Episode 4.0: The Abominable Bride (alias The Special)

[high.functioning.sociopath]

It was absolutely engrossing and I watch it rather a lot. Could someone please inform me how to display my favourite episode of each season by my profile? Thank you.

 

[high.functioning.sociopath]

The other day I went to a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk to see Mark Gatiss and I must say he is hilarious, especially when talking to me while I was re-reading 'The Adventures and Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes'

[Arcadia]

It was absolutely engrossing and I watch it rather a lot. Could someone please inform me how to display my favourite episode of each season by my profile? Thank you.

Hi there, sociopath, welcome to the forum!

 

To display your favorite episodes, look for your name (your user name) up near the top of the page. Click on it, and from the menu, select "My Settings". Scroll down; the place to enter your favorite episodes is near the bottom of the page. While you're there, you can fill in some of the other information, or click one of the links on the left ("signature" is a popular one ) to access some different options.

 

Glad to have you here, hope you hop right in and join the fun!

[Carol the Dabbler]

The other day I went to a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk to see Mark Gatiss and I must say he is hilarious, especially when talking to me while I was re-reading 'The Adventures and Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes'

 

Hey, sociopath -- welcome to Sherlock Forum! 

 

That sounds delightful!  I was thinking of attending an event here in Indiana, only because Mart Gatiss was scheduled to speak.  But then he had a conflict and had to cancel, so I was glad I hadn't prepaid.  Would love to hear him in person sometime, especially if there's a Q&A.

 

Do you live in Suffolk?

[sittything]

 

The other day I went to a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk to see Mark Gatiss and I must say he is hilarious, especially when talking to me while I was re-reading 'The Adventures and Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes'

 

Hey, sociopath -- welcome to Sherlock Forum! 

 

That sounds delightful!  I was thinking of attending an event here in Indiana, only because Mart Gatiss was scheduled to speak.  But then he had a conflict and had to cancel, so I was glad I hadn't prepaid.  Would love to hear him in person sometime, especially if there's a Q&A.

 

Do you live in Suffolk?

 

 

OK Carol, if Mark is ever headed to Indiana again to speak you must let me know.  I will be there.  

[Carol the Dabbler]

Sure will, if I happen to notice!  Can't think how I happened to see that talk advertised -- somewhere on the internet....

 

[clavery111]

Woo hoo!  Six Emmy nominations for TAB:

 

Outstanding TV movie

Outstanding lead actor in a limited series or movie - Benedict Cumberbatch

Outstanding cinematography - Suzie Lavelle, ISC, Director of Photography

Outstanding sound editing for a limited series, movie or special

Outstanding sound mixing for a limited series or movie

Outstanding special visual effects - Danny Hargreaves & company

 

Sarah Arthur got ROBBED!  Those costumes were soooo apropo and gorgeous!

[clavery111]

The other day I went to a talk in Woodbridge, Suffolk to see Mark Gatiss and I must say he is hilarious, especially when talking to me while I was re-reading 'The Adventures and Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes'

 

Was that the talk at The Riverside?  Pray tell us - what did he say? 

[Arcadia]

Here's something I came across when I was lost in the wilds of Tumblr. I've always thought, in TAB, that the people in Sherlock's mind palace appeared as he perceived them, and in the real world scenes they appeared as they actually were.

 

But this person suggested that in his mind palace, only the modern mind-palace versions (at the graveside) represent how he sees them. The Victorian versions appeared the way he wishes they were. (And in the real world scenes, we still see how they actually are, I guess. I'm not sure this person believed there were any "real world" scenes. Also, this person only talked about John, but I figure if it applies to one character, it applies to all of them.)

 

So in his Victorian dream, we have the wished-for version of John who is Sherlock's conscience, is steadfast and patient, a bit slow, but always there when Sherlock needs him, and not at home with his wife. The modern mind-palace John shouts and argues and refuses to help and goes home with Mary. The real John is somewhere in between, I'd say.

 

I read that and thought it made a pretty good argument. But does it work for the rest of the characters? Let's see ... that would mean Sherlock wishes Mycroft were all-seeing but dying from gluttony (Victorian version), but thinks he is fairly distant (modern, graveyard version). The real version seems to genuinely care about his little brother, but Sherlock never sees it. (?)

 

Okay, so far, still plausible, I guess.

 

Lestrade. Victorian version: wishes he was dumber than he already thinks the poor man is, apparently. Modern: thinks he's helpful. No real version.

 

Molly: wishes she would disguise herself as a man (or wishes she were a man)? No modern version, no real version.

 

Mary: wishes she were more clever than she seems; thinks she's more clever than she seems; she is more clever than she seems. Okay, so no confusion there at least. :D

 

Eh ... not sure I'm convinced, but I thought it was interesting. Comments?

[clavery111]

but what would that say about .... shiver.... Moriarity?  Victorian Moriarity is as Sherlock WISHES he was?  ie. psychosexualviolent-ness?

 

It's an interesting thought, this Victorian/modern day = wishes/clear eyed assessments, but I do not think that Mofftiss wrote it like that.  

[Arcadia]

Oh geez, I forgot Moriarty. Um, yeah, let's not go there. Okay then, back to my original premise ... he's picturing them as he thinks they are!

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I've heard it said (somewhere, many years ago, so don't ask by whom) that any well-written story will have any number of plausible interpretations.  Sort of like real life, I guess.  I agree, at least to the extent that if a story hits me over the head with its One True Interpretation, I don't think it's well written.

 

This could help clear things up in just about every thread on this forum.  If we actually wanted them cleared up!

 

[J.P.]

But Victorian John is also hostile towards Sherlock, asks him uncomfortable questions and forces him to wear the hat. This would work only if Sherlock was a masochist.

[Arcadia]

Hey, I didn't say it was a good theory! Oh, and there's a theory that Sherlock IS a masochist. Read it last night. So there you go. :d

[Boton]

I think all the mind palace versions represent the role Sherlock thinks they play in his life, with a little bit of Sherlock's own meta-commentary on how he uses them.  So, he sees John as a sounding board and admits to himself at the end that it is John who keeps him metaphorically from throwing himself over the cliff.  Molly is someone that he has identified so strongly with the Work (probably he thought this was a good thing) that he has ignored her otherwise. 

 

I think Moriarty is most strongly a representation of something in Sherlock's own psyche: he is the impulsive, urge-driven part of Sherlock's self that Sherlock fears will drive him to destruction.

 

Mostly, I've always thought that one of the purposes of TAB from Moftiss' perspective was to go over all of the information from the previous nine episodes that they thought was important, particularly when it comes to Sherlock's mind, and emphasize it so we get it going into the fourth season.  I think it makes a certain degree of sense to look at the characters in pairs across the two mind palace scenes (HLV and TAB).

 

So, for example, Molly represents a steady voice of scientific knowledge, respect for the Work, and perhaps self-preservation, but she also carries Sherlock's guilt about him ignoring other aspects of the real Molly's personality, such as her femininity and her feelings.

 

Moriarty is impulse.  Just die already.  Just jump. Just act.  If it were only him in Sherlock's mind, Sherlock fears that he would be his own destruction.  (Not an idle concern, given that he was playing Russian roulette with the cabbie an hour after we all met him.)  But John literally "keeps him right."

[Arcadia]

Yep, I buy all that, but I admit I'm still a little mystified by -- well, many things :d -- but right now it's this: if John is the one who keeps him from throwing himself over the cliff ... why did he throw himself over the cliff? I had an explanation around here somewhere, but it's eluding me at the moment.

 

I think it's interesting that so many of us see Sherlock as somewhat self-destructive, because I don't get the impression from interviews etc. that Moftiss actually means quite that. Lacking in a sense of self-preservation, yes, but that's a bit different. I think?

 

[Boton]

Yep, I buy all that, but I admit I'm still a little mystified by -- well, many things :D -- but right now it's this: if John is the one who keeps him from throwing himself over the cliff ... why did he throw himself over the cliff? I had an explanation around here somewhere, but it's eluding me at the moment.

 

I think it's interesting that so many of us see Sherlock as somewhat self-destructive, because I don't get the impression from interviews etc. that Moftiss actually means quite that. Lacking in a sense of self-preservation, yes, but that's a bit different. I think?

 

I actually don't think he's self-destructive; I think he appears self-destructive from the outside. I think most if not all of the risks he has taken are ones where he has used his intellect to improve the odds.  Now, the odds may still not look good to us, but they look good to him.  And if he gets an adrenaline rush out of being right, so much the better.  But he probably realizes at this point that he's run some risks that maybe weren't as wise as he thinks.

 

Why did he throw himself over the cliff?  Because it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing.  Since the whole thing is an extended, drug-fueled metaphor, he and "John" can eliminate Moriarty by throwing him off the cliff while still using the cliff to prove to Sherlock that he can have a soft landing, because he has the support of his friend.  (Also, there's the imminently practical view that he felt the plane descending and that cued him subconsciously to imagine a fall.)

[clavery111]

drug addict = self-destructive in my book

 

It'll be interesting to see how Mofftiss chooses to address Sherlock's addiction.  My bet is that they don't address it... it'll just wither away w/out comment or attention.

[Arcadia]

 

Yep, I buy all that, but I admit I'm still a little mystified by -- well, many things :D -- but right now it's this: if John is the one who keeps him from throwing himself over the cliff ... why did he throw himself over the cliff? I had an explanation around here somewhere, but it's eluding me at the moment.

 

I think it's interesting that so many of us see Sherlock as somewhat self-destructive, because I don't get the impression from interviews etc. that Moftiss actually means quite that. Lacking in a sense of self-preservation, yes, but that's a bit different. I think?

 

I actually don't think he's self-destructive; I think he appears self-destructive from the outside. I think most if not all of the risks he has taken are ones where he has used his intellect to improve the odds.  Now, the odds may still not look good to us, but they look good to him.  And if he gets an adrenaline rush out of being right, so much the better.  But he probably realizes at this point that he's run some risks that maybe weren't as wise as he thinks.

 

Why did he throw himself over the cliff?  Because it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing.  Since the whole thing is an extended, drug-fueled metaphor, he and "John" can eliminate Moriarty by throwing him off the cliff while still using the cliff to prove to Sherlock that he can have a soft landing, because he has the support of his friend.  (Also, there's the imminently practical view that he felt the plane descending and that cued him subconsciously to imagine a fall.)

 

 

I think that's why I'm confused; to me, that's saying that the same metaphor means two opposite things. 1. Jumping into the abyss is what Sherlock needs to be rescued from by John. 2. Jumping into the abyss is how Sherlock gets back to reality. ALSO... 1. The landing will kill you. 2. The landing will, uh, get you back to reality.

 

And since Moriarty goes off the cliff too, for a moment there seems to be a 3rd meaning; The cliff is Sherlock's psychic safety zone, the abyss is .... well, the abyss.

 

Huh?

 

 

drug addict = self-destructive in my book

 

It'll be interesting to see how Mofftiss chooses to address Sherlock's addiction.  My bet is that they don't address it... it'll just wither away w/out comment or attention.

I can't decide. Why bring up drug use if it's never going to be an issue? Although I suppose we could adopt Sherlock's attitude, and say it isn't an issue, he has it under control. (Likely story, that. <_<) I've sort of been expecting them to do something with it some day, because otherwise why bring it into the equation all the way back in the first episode?

 

I'm also a bit surprised that apparently there will be some sort of fallout from the CAM storyline .... I'd about convinced myself that the most likely course of action there would be to ignore it. Although what they consider "fallout" and what I do may be very different things...

[J.P.]

He's not an addict. He's a USER. Which actually makes it worse. An addict has hardly a choice...

[clavery111]

He's not an addict. He's a USER. Which actually makes it worse. An addict has hardly a choice...

 

Ooooh, I beg to differ with you 100% on your interpretation  - both within BBC Sherlock, canon Sherlock, and in reality - but am not going to debate it out.  

 

I like to think that Mofftiss, being such smart and engagingly literary writers, would really apply themselves to giving an answer to the WHY:  why anyone and/or Sherlock (someone obviously smart w/ family/financial/educational resources)  does become a drug addict. Not even addiction scientists can agree on the root causes...

[Arcadia]

In Sherlock's case .... to keep from being bored?

[clavery111]

don't you think that's a childish excuse for Sherlock?  like his calling himself a high-functioning sociopath is a childish way of dealing with ... whatever psycho stuff he had to deal with?  He's not a sociopath - at least Mofftiss hasn't written any sociopathic stuff for us to see (although murdering Mag in cold-blood is coming close)

[Arcadia]

Oh, of course. But that's his story arc, I think. Growing up into a real boy. He can't start out as a fully fledged human being, there'd be nowhere to go with his character if they did. And I suspect addicts really do make immature excuses for their own behavior quite often; human nature.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

For our version, it wouldn't surprise me if a younger Sherlock somehow got jumped and injected with drugs leading him to realize his flawed take on how it helped his brain work better. Thus our crazy addicted detective trying to solve Victorian cold cases in a drug-addled mind palace.