoyed that John seems to know Sherlock less and less after HLV-TLD. And no, I don't imply that John should 'cater' for Sherlock's quirkiness, but understand it because as, possibly his only friend, patronizing is the last thing Sherlock needs.

John was the person who could look through his abrasive behavior, compared to other's piss-off. He seems to understand Sherlock more than others, starting from wanting to share a flat with him, protecting each other. Fun times.

 

Okay, just to play devil's advocate here, not that I necessarily believe it ... is it possible that John knows Sherlock better than we do? He says what he does because he sees right through Sherlock?

 

........

 

........

 

Okay, given that this is John we're talking about here, I admit it's a long shot .... 

 

 

I don't know, I feel the need to defend John here, possibly because no one else does :(  but also because I simply love the passion with which he delivers his little speech. He's in so much pain, drowning in guilt, yet still believing he was better off having had Mary in his life. And he's tired of seeing his friend alone and b*llsh*tt*ng about something he knows nothing about. (I would contend that observing other people's relationships and being in one yourself are not the same thing.)

But that's not what I get though from the scene. I would probably looking at it the other way around that John also BS-ing something he doesn't understand enough, but while Sherlock is defensive, at least in that scene, John is ...judgemental, imo.

Well, I think, John probably reflects his suggestion to himself, something about treasuring something you have before it's too late.

Because it's clear enough that he didn't and regrets it. One way to look at it, is to feel bad for him because it must be horrible, having that kind of regrets that you have to bear all your life, which I suppose more on your stance. The other way is to look at it, he is using it as a way to patronize other, whether he means it or not (it could very well be just an outlet, but I still don't condone this kind of outlet because it is very personal) and saying something like ..that would complete you as a human being.

What? I think I'd take offense of anyone who think they know what kind of human being I aspire to be that cater to his standard.

 

 

P.S. To add, he knows, and he saw, although not everything, about how Irene messed up Sherlock back then.

He even mentioned dangerous, lunatic etc yet still pushing the idea. Anddddd... that reminds me of those annoying advice to others I mentioned earlier.. don't be picky..time's up... So apparently it's better to grab anything than being alone.

 

Okay, I see all that. I guess I'm just coming at it from a different direction ... which is that John thinks that Sherlock really wants Irene, but won't let himself go to her. And he's just telling Sherlock to get out of his own way, and go already. But I suspect I think that because Moffat seems hung up on her being "the" woman, in the sense that she's the only person Sherlock Holmes is interested in romantically. Personally, I think if he wanted someone that way, he could do a lot better. But if I look at the author's intent (and I'm the one who thinks that is super important, remember? :P) I think John's statement is meant to be exasperation that Sherlock won't just let himself have what he wants.

 

But if you believe Sherlock truly doesn't want anyone at all (I don't) then I can see how John's advice is misguided. But I think John knows what he's talking about, at least in the context of the show; Sherlock yearns for connections with people, whether he wants to or not. He thinks he shouldn't, but he does anyway. That's how I've seen him from the start. But I agree that having meaningless, random sex with a crazy dominatrix is probably not the kind of connection he's looking for. Which, if you look at it a certain way, could be what John was advising. I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, though. I think John thinks Sherlock genuinely is romantically interested in her.

[gerry]

I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, though. I think John thinks Sherlock genuinely is romantically interested in her.

I agree with this but even if John believes that why would you give advice to pursue her knowing what and who she is? Wouldn’t a friend advise the opposite thinking she’s bad news for their friend? That’s what I disliked most about that line. I guess you can chalk it up to John’s grief and Moffat’s obsession with Irene but it wasn’t good advice. Even Sherlock seems to know that it’s not good for him, “i try not to”.

[Arcadia]

I agree; but there seems to be a sizeable group of people who have no problem with it, going by the number of times I've seen a similar dynamic pop up in fiction. (I have a hard time believing it's that common in real life.) How did Mary put it? "The posh boy loves the dominatrix. He's never knowingly under-cliched, is he?" (Or something like that.) So it's a thing, apparently. Me, I don't get it. 

 

Aha! And I just realized; there's the proof that John thinks Sherlock's in love with Irene! Mary's in his head, so if she thinks Sherlock's in love, so does John. Oh, John, you really are a romantic.....

[gerry]

The problem is how often is John right about Sherlock? I’m not sure we can trust his judgment!

[Artemis]

Aha! And I just realized; there's the proof that John thinks Sherlock's in love with Irene! Mary's in his head, so if she thinks Sherlock's in love, so does John. Oh, John, you really are a romantic.....

 

Is it "in love"  though?  Or is it "love" like the way he loves ginger nuts, or a nice murder?  :P

 

 

[Arcadia]

The problem is how often is John right about Sherlock? I’m not sure we can trust his judgment!

Exactly! Sometimes John gets it right, other times he's clueless. Not exactly a reliable compass.

 

 

Aha! And I just realized; there's the proof that John thinks Sherlock's in love with Irene! Mary's in his head, so if she thinks Sherlock's in love, so does John. Oh, John, you really are a romantic.....

 

Is it "in love"  though?  Or is it "love" like the way he loves ginger nuts, or a nice murder?  :P

 

 

Are you asking me, or John? :p Me, I think she's just an unsolved puzzle, and Sherlock's wise to keep himself away from her. John (via Mary's voice) seems to think there's romantic and/or sexual attraction. Is that the same thing as love? I believe some people think so. Not sure I do.

[Hikari]

 

 

 Irene is a crazy dangerous femme fatal who sends Sherlock naughty texts once in a while and whom he occasionally likes to imagine naked. 

 

Not to be argumentative, but I'm genuinely curious what makes you think he sometimes likes to imagine her naked? He doesn't seem particularly interested when she's straddling his thigh. He looks bemused more than anything. I've always thought of Sherlock's fascination with Irene as being with her mind rather than her body. He finds the way she thinks fascinating, plus the fact she almost beat him. In the scenes where we see them together and she flirts with him he either looks uncomfortable or ignores it completely. 

 

Maybe it's another one of those things where it depends what we believe about Sherlock's sexuality as to how we read into his relationship with Irene. 

 

 

Just seeing this.

 

Sherlock doesn't have to be content with 'imagining' Irene naked, as he had the full-on effect of the 'battle dress' at some length.  Irene's nudity is absolutely the very last aspect of her which he finds interesting . . ignoring her physicality is the only way to back-foot her a bit because her body is her usual default method of dazzling men into submission.

 

This Adler isn't as crazy dangerous a femme fatale as she believes herself to be.  She's little more than a narcissistic poser.  She acts like she is a cast-iron, self-sufficient unassailable entity, but actually her default position is to align herself with a powerful man at the first hint of difficulty--cf. Moriarty.   She c*cked up her little blackmailing scheme so badly she needed Mycroft to bail her out . . when it was the British government who'd been the target of the 'Bond Air' scheme.

 

This Woman, unlike the original, is mostly just a sexed-up Loser.  Not worthy of our Sherlock, though I'd have said, if circumstances were different (ie, she wasn't just about to get married to someone else) the Original Adler would have been a worthy life companion for Sherlock Holmes.  Watson recognized this, which is why he was bitterly jealous of her for the rest of his life (Canon version Watson, that is.  BBC John seems quite keen for Sherl to grab that chance before it's gone.)

 

[Boton]

 

Okay, I see all that. I guess I'm just coming at it from a different direction ... which is that John thinks that Sherlock really wants Irene, but won't let himself go to her. And he's just telling Sherlock to get out of his own way, and go already. But I suspect I think that because Moffat seems hung up on her being "the" woman, in the sense that she's the only person Sherlock Holmes is interested in romantically. Personally, I think if he wanted someone that way, he could do a lot better. But if I look at the author's intent (and I'm the one who thinks that is super important, remember? :P) I think John's statement is meant to be exasperation that Sherlock won't just let himself have what he wants.

 

But if you believe Sherlock truly doesn't want anyone at all (I don't) then I can see how John's advice is misguided. But I think John knows what he's talking about, at least in the context of the show; Sherlock yearns for connections with people, whether he wants to or not. He thinks he shouldn't, but he does anyway. That's how I've seen him from the start. But I agree that having meaningless, random sex with a crazy dominatrix is probably not the kind of connection he's looking for. Which, if you look at it a certain way, could be what John was advising. I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, though. I think John thinks Sherlock genuinely is romantically interested in her.

 

 

I agree with this.  This is a great analysis of what I think is going on in John's head.

 

And I think John is right in this instance.  He watched Sherlock mooning around for 6 months or however long after he thought Irene was dead.  John saw Mycroft confirm this theory twice: once when he declared the night of Irene's "death" a danger night, and once when he proposed that John could lie to Sherlock about whether or not Irene was in witness protection in America, which is a point that John visibly debated before he told the lie in the kitchen.

 

I do think, and have from the beginning, that Sherlock wants Irene on more than an intellectual level.  Sure, maybe he loves the challenge, but I think he also loves remembering her in battle dress  and is intrigued by the idea of some recreational scolding.  I understand why some people see this differently.  However, one of the impressions I have had that was strengthened by the Eurus story in S4 is that Sherlock is only pushing people away on Mycroft's advice and as a way of avoiding getting hurt, not because he is disinterested in human connection or that he can't relate on any level but the intellectual.

[Hikari]

 

 

Okay, I see all that. I guess I'm just coming at it from a different direction ... which is that John thinks that Sherlock really wants Irene, but won't let himself go to her. And he's just telling Sherlock to get out of his own way, and go already. But I suspect I think that because Moffat seems hung up on her being "the" woman, in the sense that she's the only person Sherlock Holmes is interested in romantically. Personally, I think if he wanted someone that way, he could do a lot better. But if I look at the author's intent (and I'm the one who thinks that is super important, remember? :P) I think John's statement is meant to be exasperation that Sherlock won't just let himself have what he wants.

 

But if you believe Sherlock truly doesn't want anyone at all (I don't) then I can see how John's advice is misguided. But I think John knows what he's talking about, at least in the context of the show; Sherlock yearns for connections with people, whether he wants to or not. He thinks he shouldn't, but he does anyway. That's how I've seen him from the start. But I agree that having meaningless, random sex with a crazy dominatrix is probably not the kind of connection he's looking for. Which, if you look at it a certain way, could be what John was advising. I don't think it was meant to be taken that way, though. I think John thinks Sherlock genuinely is romantically interested in her.

 

 

I agree with this.  This is a great analysis of what I think is going on in John's head.

 

And I think John is right in this instance.  He watched Sherlock mooning around for 6 months or however long after he thought Irene was dead.  John saw Mycroft confirm this theory twice: once when he declared the night of Irene's "death" a danger night, and once when he proposed that John could lie to Sherlock about whether or not Irene was in witness protection in America, which is a point that John visibly debated before he told the lie in the kitchen.

 

I do think, and have from the beginning, that Sherlock wants Irene on more than an intellectual level.  Sure, maybe he loves the challenge, but I think he also loves remembering her in battle dress  and is intrigued by the idea of some recreational scolding.  I understand why some people see this differently.  However, one of the impressions I have had that was strengthened by the Eurus story in S4 is that Sherlock is only pushing people away on Mycroft's advice and as a way of avoiding getting hurt, not because he is disinterested in human connection or that he can't relate on any level but the intellectual.

 

 

I don't in general get turned on by the idea of beatings-as-foreplay, on either the giving or receiving end.  But when Sherl was helpless on the floor of Adler's bedroom, being caressed by the flogger . . that was rathah hawt.  I admit that there are some erotic possibilities to be imagined upon seeing a normally large-in-charge guy rendered helpless on the floor.   Ben looked pretty adorable.  Since my second urge was to cover him up with a blankie and get a pillow for his head rather than hurting him any further, I deduce that I am not actually a heartless Dominatrix.

 

[Boton]

 

 

 

I don't in general get turned on by the idea of beatings-as-foreplay, on either the giving or receiving end.  But when Sherl was helpless on the floor of Adler's bedroom, being caressed by the flogger . . that was rathah hawt.  I admit that there are some erotic possibilities to be imagined upon seeing a normally large-in-charge guy rendered helpless on the floor.   Ben looked pretty adorable.  Since my second urge was to cover him up with a blankie and get a pillow for his head rather than hurting him any further, I deduce that I am not actually a heartless Dominatrix.

 

 

 

And it doesn't have to be black and white.  It doesn't have to be either moonlight and roses or Wartenberg wheels and floggers. A little bit of game play could be a natural extension of what many people are saying is Irene's primary appeal: that she presents a challenge for Sherlock who can give as good as she gets. It doesn't seem that far of a leap to me that if he likes the head games of trying to outsmart her, he might like physical interactions that involve some head games too.