Sherlock (the BBC character)

[Arcadia]

Guess I'm not part of the Sherlockian world, then.

[gerry]

Yep, I agree. It's a horribly shoe-horned in line as is. If they really had to say it, that way would have been a lot better.

IA it wasn't a natural line but it's in keeping with the stupid montage ending for me. I disliked the end of TFP from Eurus' bedroom scene to the end.

[Pseudonym]

Interesting how he wasn't a good man before because he cared more about the puzzle than the victims, but now, after shooting someone in the face only a few months before, now he's 'a good man'? So, an awkward, immature kid with no people skills equals bad, a guy who murders someone in cold blood and demonstrates no remorse equals good? Just because he's shown a limited capacity to have empathy towards those he's close to? God, Greg, you really need to review your definitions of what exactly makes someone 'a good man.' 

[gerry]

By the time that line was uttered though what limited empathy had he really shown except to say Greg and to ask him watch out for Mycroft?

[Pseudonym]

I suppose the misguided sending himself to hell to save John? Hugging Eurus? I don't know, I fail to see how he's improved enough for that line.

[gerry]

Agreed.

[Carol the Dabbler]

The show had to end with that line.  Therefore it did.
 

... it wasn't a natural line but it's in keeping with the stupid montage ending for me. I disliked the end of TFP from Eurus' bedroom scene to the end.

 
While I, on the other hand, consider the montage to be one of my favorite parts of Series 4.  De gustibus non disputandum est.  Or, to put it another way, chacun à son goût.

[Arcadia]

I suppose the misguided sending himself to hell to save John? Hugging Eurus? I don't know, I fail to see how he's improved enough for that line.

 

 

Well, obviously I'm not one who can argue much about the Magnussen thing. All I can do is hope that his experiences since then have taught Sherlock a little humility; maybe he won't set himself up as judge, jury and executioner next time. (God, I hope there's not a next time. I'd rather never see the show again than see him commit another murder.)

 

At any rate, I thought there were a few key moments, chiefly Mary's death and the "Norbury" thing. He was chastened for sure, there. Of course, they never brought that moment into play again so it's easy to dismiss. (Gawd, they really did rush this season, didn't they?) But I took that to be the moment when Sherlock realized he was only human too. And that played out in several ways in TLD, especially at the end. Not only is he human, but it's okay to be that way.

 

And then, yes, hugging Eurus. I don't think they did it as well as they could have, and all of the negative reaction to this series since then has blurred the feelings I had at the time ... but when first watching TFP, I thought it was clear that they were drawing a distinction between Eurus ... all intellect, no humanity ... Mycroft ... trying to be that way ... and Sherlock, who had accepted that being human was a far better thing to be than being the smartest one in the room. Yes, caring is not an advantage, but I would maintain that what he's learned is that "having the advantage" is not a goal that is worthy of him.

 

It even goes back to the best man's speech ... Sherlock can solve your murder, but John Watson can save your life, and that's a more admirable achievement.

 

So at the end, Sherlock offers Eurus compassion ... a very human "failing", that ... and saves John's life; a far better thing than simply proving himself to be smarter than Eurus.

 

Did they do it well? Not particularly; Eurus had already given up by the time he reached her, so there wasn't any obstacle for him to overcome. It wasn't really a hero moment, just a reconciliation. If that. But I still think that's the story they were attempting to tell ... Sherlock realizing that being a good man was more important than being a great one. Moriarty showed him what he could become if he turned to evil, but Eurus showed him what he could become if he stayed on the path Mycroft had chosen for him.

 

So I think at the moment. I might have a different opinion next week.

 

 

The show had to end with that line.  Therefore it did.

 

... it wasn't a natural line but it's in keeping with the stupid montage ending for me. I disliked the end of TFP from Eurus' bedroom scene to the end.

 

While I, on the other hand, consider the montage to be one of my favorite parts of Series 4.  De gustibus non disputandum est.  Or, to put it another way, chacun à son goût.

 

 

Hmmm, I'm guessing that's not really about gout, is it? Okay, Dabbler, isn't there some forum rule about forcing the less educated among us to resort to a translation app? :P  (googles furiously)  Aha ... you're saying there's no accounting for taste, is that it?

 

I'll just let the rest of y'all decipher it for yourselves, shall I? ...

[Van Buren Supernova]

Interesting how he wasn't a good man before because he cared more about the puzzle than the victims, but now, after shooting someone in the face only a few months before, now he's 'a good man'? So, an awkward, immature kid with no people skills equals bad, a guy who murders someone in cold blood and demonstrates no remorse equals good? Just because he's shown a limited capacity to have empathy towards those he's close to? God, Greg, you really need to review your definitions of what exactly makes someone 'a good man.'

Well, don't you think you take it a bit too literally?

I believe Lestrade's POV is meant for us who have seen the overall story. Of the two points you mentioned, what about the rest of his stories?

To me, he still have limited capacity of emphaty, still awkward but he has gone through all the journey that shows he is more, capable of more, and even the cold blooded murder is basically driven by his desire to protect people he cares about, regardless how messed up it is.

 

I have to say I am with Lestrade here, although I agree it would be better if he just murmurs that line to himself.

 

 

While I, on the other hand, consider the montage to be one of my favorite parts of Series 4. De gustibus non disputandum est. Or, to put it another way, chacun à son goût.

Eh?

I like the montage too, and TFP in general, it's far from perfect, yes I agree, I hear you, but there are also many great moments that I'm happy with. If that makes me non Sherlockian or whatever, then be it. I'm not even sure I'm a Sherlockian in the first place based on whatever category that I'm certainly not familiar with.

 

But you are saying....? :p

I see non disputandum seems like the whole sentence would mean something like no dispute or 'agree to disagree'.

[gerry]

The show had to end with that line. Therefore it did.

 

... it wasn't a natural line but it's in keeping with the stupid montage ending for me. I disliked the end of TFP from Eurus' bedroom scene to the end.

While I, on the other hand, consider the montage to be one of my favorite parts of Series 4. De gustibus non disputandum est. Or, to put it another way, chacun à son goût.

To each their own but if the only way to show them happy was to fast forward, months or years, with seconds of snippets then there was something wrong with the writing leading up to it. It was just as forced as the good man line. What's the writing expression, don't tell, show the audience or something like that? You're meant to guess how he's changed to a good man, not shown it because they rushed the end.

 

ETA. I'm amused that I said to each their own before looking up Carol's quote. Too funny.

[Arcadia]

I think where we're disagreeing, though, is that some us think they did show, not tell. But not well enough, obviously, or there wouldn't be debate. But I for one felt Sherlock had earned the "good man" sobriquet by the end of the series. But I also get that it wasn't done in an entirely satisfying way; the audience was left to color in an awful lot of the lines. Which is kind of an interesting way to tell a story, but it also means everyone's seen a different show, basically. Hmm.

[Carol the Dabbler]

 

De gustibus non disputandum est. Or, to put it another way, chacun à son goût.

But you are saying....? :P

I see non disputandum seems like the whole sentence would mean something like no dispute or 'agree to disagree'.

Sorry! The Latin expression means "Of taste there is no dispute," and the French means "Each one to their own taste." Or, as Gerry said, "To each their own.". Or as you say, "Agree to disagree."

 

To each their own but if the only way to show them happy was to fast forward, months or years, with seconds of snippets then there was something wrong with the writing leading up to it. It was just as forced as the good man line. What's the writing expression, don't tell, show the audience or something like that? You're meant to guess how he's changed to a good man, not shown it because they rushed the end.

Yup, I agree about that. Seems like the creative types always want to leave plenty of room for their own favorite stuff, so what the fans are looking forward to gets rushed through or even omitted entirely in order to leave time for more orcs and wargs or (in this case) more sturm und drang.

 

VBS: Sorry, I don't seem to know any English cliches today. That last phrase is German for something like "sound and fury" (literally "storm and [something]").

[Arcadia]

"Storm and stress."

 

Look at all the flak they got for "fan service" in season 3, though. Can't win for losing.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Carol, 'de gustibus et de coloris non disputantum est', i.e each to their own tastes and colours. Elsewhere, I used a line from Sharktale: 'the horror', because TFP solved absolutely nothing and left too many questions in its wake. As a creative pair, they should cease and desist. Other, worse versions, have come before them, other new versions will come after them, but TFP doesn't cut it, not by half!

Dear Arcadia, if they posited S3 on the premise of overwriting S2 Ep.3, then they should lose, fair and square! Sturm und Drang is usually reserved for looooong Wagnerian operas, like Tristan und Isolde (Benedict's favourite for some unfathomable reason,), The Flying Dutchman, Lohengrin and Parsifal.

[Pseudonym]

Well, shooting someone in the face is pretty literal. I think he's learnt it's okay to just be human, but I fail to see how that necessarily makes him good. It just makes him normal. Maybe our differences lie in our opinion of what makes someone good? How does Mary's death and his failing with Norbury make him good? Yes, he might have learned to be less arrogant but that's another thing entirely. 

 

[Arcadia]

Well, true, it depends on what you thinks makes someone good. For me, it would have to include humility (lack of arrogance); loyalty; empathy; courage; compassion; forgiveness; honesty. Except for the last, I think Sherlock now has all that in spades, and I give him a little leniency for the reasons he's a liar. And humility; so far, he's really only given lip service to that with the "Norbury" remark to Mrs. H., and with the "I can't do it, not alone" to John, but until I see otherwise I will take that to mean he's learned that lesson too. Probably the hardest one, for him.

 

Whereas John had all that at the beginning, and I guess only now is starting to realize that no one, not Mary, not Sherlock, not even himself, can be that much of a paragon all the time. One can only try to be a good person; sometimes one fails. That's the most human part, I guess.

[Pseudonym]

Do you think he has compassion and empathy for people outside his immediate family (including John and Rosie)? Ditto with forgiveness?

 

I don't know, I'd say John is a bit lacking in the good man category too. 

[Arcadia]

I'm posting this mostly because I think it's beautifully edited, I really admire the time and care that went into this one. (Also I like the music, which I seldom do with these things. :P) But it also relates a little bit to the discussion we're having here, so this is where I'm putting it. I'm only human, after all. ;)

 

[Pseudonym]

Ah yep, saw that doing the rounds.

[Arcadia]

Do you think he has compassion and empathy for people outside his immediate family (including John and Rosie)? Ditto with forgiveness?

 

I don't know, I'd say John is a bit lacking in the good man category too. 

 

Sorry, cross-posted.

 

Given the little interaction we've seen between him and "not his family" we've seen since the end of T6T? Hmmm, well I would have to base that on certain assumptions, but that's pretty much what I do anyway ... God forbid Moftiss should actually show us some examples to base our conclusions on.  :d

 

At the moment the only thing that comes to mind is the way he interacted with "Faith." I suppose I could choose to interpret that as him selfishly being glad to find the right case to "save" John, but instead I choose to believe he was genuinely concerned about keeping her from harming herself. He certainly implied empathy was at work, there.

 

And we've often remarked around here how Sherlock doesn't seem to hold things against people; they give him all sorts of crap, even shoot him, and he just shrugs it off. (Unless it's Mycroft, but that's a different dynamic than he has with everyone else.) We've argued that it's because he doesn't place much value on his own life, but we know now that he does, because Mary gave it to him.

 

Otherwise, I just assume the way he treats Greg is symbolic of how he treats everyone else, since Greg was established at the outset as the arbiter on whether Sherlock's a good man or not. It's not a perfect assumption, because Sherlock isn't perfect, and God knows Moftiss isn't ... if the series comes back, Sherlock's behavior might be worse than ever. But for now I choose to believe they've done their best to set him on the right path.

 

Good gawd, it's time to get up and at 'em. Wonder if I'm going to have to snowshovel the driveway today. Ak. Looks like only a couple inches so far but it's supposed to get heavier later today.....

[Pseudonym]

Ooo, snow! Here we have rain and fog. As usual. 

 

'Faith' confuses me. He's not very nice to her in the beginning, basically telling her to sod off, and then all of a sudden he is nice? Is it just because of the gun? 

[Arcadia]

Well, thinking someone plans to off herself is a pretty good reason, isn't it? Unless he genuinely is an uncaring sociopath. Which I am arguing he isn't.

 

Which I suppose shows that Eurus understood him pretty well. Which confuses me. Unless she was just curious to see if he would take the bait.

[J.P.]

An interesting bit from http://ivyblossom.tumblr.com/post/158380068135/it-comes-back-to-reichenbach

 

 

With the perspective of S4, we can say that S2 Sherlock didn’t believe he was capable of having a friend who cared so much about him. He’d believed his whole life that that would be impossible, he was unlovable, only entertainment at best. He constructed a self-image where he wouldn’t and couldn’t have friends who could be taken from him and hurt, and he didn’t know why. 

Knowing what we know now, It looks as if he might have deliberately destroyed his extremely close relationship with John out of some kind of subconscious fear of loss and pain, out of fear that someone would take his beloved friend and kill him just to watch Sherlock squirm. But he doesn’t know that he’s reliving a traumatic memory from his past. And that means he doesn’t really understand why he’s crying on the roof before he jumps.

 

So if it's really the reason why Sherlock was crying - I have to ask: did the makers knew it back then? :P

[Arcadia]

I doubt it. But it's a nice try.

[Pseudonym]

Yea, I don't really believe that. I think he jumped because he had to, I don't think there was any 'I'll kill this friendship before anyone else can use it to hurt me.'