Baby Watson

[Inge l-w]

Dear Boton, who doesn't? Best and most creatively intelligent friendship ever, but every time pictures of the "happy" trio emerge, they seem to be around the same location. So, anything goes! If it becomes a common or ordinary variety sitcom or romcom, it will keep the under-thirty fan girl base in China and such places, but lose all right-thinking Sherlockians in one fell swoop. We all vote with our remote controls, in the end.

[Pseudonym]

I also hope, if they do go down the route of her running, that it's done in a way that makes it obvious she is never coming back. I don't want her to randomly pop up in some future episode, or for a teenage baby Watson to show up at the door. 

[Arcadia]

Oooooh, you are all a hard, cruel bunch! :p

 

Does having a wife and baby absolutely rule out also having a best friend? That seems awfully restrictive. But maybe it depends on what you think a friendship looks like. I don't have to see the boys always in each other's back pockets to believe they are really close. Of course, I'm the person who's been predicting for ages that Sherlock is destined to end up as a lone, somewhat remote figure. I think the one constant in his life will be John's friendship, but not necessarily his continual presence.

[Arcadia]

For some reason that post froze up on me (my new Evil Browser Strikes Again!) so I had to go to a new post to add .... I'm not sure what I hope for. I think my preference would be for Mary to play the happy housewife and remain largely in the background, popping up for a few minutes each episode like Molly and Mrs. H, and then disappearing again. But I have a feeling they are sensitive (with reason) to the inevitable charges of misogyny if they do that. Which is too bad, because there shouldn't be anything wrong with Mary being a background character if that's the kind of show they want. But it's an issue, soo..... darned if I know how they're going to resolve it. I assume they are steeling themselves to hearing loud displeasure from at least half the fandom, and hoping the "casual viewers" don't really care as long as it's a good story. I am certainly preparing myself for the loud boos! :D (In fact, I think I'm starting to get just as deaf to them as Moftiss appear to be....)

[Inge l-w]

I should think "casual viewer" and Sherlockforum " moderator" should be mutually exclusive. After all, it's a lot of our little grey cells (pace, the little Belgian with the moustache), that we have invested/spent/ wasted on their fanboy ego trip!

And we saw how important Mary is in Sherlock's drug-addled mind in TAB, so no back-seat for the ex-assassin housewife and mother *shudder*!

[Van Buren Supernova]

I don't have anything to contribute, my mind is blank right now. I'd just say something important; most of you need to send me ten pounds each if those scenes are proven fake. If it's real, you don't know where to find me.

 

The huge airbag that prevented Sherlock become a road pancake at the end of TRF.

Believe me mam, those hardly look like pancake.

I'd say barbeque raw material. Yikes.

[Shadow Dweller]

I don't have anything to contribute, my mind is blank right now. I'd just say something important; most of you need to send me ten pounds each if those scenes are proven fake. If it's real, you don't know where to find me.

 

 

The huge airbag that prevented Sherlock become a road pancake at the end of TRF.

Believe me mam, those hardly look like pancake.

I'd say barbeque raw material. Yikes.

Uncooked road pizza's topping. :lol:

[Arcadia]

Oh gawd. Behave, you two.   No, don't, I enjoy your sick humor too much..... XD

 

I should think "casual viewer" and Sherlockforum " moderator" should be mutually exclusive. After all, it's a lot of our little grey cells (pace, the little Belgian with the moustache), that we have invested/spent/ wasted on their fanboy ego trip!
And we saw how important Mary is in Sherlock's drug-addled mind in TAB, so no back-seat for the ex-assassin housewife and mother *shudder*!

Sorry, I wasn't very clear at the end of that post -- what I meant was, "I am" also steeling myself to hearing loud displeasure from at least half the fandom. (Heck, the season hasn't even finished filming yet, and I already do! :P ) Anyway, I'll go back and edit my post to make it clearer what I'm actually trying to say.

[Inge l-w]

Well, Mr Gatiss indicated some time ago via Twitter that Episode One was finished and they were moving on to Episode 2, so any set locks still showing Dr Watson carrying a baby and a live ex-assassin will NOT bode well for some of us, since E1 evidently did NOT abide by Dr Watson's " sad loss" in The Empty House story.

[Arcadia]

Oh, I have no doubt we'll see Mary some more, at least, if not the baby. Otherwise it would be a dead giveaway, wouldn't it? (No pun intended. ) Although just because we see her on set doesn't mean she'll actually appear in the episode. My gut tells me she will survive the season, though.
 
I also have a bet with myself that the baby won't remain a newborn for 3 episodes; be on the lookout for casting calls for toddlers! :P (How much does a toddler actor earn for a minute of screen time, anyway? More than me in a week, I'll bet. :( )

[Van Buren Supernova]

Good god! I hope you lose your every bet in that post.

But if you bet against yourself, who is the winner?

 

Whatever it will be, keep them in the background please. I don't want baby-toddler drama in Sherlock.

 

Oh gawd. Behave, you two.

It's Shadow..!

[Boton]

Oooooh, you are all a hard, cruel bunch! :P

 

Does having a wife and baby absolutely rule out also having a best friend? That seems awfully restrictive. But maybe it depends on what you think a friendship looks like. I don't have to see the boys always in each other's back pockets to believe they are really close. Of course, I'm the person who's been predicting for ages that Sherlock is destined to end up as a lone, somewhat remote figure. I think the one constant in his life will be John's friendship, but not necessarily his continual presence.

 

Well, no, it doesn't.  But it's kind of problematic for me because of the way you have to update Sherlock Holmes vis-a-vis modern culture.

 

For me, the original ACD stories could have had Mary and a baby alive and in Watson's life the entire time, because she was confined to the domestic sphere by Victorian social mores.  Not only did that remove Mary from the storytelling equation, but it also gave some excuse as to why Watson would be able to go off on potentially life-endangering quests with Holmes: he's the only one in the family out in the public sphere, and he can do what he needs to support the family.  (But, we have hints that Mary died, so moot point.)

 

In modern Sherlock, we have two (ETA: apparently, I have more than two...) things that make it difficult for me to imagine a future with Mary and the baby in the picture.  First, there's John and that bloody baby carrier.  That's what we expect today: a modern father who's taking his turn at baby nurturing and domestic chores, and that will create scenes just like setlock, where John has the baby strapped to him.  Which is part of the problem; once John has a baby, he's not going to want to risk his life in some quest against an ultra-baddie like CAM or something, because then we'll be over here in these forums raising holy cane about how irresponsible he's being.

 

Second, there's Mary.  I think if there were no baby, we could plausibly say that Mary is off on her own freelance jobs and has no interest in meddling, but this way, I almost feel like Mary is so good (and Arcadia, you made that point elsewhere), anytime the boys come up against a thorny problem, they should probably ask Mary for help.  And I love Mary, but I don't want a crime solving trio.

 

Third, I think we have a cultural expectation that romantic relationships trump all other relationships in fiction. (I think that's one of the many reasons for the popularity of Johnlock; we want the boys to have the most intense relationship possible, and our cultural vernacular says that's a romantic one.)  We do have some exceptions for female friendships (Sex and the City, Grey's Anatomy), but I can't think of any really where the male protagonists put their relationship above a marriage unless we build in a reason like making them police or combat soldiers or something.  Part of the charm of the Holmes/Watson relationship, to me, is that it is entirely about choice.  There's no earthly reason these two should prioritize one another, but they do.  

 

Finally, and this is just me, but I'm bored with watching sexual tension and romance and procreation.  Yeah, it can be entertaining, but it's where every single show seems to go.  If the creators can plausibly get Mary and the baby off screen (no offense, AA) and keep the Holmes/Watson relationship front and center at all times, then I don't care what either one of them has going on on the side.  (House accomplished this very successfully, for my money.)  But I'm nervous that the show will succumb to making marriages the centerpiece of the show.

[Shadow Dweller]

Good god! I hope you lose your every bet in that post.

But if you bet against yourself, who is the winner?

 

Whatever it will be, keep them in the background please. I don't want baby-toddler drama in Sherlock.

 

 

Oh gawd. Behave, you two.

It's Shadow..!

It takes two to tango, VBS. (wo)Man up, would you. :p

[Arcadia]

 

Oooooh, you are all a hard, cruel bunch! :P

 

Does having a wife and baby absolutely rule out also having a best friend? That seems awfully restrictive. But maybe it depends on what you think a friendship looks like. I don't have to see the boys always in each other's back pockets to believe they are really close. Of course, I'm the person who's been predicting for ages that Sherlock is destined to end up as a lone, somewhat remote figure. I think the one constant in his life will be John's friendship, but not necessarily his continual presence.

 

Well, no, it doesn't.  But it's kind of problematic for me because of the way you have to update Sherlock Holmes vis-a-vis modern culture.

 

For me, the original ACD stories could have had Mary and a baby alive and in Watson's life the entire time, because she was confined to the domestic sphere by Victorian social mores.  Not only did that remove Mary from the storytelling equation, but it also gave some excuse as to why Watson would be able to go off on potentially life-endangering quests with Holmes: he's the only one in the family out in the public sphere, and he can do what he needs to support the family.  (But, we have hints that Mary died, so moot point.)

 

In modern Sherlock, we have two things that make it difficult for me to imagine a future with Mary and the baby in the picture.  First, there's John and that bloody baby carrier.  That's what we expect today: a modern father who's taking his turn at baby nurturing and domestic chores, and that will create scenes just like setlock, where John has the baby strapped to him.  Which is part of the problem; once John has a baby, he's not going to want to risk his life in some quest against an ultra-baddie like CAM or something, because then we'll be over here in these forums raising holy cane about how irresponsible he's being.

 

Second, there's Mary.  I think if there were no baby, we could plausibly say that Mary is off on her own freelance jobs and has no interest in meddling, but this way, I almost feel like Mary is so good (and Arcadia, you made that point elsewhere), anytime the boys come up against a thorny problem, they should probably ask Mary for help.  And I love Mary, but I don't want a crime solving trio.

 

Third, I think we have a cultural expectation that romantic relationships trump all other relationships in fiction. (I think that's one of the many reasons for the popularity of Johnlock; we want the boys to have the most intense relationship possible, and our cultural vernacular says that's a romantic one.)  We do have some exceptions for female friendships (Sex and the City, Grey's Anatomy), but I can't think of any really where the male protagonists put their relationship above a marriage unless we build in a reason like making them police or combat soldiers or something.  Part of the charm of the Holmes/Watson relationship, to me, is that it is entirely about choice.  There's no earthly reason these two should prioritize one another, but they do.  

 

Finally, and this is just me, but I'm bored with watching sexual tension and romance and procreation.  Yeah, it can be entertaining, but it's where every single show seems to go.  If the creators can plausibly get Mary and the baby off screen (no offense, AA) and keep the Holmes/Watson relationship front and center at all times, then I don't care what either one of them has going on on the side.  (House accomplished this very successfully, for my money.)  But I'm nervous that the show will succumb to making marriages the centerpiece of the show.

 

 

I agree that all of that is a potential problem; I just also see the potential that Mary (and the baby) can be in the show without "ruining" the boys' relationship. Is it likely that she won't? As you pointed out, the history of TV isn't too promising in that regard. But then, as you say, there's House. And what does this show very closely resemble....?

 

I'm not too nervous about marriage becoming the centerpiece, because Sherlock isn't -- and I predict, never will be -- married. And he's at least half, if not more, of the show. So we can all just sleep through John's half if we have to.

 

Besides ... if we'd all just relax and let go of our expectations, and just watch what Moftiss gives us without criticizing them for not reading our minds and making it go the way WE think it should go....... who knows, we might actually enjoy the results. Not here so much, but in other places on the 'net, I'm seeing all kinds of dire threats if the story doesn't go exactly the way Person A or B wants it go. Puh-leez!

 

(BTW, I think that baby carrier looks silly too ... but I think it would look just as silly on Mary. I think they look silly wherever I encounter them, real life or fiction.....)

 

Agghgh, gotta run.

 

 

[Boton]

 

 

Oooooh, you are all a hard, cruel bunch! :P

 

Does having a wife and baby absolutely rule out also having a best friend? That seems awfully restrictive. But maybe it depends on what you think a friendship looks like. I don't have to see the boys always in each other's back pockets to believe they are really close. Of course, I'm the person who's been predicting for ages that Sherlock is destined to end up as a lone, somewhat remote figure. I think the one constant in his life will be John's friendship, but not necessarily his continual presence.

 

Well, no, it doesn't.  But it's kind of problematic for me because of the way you have to update Sherlock Holmes vis-a-vis modern culture.

 

For me, the original ACD stories could have had Mary and a baby alive and in Watson's life the entire time, because she was confined to the domestic sphere by Victorian social mores.  Not only did that remove Mary from the storytelling equation, but it also gave some excuse as to why Watson would be able to go off on potentially life-endangering quests with Holmes: he's the only one in the family out in the public sphere, and he can do what he needs to support the family.  (But, we have hints that Mary died, so moot point.)

 

In modern Sherlock, we have two things that make it difficult for me to imagine a future with Mary and the baby in the picture.  First, there's John and that bloody baby carrier.  That's what we expect today: a modern father who's taking his turn at baby nurturing and domestic chores, and that will create scenes just like setlock, where John has the baby strapped to him.  Which is part of the problem; once John has a baby, he's not going to want to risk his life in some quest against an ultra-baddie like CAM or something, because then we'll be over here in these forums raising holy cane about how irresponsible he's being.

 

Second, there's Mary.  I think if there were no baby, we could plausibly say that Mary is off on her own freelance jobs and has no interest in meddling, but this way, I almost feel like Mary is so good (and Arcadia, you made that point elsewhere), anytime the boys come up against a thorny problem, they should probably ask Mary for help.  And I love Mary, but I don't want a crime solving trio.

 

Third, I think we have a cultural expectation that romantic relationships trump all other relationships in fiction. (I think that's one of the many reasons for the popularity of Johnlock; we want the boys to have the most intense relationship possible, and our cultural vernacular says that's a romantic one.)  We do have some exceptions for female friendships (Sex and the City, Grey's Anatomy), but I can't think of any really where the male protagonists put their relationship above a marriage unless we build in a reason like making them police or combat soldiers or something.  Part of the charm of the Holmes/Watson relationship, to me, is that it is entirely about choice.  There's no earthly reason these two should prioritize one another, but they do.  

 

Finally, and this is just me, but I'm bored with watching sexual tension and romance and procreation.  Yeah, it can be entertaining, but it's where every single show seems to go.  If the creators can plausibly get Mary and the baby off screen (no offense, AA) and keep the Holmes/Watson relationship front and center at all times, then I don't care what either one of them has going on on the side.  (House accomplished this very successfully, for my money.)  But I'm nervous that the show will succumb to making marriages the centerpiece of the show.

 

 

I agree that all of that is a potential problem; I just also see the potential that Mary (and the baby) can be in the show without "ruining" the boys' relationship. Is it likely that she won't? As you pointed out, the history of TV isn't too promising in that regard. But then, as you say, there's House. And what does this show very closely resemble....?

 

I'm not too nervous about marriage becoming the centerpiece, because Sherlock isn't -- and I predict, never will be -- married. And he's at least half, if not more, of the show. So we can all just sleep through John's half if we have to.

 

Besides ... if we'd all just relax and let go of our expectations, and just watch what Moftiss gives us without criticizing them for not reading our minds and making it go the way WE think it should go....... who knows, we might actually enjoy the results. Not here so much, but in other places on the 'net, I'm seeing all kinds of dire threats if the story doesn't go exactly the way Person A or B wants it go. Puh-leez!

 

(BTW, I think that baby carrier looks silly too ... but I think it would look just as silly on Mary. I think they look silly wherever I encounter them, real life or fiction.....)

 

Agghgh, gotta run.

 

 

 

Well, if I relaxed and let go of expectations, what would I have to fret about until the season starts?  :-)

 

Actually, I do trust Moftiss, and they pulled off something with the relationship among Sherlock, John, and Mary that I had worried a bit about over time.  If they can work the same magic, I'm in.  And I do think they have gotten a fair amount of inspiration from House, which makes me rest a bit easier.

 

For me, all this "worry" is the happy result of being really invested in a TV show for the first time in ages.  Will I turn the TV off and go away in a sulk if they don't show exactly what I want to see?  Of course not.  I'm in this for the long haul, unless they really, seriously jump the shark at some point.  But I get a thrill every time I watch an episode of Sherlock, and that's true even on repeated viewings.  I just really want that feeling to continue.

[Arcadia]

Amen to that.

 

And I'm not adverse to worrying! (Who, me? Never! ) But I do get frustrated with people who say things like "they'd better kill off Mary in the first episode or it will be the last episode I watch." Inflexible, much? :P Oh well, they probably don't mean it anyway.

 

I think my biggest worry is that they will continue to minimize John's role to the point that Martin will finally say "to heck with it" and leave the show. I hope John gets a really good story line next time. Not just for Martin's sake, but just because it's John's turn to shine, imo. Although Sherlock's so bright it's sort of hard to see past him sometimes.....

[J.P.]

Oh, I said "they better don't kill Mycroft or I'll quit". And I mean it.

So far...

I think..

[Inge l-w]

The alleged fanboy creators either fly off the bat with their version of a domesticated Dr Watson and a restless, roving Sherlock to keep the fires of TJLC alight, or they abide by Dr Watson's "sad loss", and it's Sherlock and John as per usual. I have no idea of other forums and their militancy, but if it turns as bad as TAB, with Mary effortlessly slashing MI5 codes on her phone (very funny!) and working for Mycroft and solving issues right, left and centre, then they should start thinking of renaming the show: The Amazing Mrs Watson, for example.

[Caya]

But I do get frustrated with people who say things like "they'd better kill off Mary in the first episode or it will be the last episode I watch." Inflexible, much? :P Oh well, they probably don't mean it anyway.

 

Will you forgive me for planning just that?  -_- Well, more or less - in my case it's more like, sitting out the season and reading the spoilers afterwards to see whether Mary's position is still "accepted member of the gang" before I decide whether or not to watch S4 at all. Don't get me wrong, I wish everyone who enjoys watching the detective trio all the best and lots of fun - it's just not something I care to spend my time on. And I'll keep hanging round here regardless anyway .

[Arcadia]

Oh, I said "they better don't kill Mycroft or I'll quit". And I mean it.

So far...

I think..

Yep. Right. Inflexible, I get it now....

 

 

But I do get frustrated with people who say things like "they'd better kill off Mary in the first episode or it will be the last episode I watch." Inflexible, much? :P Oh well, they probably don't mean it anyway.

Will you forgive me for planning just that? -_-

 

No. :D

 

Well, more or less - in my case it's more like, sitting out the season and reading the spoilers afterwards to see whether Mary's position is still "accepted member of the gang" before I decide whether or not to watch S4 at all. Don't get me wrong, I wish everyone who enjoys watching the detective trio all the best and lots of fun - it's just not something I care to spend my time on. And I'll keep hanging round here regardless anyway .

 

Ooooooh, the lies I am prepared to tell you ...

 

You must have a lot more willpower than I do ... no matter how the story goes, no way could I resist seeing how they tell it. But then I'm one of those sad people who set everything aside to watch the last episode of Lost. And disliked it just as much as I suspected I would. *sigh* But no way I would rely on what other people said about it, nuh-uh. They might lie.... :P

[Caya]

 

No. :D

 

 

As for willpower, nah, it's more like meh. When our internet conked out last New Year's Eve, I was pretty frantic because I couldn't be on (and take my share of mod duties of) the forum during such a high-traffic time. But as for the Special itself, I honestly wasn't bothered too much that I'd only see it later. My enthusiasm has been, one could say, shot through the heart B).

[Arcadia]

Noooo... not....INDIFFERENCE!!!!

[Pseudonym]

I think for me a big part of it is who is John's priority? As a father and husband his priority has to be with his family. And we already know he and Sherlock drifted apart when John came back from his honeymoon, how much more extreme will that be when John is turning down cases because he's looking after the baby?

[Arcadia]

Maybe ... but I think one of the points of HLV was to make John realize that he will not be content to stay home and lead an "ordinary" life. He has been handed the perfect excuse -- he "needs" danger -- to go out and play with Sherlock whenever he wants. I expect Mary to be all understanding and supportive and tell him to go ahead. Not very realistic, perhaps ... but neither is the idea that John is "addicted to danger" in the first place. So I suspect that's why they gave him that trait.

 

Also this is not one of those shows where you're dropping in to visit the characters once a week. Whole months went by in ASIB alone .... lord knows how many months pass between episodes. I have no problem imagining that Sherlock and John would barely see each other for weeks on end, yet still be ready to join forces when the situation calls for it. Isn't that how it sort of worked in the books? Holmes was solving crimes whether Watson was around or not? But occasionally they'd meet up, or Watson would be called for, and off they'd go? I seem to remember that from the few I've read; they each had their own lives, but were together when it mattered. (Mostly so Watson could record the proceedings, as I recall. )

 

On a more realistic note ... I know there's this modern ideal of both parents sharing equally when it comes to house and kids, but the reality is ... women still bear the larger share of homemaking and child-rearing, even the moms who work outside the home. At least, in this country. Maybe it's genuinely different in Britain?

[Pseudonym]

 

 

On a more realistic note ... I know there's this modern ideal of both parents sharing equally when it comes to house and kids, but the reality is ... women still bear the larger share of homemaking and child-rearing, even the moms who work outside the home. At least, in this country. Maybe it's genuinely different in Britain?

 

I don't know, but I can't imagine London being much different to any big city in America. I think what makes me doubtful is knowing Mary's past I really can't imagine her being happy if her and John didn't take equal responsibility, I think she would expect him to look after the baby as much as she does.