Eurus

[Surelock]

I think that's why I find Eurus fascinating. I keep trying to imagine going through the world with no emotional context, and I can't. To me, it sounds boring beyond endurance, for one thing. Aha ... maybe that's why Sherlock was always complaining about boredom ...

 

Which reminds me, who wants to take a stab at explaining this to me?

 

SHERLOCK (quietly, thoughtfully): I said I’d bring her home. I can’t, can I?

JOHN: Well, you gave her what she was looking for: context.

SHERLOCK (looking round at him): Is that good?

JOHN: It’s not good, it’s not bad. It’s ...

(He looks away and screws up his face, searching for the right words, then turns back to his friend.)

JOHN: It is what it is.

 

(From Ariane Devere: http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/92287.html

 

You can't change the past so just accept whatever happened and moved on.

 

That's basically what 'It is what it is' means.

 

Honestly I wonder if that quote has a meta-meaning because it kind of feels like Moffatiss kept telling themselves 'It is what it is' when they wrote the script for Season 4.

[bedelia1984]

 

Yes there really is that inherent contradiction in her character- apparently a genius to the level of Newton, but incapable of learning the difference between right and wrong?

 

I can see room for sympathy for her, because her actions, even if they are self-interested, don't achieve the aims that she wants- everything she did made her increasingly isolated instead of less so. Even her own self-awareness seems shot- when she is reacting to Sherlock's tests, it is as if she doesn't even know what she is feeling herself- 'all those complicated little emotions, I've lost count,'- but really she must feel totally flummoxed, if someone asked her to identify them, she would likely get it all wrong.

 

In a way, it is surprising that Moriarty had the death wish and not Eurus. Her quality of life is pretty terrible in comparison to his.

But was she even capable of realizing that? She may have been completely miserable; but how would she know? She can't distinguish misery from joy, it would seem.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think the point they were trying to make was that this is what Sherlock would have become if he had managed to completely stripped himself of the ability to feel, as he seemed to be trying to do. It's hard for me to imagine what such a person would be like, but I think they were trying to show us, through Eurus.

 

But then why the little girl persona? Because her inability to connect with people also kept her from becoming a fully developed human being? Which, come to think of it, does sort of describe Sherlock, as well.

 

Do you suppose Moftiss really thinks all this stuff through? :D

 

 

I'd like to think they do, but probably not as much as us, no!

 

I do think they wanted to show where the path of ignoring any emotional response went. In a way, they did better with Mycroft, who seemed to try and apply a practical response to covering up Eurus, at the expense of the parents having contact with her? Or does that just show that like everyone in the family Mycroft has trouble processing emotions?

 

It might be true she didn't know what she was feeling, but she knew she wanted out, and she knew she wanted to see Sherlock. And, whilst of course she got out of Sherrinford, she chose to go back there. It seemed to me like Eurus was institutionalised, she's grown fond of her cage. Even when she did finally leave, it was just to go as far as the family home.

 

Was she unable to connect or just horribly delayed in the process? She does manage a connection with Sherlock in the end, doesn't she?

 

 

 

 

But was she even capable of realizing that? She may have been completely miserable; but how would she know? She can't distinguish misery from joy, it would seem.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think the point they were trying to make was that this is what Sherlock would have become if he had managed to completely stripped himself of the ability to feel, as he seemed to be trying to do. It's hard for me to imagine what such a person would be like, but I think they were trying to show us, through Eurus.

 

 

And this is another reason why I find Euros to be such a boring character.

 

How many times have we seen the cliche 'Oh you would be like this person if you went down the wrong path' character in stories? 

 

Nowadays it just feels really lazy when writers resort to this because even an average reader can figure out what the repercussions of a character's poor decisions can be. We don't need such details spoon fed to us.

 

 

I think it is a little more complex than a choice of path- Sherlock actually has a choice, he can choose act on what he feels, or to ignore what he feels, but Eurus doesn't seem to have that open to her? For her, she is in many ways still at the toddler stage of development, where the consequences of what she does seem to carry no meaning for her. Like Rosamund throwing away the rattle despite the fact that she wants it?

 

 

Yes there really is that inherent contradiction in her character- apparently a genius to the level of Newton, but incapable of learning the difference between right and wrong?

Gosh, I absolutely hate the Newton comparison. The way she's described - Newton was just another goldfish to her. Plus he didn't seem to have an ability to reprogramm others' brains.

 

But back on track: I think children learn right and wrong through emotions, and the ability to read the emotions in others. It has nothing to do with the calculating capability of their brains. It's like expecting a computer to distinguish between computing an orbit of the next weather satelite, from the trajectories of the nuclear missiles about to hit another country.

 

 

Yes, mentioning Newton at all is a bit cringe- inducing. I see it as them wondering how they can possibly convey to us dummies at home her level of intelligence. And of course the difficulty of writing someone at that level of genius when you may only just be human yourself  :D

 

Like I mention above, as well as the emotions, don't consequences teach children right from wrong? Like, killing Victor in no way got Eurus what she wanted, but she didn't seem to learn from that at all? Or was it impossible for her to distinguish bad consequences from good? Maybe imprisonment suited her (and that is why she put herself in that plane), because she was incapable of ever containing herself?

[J.P.]

What I meant is the very early developement stage, when children learn the very ideas of good and wrong by the emotional response of other people, before they even can develop an idea of consequences.

 

Then, she apparently didn't have the ability to identify her own physical pain as a negative impulse, which is a bit confusing and interesting at the same time, because the unability to feel physical is a life threatening condition and a disability, but I never heard of anyone being able to feel it, but not having the instinct to avoid it. Imagining that is fascinating and terryfying at once.

 

Note to self - do your research.

[bedelia1984]

Whether Eurus has any sort of pain response, or a way of interpreting it, is an interesting concept. I've read about the type of condition you describe, and actually the show 'House'- (that other Holmes derivative) did a a show on it called 'Painless'. As you say, it is a deadly condition, as the pain response stops you from harming yourself, first and foremost. They also did a show about someone who was unable to feel irritation, because the brain didn't react correctly to the stimulus of noise and stress, which was really fascinating.

 

She does speak about not wanting to be left out- and that is a kind of emotional pain, right? Did she see it as a value judgement, that Sherlock was saying she wasn't good enough to play with? So on some level she knew she was hurting, and how to hurt, but it was as if there was absolutely no sense of proportion.

 

I still find the parents role in her upbringing baffling. The house seemed littered with warning signs (her drawings especially). Why wasn't there some kind of intervention for Eurus before things turned violent? The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

[Arcadia]

 

Which reminds me, who wants to take a stab at explaining this to me?

 

SHERLOCK (quietly, thoughtfully): I said I’d bring her home. I can’t, can I?

JOHN: Well, you gave her what she was looking for: context.

SHERLOCK (looking round at him): Is that good?

JOHN: It’s not good, it’s not bad. It’s ...

(He looks away and screws up his face, searching for the right words, then turns back to his friend.)

JOHN: It is what it is.

 

(From Ariane Devere: http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/92287.html

 

You can't change the past so just accept whatever happened and moved on.

 

That's basically what 'It is what it is' means.

 

Honestly I wonder if that quote has a meta-meaning because it kind of feels like Moffatiss kept telling themselves 'It is what it is' when they wrote the script for Season 4.

 

 

Perfectly sound analysis, but I was hoping you’d go deeper. ;)

 

Why did she want context? What WAS the context? What does it mean that Sherlock has to turn to John to find out if having context is good or bad?

 

 

I do think they wanted to show where the path of ignoring any emotional response went. In a way, they did better with Mycroft, who seemed to try and apply a practical response to covering up Eurus, at the expense of the parents having contact with her? Or does that just show that like everyone in the family Mycroft has trouble processing emotions?

Your first idea feels more right to me ... Mycroft has chosen to be dispassionate (and also possibly may just come by it naturally), so he sometimes misses what others would consider to be "obvious." I rather sympathize with him there, I have similar problems sometimes.

 

It might be true she didn't know what she was feeling, but she knew she wanted out, and she knew she wanted to see Sherlock. And, whilst of course she got out of Sherrinford, she chose to go back there. It seemed to me like Eurus was institutionalised, she's grown fond of her cage. Even when she did finally leave, it was just to go as far as the family home.

Here's where it gets muddy for me. Why did she want to see Sherlock? Why would she care? Which kind of brings me back to the boredom thing; was she just looking for something to do? Or was she obsessed with him in some way? Does she even have motivation, or was it all just random crazy? That last part doesn't sound quite right, though, because she was capable of following through on a long term plan; if she'd been randomly crazy, would she have been able to stick with her plan? Why do I keep coming up with more questions instead of answers?

 

She did manage to go to London and pretend to be "normal" people. She spent time with Sherlock then, if that was her only goal, why not just adopt a fake personality every once in a while, and spend time with him? So I think the only reason she did that was to set up her plan, and study Sherlock up close. And I think the reason she went to Musgrave was simply so Sherlock could complete the riddle. He had to see the gravestones, and he had to find her in her room. And that's where the well was, too. Also, I suspect she didn't go back to Sherrinford willingly so much as she was just shut down at that point, and did whatever she was made to do. (But why did she shut down?)

 

Was she unable to connect or just horribly delayed in the process? She does manage a connection with Sherlock in the end, doesn't she?

At Musgrave, you mean? I'm still unsure what was supposed to happen there. He solved her riddle, and found her, and she was suddenly in little girl mode, and allowed him to tell her what to do. But was there a connection? Immediately afterwards she shuts down so no one could reach her.

 

But later, with the violin, yeah, I'd say he definitely made a connection then. Maybe not a truly emotional one, but as close to it as she could get. By the way, I thought it was a nice touch ... she's a better player than he is! She got a sweeter tone out of her violin than he did. Oh, and I also note that Mycroft, in his way, loved her too ... he got her the best violin he could get. He could have brought her a kid's toy, but no, he gets a Strad. Aw, Mycroft, you do care, you reptile.

I think it is a little more complex than a choice of path- Sherlock actually has a choice, he can choose act on what he feels, or to ignore what he feels, but Eurus doesn't seem to have that open to her? For her, she is in many ways still at the toddler stage of development, where the consequences of what she does seem to carry no meaning for her. Like Rosamund throwing away the rattle despite the fact that she wants it?

 Yeah, that. Oooo, more foreshadowing!

 

Like I mention above, as well as the emotions, don't consequences teach children right from wrong? Like, killing Victor in no way got Eurus what she wanted, but she didn't seem to learn from that at all? Or was it impossible for her to distinguish bad consequences from good? Maybe imprisonment suited her (and that is why she put herself in that plane), because she was incapable of ever containing herself?

Yeah, that's what I thought they were trying to establish; she can't distinguish bad from good on any level, even consequences; because whatever the consequence, it all feels the same to her. Yet she says Sherlock was her favorite, and she loved to hear him laugh ... but if she doesn't know what love feels like, then how did she know he was her favorite? How was she able to take pleasure from hearing him laugh or scream? Just the sound alone, maybe, was that what intrigued her?

 

At any rate, I don't think she put herself on the plane; I think she found herself on the plane, with no idea how or why she was there, or how to get off. That was a pretty neat metaphor, actually. But I'm still puzzled as to whether the girl on the plane popped out at random, or just when Eurus wanted her to.

 

I'm beginning to understand why I didn't major in psychology. :D

[bedelia1984]

In retrospect, I wonder if the episode Moftiss really wanted to write was Sherlock taking a journey into Eurus's mind palace? Because essentially that is what we got, though of course if they had done it in a straight-forward way it might have been a little too sci-fi for this show.

 

 

 

Which reminds me, who wants to take a stab at explaining this to me? 

SHERLOCK (quietly, thoughtfully): I said I’d bring her home. I can’t, can I?
JOHN: Well, you gave her what she was looking for: context.
SHERLOCK (looking round at him): Is that good?
JOHN: It’s not good, it’s not bad. It’s ...
(He looks away and screws up his face, searching for the right words, then turns back to his friend.)
JOHN: It is what it is.

(From Ariane Devere: http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/92287.html

 
You can't change the past so just accept whatever happened and moved on.
 
That's basically what 'It is what it is' means.
 
Honestly I wonder if that quote has a meta-meaning because it kind of feels like Moffatiss kept telling themselves 'It is what it is' when they wrote the script for Season 4.

 

 
Perfectly sound analysis, but I was hoping you’d go deeper.  ;)

Why did she want context? What WAS the context? What does it mean that Sherlock has to turn to John to find out if having context is good or bad?
 

 

In a way he did take her home though, the way they tell it in the montage at least, he brings a little bit of Baker Street to her, with his violin playing (and the Holmes family in tow, too).

 

 

It might be true she didn't know what she was feeling, but she knew she wanted out, and she knew she wanted to see Sherlock. And, whilst of course she got out of Sherrinford, she chose to go back there. It seemed to me like Eurus was institutionalised, she's grown fond of her cage. Even when she did finally leave, it was just to go as far as the family home.

Here's where it gets muddy for me. Why did she want to see Sherlock? Why would she care? Which kind of brings me back to the boredom thing; was she just looking for something to do? Or was she obsessed with him in some way? Does she even have motivation, or was it all just random crazy? That last part doesn't sound quite right, though, because she was capable of following through on a long term plan; if she'd been randomly crazy, would she have been able to stick with her plan? Why do I keep coming up with more questions instead of answers? 
 
She did manage to go to London and pretend to be "normal" people. She spent time with Sherlock then, if that was her only goal, why not just adopt a fake personality every once in a while, and spend time with him? So I think the only reason she did that was to set up her plan, and study Sherlock up close. And I think the reason she went to Musgrave was simply so Sherlock could complete the riddle. He had to see the gravestones, and he had to find her in her room. And that's where the well was, too. Also, I suspect she didn't go back to Sherrinford willingly so much as she was just shut down at that point, and did whatever she was made to do. (But why did she shut down?)

 

In a sense she is just designed to be an enigma, isn't she? In one way her motivation seems terrifically simple- it is just a childish need for attention- good or bad, makes no real difference. But she does call Sherlock her favourite, in her flashbacks she seems to prefer him to Mycroft, and as Faith she likes him too, she calls him nice, but how does she know he is nice? The strange thing to me about her plan is that it was all so grounded in  where she already was and had been- Sherrinford, her chidhood home...  there did not seem to be any built in endgame for Eurus if she didn't go back?

 

Like I mention above, as well as the emotions, don't consequences teach children right from wrong? Like, killing Victor in no way got Eurus what she wanted, but she didn't seem to learn from that at all? Or was it impossible for her to distinguish bad consequences from good? Maybe imprisonment suited her (and that is why she put herself in that plane), because she was incapable of ever containing herself?

Yeah, that's what I thought they were trying to establish; she can't distinguish bad from good on any level, even consequences; because whatever the consequence, it all feels the same to her. Yet she says Sherlock was her favorite, and she loved to hear him laugh ... but if she doesn't know what love feels like, then how did she know he was her favorite? How was she able to take pleasure from hearing him laugh or scream? Just the sound alone, maybe, was that what intrigued her?
 
At any rate, I don't think she put herself on the plane; I think she found herself on the plane, with no idea how or why she was there, or how to get off. That was a pretty neat metaphor, actually. But I'm still puzzled as to whether the girl on the plane popped out at random, or just when Eurus wanted her to.

 

I think the reason that I put it that way, is that Eurus seems to be constantly trying to put other people in boxes of a sort herself- Victor in the well, Molly in the coffin, John in the well, And all those rooms she puts the boys in too- and then finally we see her in her own room at home- there is something about solitary confinement that seems to sit well with her. I can't help but think that she is placing other people in the kind of isolation that she feels herself. Maybe part of her even thinks that if she sees how they escape from her traps, then she can somehow escape for her own? And it is not a literal escape, leaving Sherrinford doesn't help her, because this is her own mind she's trying to get to grips with. It wouldn't help too, that most psychologists probably aren't smart enough to understand her- so I guess we shouldn't feel too bad either  :D

 

Of course it's a very jumbled up reasoning, I'm combining the literal and the metaphorical here, but her brand of logic seems to call for it a bit...

[T.o.b.y]

I haven't seen anything speculating on his sexual orientation ... all I've seen is the observation that his attention to Sherlock has sexually abusive overtones, similar to CAM's in the deleted scenes.

 

Okay, that wouldn't have occurred to me on my own but now that you mention it it makes sense.

 

I suppose they have always wanted to do a scene like that. Remember the cabbie in the pilot episode? Seems they couldn't quite let that idea go. They scrapped it twice (the cabbie is vastly different in A Study in Pink and in His Last Vow, Magnussen's hospital visit fortunately did not make the final cut) but I suppose now that it was perhaps their last chance to make a Sherlock season, they decided to include it after all.

 

I can imagine Smith getting off on the act of killing - a particular kind of sadism, I guess. Seeing as his victims seem to be from various age groups with no regard for gender (he talks about it being literally "anyone"), I don't think this says anything about his sexual orientation. He just likes "turning people into things".

 

It's a very neat variation of their rather disturbing theme that when this kind of abuse finally makes it into a finished episode, Sherlock is actually in charge of the situation and only plays along to bring about the villain's downfall. It's very similar to the story "The Dying Detective", where Smith gloats and gloats and Holmes gives an excellent performance of a dying man that seems to satisfy Smith immensely until the police come in and arrest him and Watson steps out of his hiding place to bear witness to his confession.

 

So Sherlock isn't really a victim in that scene at all - which makes it a lot more okay for me to watch than the ones they ended up not using.

 

 

Okay. Back to Euros (if the name is Greek, then it should be spelled with "-os", shouldn't it?). I need to watch the episode again (and probably a few more times) to make up my mind about her. Just a few more practical questions for a start:

 

- Could the "mutual friend" who gave her Faith's note have been Moriarty? Would that fit, time-wise? Not during the five minute visit, obviously, but I am pretty sure that there was lots of communication between the two after that. Moriarty probably gave her a phone or some other device that let her stay in touch with him and I bet he also sent her stuff by mail. He is just the man to find ways to have it delivered to her (and Sherrinford staff seems to have been far from infallible, so he could well have found accomplices among them, also Euros most certainly did her bit from inside). But did Faith write the note long ago that Moriarty could have gotten it to her before he died?

 

- Likewise, could Euros be the true source of information on Sherlock and his life story that Moriarty gave to the press in The Reichenbach Fall?

 

- By the time Sherlock was put on the plane in His Last Vow, Euros was certainly enough in control at Sherrinford to have had the freedom to be behind Moriarty's "miss me?" message, right? That was probably one of his many recordings that he made for her. Of course Euros would not want Sherlock exiled; she had spent an awful lot of time and effort setting up her game / experiment for him, that couldn't be allowed to go to waste.

 

[Surelock]

 

I think it is a little more complex than a choice of path- Sherlock actually has a choice, he can choose act on what he feels, or to ignore what he feels, but Eurus doesn't seem to have that open to her? For her, she is in many ways still at the toddler stage of development, where the consequences of what she does seem to carry no meaning for her. Like Rosamund throwing away the rattle despite the fact that she wants it?

 

 

I have trouble seeing how someone with an intellect greater than Newton can even be compared to a toddler. Then again it looks like she may have been a toddler in some way so I guess it's just difficult to understand.

 

 

I still find the parents role in her upbringing baffling. The house seemed littered with warning signs (her drawings especially). Why wasn't there some kind of intervention for Eurus before things turned violent? The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

 

I think it's possible that her parents just didn't want to send Euros to some mental asylum. I mean she's a super genius so they want to see her succeed in life. I don't think any parent wants to see their kid go to an asylum, jail or any other kind of institution.

 

 

Like I mention above, as well as the emotions, don't consequences teach children right from wrong? Like, killing Victor in no way got Eurus what she wanted, but she didn't seem to learn from that at all? Or was it impossible for her to distinguish bad consequences from good? Maybe imprisonment suited her (and that is why she put herself in that plane), because she was incapable of ever containing herself?

Yeah, that's what I thought they were trying to establish; she can't distinguish bad from good on any level, even consequences; because whatever the consequence, it all feels the same to her. Yet she says Sherlock was her favorite, and she loved to hear him laugh ... but if she doesn't know what love feels like, then how did she know he was her favorite? How was she able to take pleasure from hearing him laugh or scream? Just the sound alone, maybe, was that what intrigued her?

 

At any rate, I don't think she put herself on the plane; I think she found herself on the plane, with no idea how or why she was there, or how to get off. That was a pretty neat metaphor, actually. But I'm still puzzled as to whether the girl on the plane popped out at random, or just when Eurus wanted her to.

 

I'm beginning to understand why I didn't major in psychology. :D

 

 

If you rewatch the scene, Sherlock also asks Euros why he was screaming. Then Euros says that he already knows. Then Sherlock says Redbeard.

 

Maybe this can give us great context as to why Euros hid Victor down a well. Maybe Euros believed she was playing a game with Sherlock by hiding Victor. When Sherlock started screaming because he couldn't find him, Euros thought he was laughing and thus she thought that she was finally happily playing with her brother. 

 

As for the girl on the plane, Euros said specifically that she was back on the plane every time she closed her eyes so it sounded like it was out of her control. So basically Euros could never exactly escape from the plane. Even when she was sleeping with her eyes closed, she was on the plane. 

[bedelia1984]

 

 

 

I still find the parents role in her upbringing baffling. The house seemed littered with warning signs (her drawings especially). Why wasn't there some kind of intervention for Eurus before things turned violent? The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

 

I think it's possible that her parents just didn't want to send Euros to some mental asylum. I mean she's a super genius so they want to see her succeed in life. I don't think any parent wants to see their kid go to an asylum, jail or any other kind of institution.

 

 

Yes, I can see your point here, but surely there is some sort of middle ground in terms of what the consequences are? It seems like Mrs. Holmes especially is not treating the situation with the gravity it deserves. And it isn't just Victor who is in danger, in her drawings Euros is threatening Sherlock too.

 

 

 

 

 

....

 

 

If you rewatch the scene, Sherlock also asks Euros why he was screaming. Then Euros says that he already knows. Then Sherlock says Redbeard.

 

Maybe this can give us great context as to why Euros hid Victor down a well. Maybe Euros believed she was playing a game with Sherlock by hiding Victor. When Sherlock started screaming because he couldn't find him, Euros thought he was laughing and thus she thought that she was finally happily playing with her brother. 

 

As for the girl on the plane, Euros said specifically that she was back on the plane every time she closed her eyes so it sounded like it was out of her control. So basically Euros could never exactly escape from the plane. Even when she was sleeping with her eyes closed, she was on the plane. 

 

 

 

I think the first part of what you say sounds right. About her closing her eyes- the part of this that I don't think works, is how is it that Euros was able to turn on and off the television feed in accordance with when she became the girl on the plane? How would she even know to switch from a video to an audio only feed, how would she plan to alter the voice so it sounded like a child, if she didn't know the voice was there? To me that seems like she needed some control. And also, she was staggering how much information the little girl could give Sherlock- how could she do that if she couldn't on some level hear it?

[Arcadia]

Okay. Back to Euros (if the name is Greek, then it should be spelled with "-os", shouldn't it?). I need to watch the episode again (and probably a few more times) to make up my mind about her. Just a few more practical questions for a start:

I'm pretty sure someone said that it's Eurus because that's the femininization of Euros. (?) Anyway, "Eurus" is what the subtitles over here are saying.

 

- Could the "mutual friend" who gave her Faith's note have been Moriarty? Would that fit, time-wise? Not during the five minute visit, obviously, but I am pretty sure that there was lots of communication between the two after that. Moriarty probably gave her a phone or some other device that let her stay in touch with him and I bet he also sent her stuff by mail. He is just the man to find ways to have it delivered to her (and Sherrinford staff seems to have been far from infallible, so he could well have found accomplices among them, also Euros most certainly did her bit from inside). But did Faith write the note long ago that Moriarty could have gotten it to her before he died?

I thought at first the "mutual friend" must be Moriarity, but now I'm not so sure; because when "Faith" comes to 221B, she says it's been 3 years since she wrote the note. I figure TLD took place, at most, a few to several months after HLV. And HLV took place ... what, at least 3 years after Moriarty died? So the timing would be awfully tight, if not impossible, for it to be Moriarty. Still, the Moftisses haven't exactly been known for temporal continuity in this show, have they? 

 

Then there's Smith's mention of some people who don't take the "forgetfulness drug", because they have similar "urges." At the time I thought, again, he was referring to Moriarty, but now I'm wondering if they're hinting at someone else?

 

- By the time Sherlock was put on the plane in His Last Vow, Euros was certainly enough in control at Sherrinford to have had the freedom to be behind Moriarty's "miss me?" message, right? That was probably one of his many recordings that he made for her. Of course Euros would not want Sherlock exiled; she had spent an awful lot of time and effort setting up her game / experiment for him, that couldn't be allowed to go to waste.

 

I think that has to be right, yeah.

 

 

I still find the parents role in her upbringing baffling. The house seemed littered with warning signs (her drawings especially). Why wasn't there some kind of intervention for Eurus before things turned violent? The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

 

I think it's possible that her parents just didn't want to send Euros to some mental asylum. I mean she's a super genius so they want to see her succeed in life. I don't think any parent wants to see their kid go to an asylum, jail or any other kind of institution.

 

I think it's possible there was some kind of intervention, but maybe too little, too late? There's really nothing to indicate one way or the other, imo. But I can believe they tried to get help for her, but it just didn't work.

 

Maybe this can give us great context as to why Euros hid Victor down a well. Maybe Euros believed she was playing a game with Sherlock by hiding Victor. When Sherlock started screaming because he couldn't find him, Euros thought he was laughing and thus she thought that she was finally happily playing with her brother.

I think that too. I wonder if she still thinks she's playing we she puts John in the well. But I get the impression that this time it's because she knows it will put pressure on Sherlock to solve her problem.

 

As for the girl on the plane, Euros said specifically that she was back on the plane every time she closed her eyes so it sounded like it was out of her control. So basically Euros could never exactly escape from the plane. Even when she was sleeping with her eyes closed, she was on the plane.

 

...... About her closing her eyes- the part of this that I don't think works, is how is it that Euros was able to turn on and off the television feed in accordance with when she became the girl on the plane? How would she even know to switch from a video to an audio only feed, how would she plan to alter the voice so it sounded like a child, if she didn't know the voice was there? To me that seems like she needed some control. And also, she was staggering how much information the little girl could give Sherlock- how could she do that if she couldn't on some level hear it?

 

How about this ... she couldn't control the sensation that she was a little girl on a plane, lost and out of control. Maybe that feeling is with her at all times? But she could fake being that little girl, as needed, in order to play her game with Sherlock. Would that make sense?

[Surelock]

 

 

 

 

I still find the parents role in her upbringing baffling. The house seemed littered with warning signs (her drawings especially). Why wasn't there some kind of intervention for Eurus before things turned violent? The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

 

I think it's possible that her parents just didn't want to send Euros to some mental asylum. I mean she's a super genius so they want to see her succeed in life. I don't think any parent wants to see their kid go to an asylum, jail or any other kind of institution.

 

 

Yes, I can see your point here, but surely there is some sort of middle ground in terms of what the consequences are? It seems like Mrs. Holmes especially is not treating the situation with the gravity it deserves. And it isn't just Victor who is in danger, in her drawings Euros is threatening Sherlock too.

 

 

 

 

 

....

 

 

If you rewatch the scene, Sherlock also asks Euros why he was screaming. Then Euros says that he already knows. Then Sherlock says Redbeard.

 

Maybe this can give us great context as to why Euros hid Victor down a well. Maybe Euros believed she was playing a game with Sherlock by hiding Victor. When Sherlock started screaming because he couldn't find him, Euros thought he was laughing and thus she thought that she was finally happily playing with her brother. 

 

As for the girl on the plane, Euros said specifically that she was back on the plane every time she closed her eyes so it sounded like it was out of her control. So basically Euros could never exactly escape from the plane. Even when she was sleeping with her eyes closed, she was on the plane. 

 

 

 

I think the first part of what you say sounds right. About her closing her eyes- the part of this that I don't think works, is how is it that Euros was able to turn on and off the television feed in accordance with when she became the girl on the plane? How would she even know to switch from a video to an audio only feed, how would she plan to alter the voice so it sounded like a child, if she didn't know the voice was there? To me that seems like she needed some control. And also, she was staggering how much information the little girl could give Sherlock- how could she do that if she couldn't on some level hear it?

 

 

 

I think it's possible that the Holmes just didn't know how to raise their kids. Their father was just a normal man and yes their mother was a maths genius but we don't see signs of any other talent from her. I think Mycroft, Sherlock and Euros were a lot smarter than their parents. Their parents just didn't really know how to raise them properly and that's why their kids have a lot of grievances against them.

 

Remember in The Sign of Three (I think) Sherlock told Mrs. Hudson that he had a list of complaints for his mother while Mycroft had a file. I think what that implies is that the smarter their kid was, the more difficulty Mrs. Holmes had in raising them. The smarter child thus had more grievances than the less intelligent one.

 

Also it's true that Euros was drawing pictures of Sherlock dying in her room but maybe her parents hadn't seen them? Remember all the pictures were scattered on the floor around her. They weren't neatly arranged. It looked like she drew them all within the last hour. It kind of looked like her parents were punishing her by telling her to stay in her room and Euros was passing the time by drawing pictures.

 

As for Euros worked the TV, I think it works something like this:

 

1, Euros can close her eyes whenever she wants and becomes the little girl.

2. The little girl can also close her eyes and then revert back to being Euros.

 

However the little girl didn't seem to have the same sort of control over the situation that Euros had. I think the reason for this is because the little girl wasn't aware of the Euros persona or how she was connected to it. So in other words, the little girl didn't know that when she closed her eyes she would revert back to being Euros. On the other hand, Euros knew that when she closed her eyes she would become the little girl.

 

So Euros was able to close her eyes strategically. She strategically changed to the little girl.

 

However the little girl didn't close her eyes strategically. She seemed to close her eyes randomly and I think that makes sense. The little girl believes she's just a scared child on a plane. It makes sense for her to close her eyes randomly when the tension of the moment gets to her. 

 

That's how I think the little girl's calls with Sherlock got interrupted. I think when she was talking to Sherlock, she got stressed at certain points and then closed her eyes. The moment she did that, she reverted back to being Euros. Then Euros told Sherlock that the call was over and it was time to play another game.

[Carol the Dabbler]

The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

I didn't have the impression that Mummy had confiscated the hairband as punishment for anything (though if she did, it didn't have to be for killing Victor -- surely Eurus did any number of "naughty" things every day). I thought it was Mummy's hairband, but Eurus coveted it.

 

After reading your post, I read Ariane DeVere's transcript, and now consider it a toss-up. Here is all of Eurus's dialog on the subject:

 

Did you bring it?

My hairband. Did you bring it like I asked.

My special hairband.

The one I made you steal from Mummy.

It was the last thing I said to you, remember, the day they took me away.

[Carol the Dabbler]

By the way, it's funny that Sherlock was taught to play the violin by Eurus (AKA Euros), the Greek god of the east wind, whereas Benedict Cumberbatch was taught by Eos (Chater), the Greek goddess of the dawn.

[Surelock]

 

The fact the mother took her hairband seemed bizarre to me, it is hardly fighting fire with fire, when your child has abducted another child, to act as if she has stolen her brother's teddy bear, or something.

I didn't have the impression that Mummy had confiscated the hairband as punishment for anything (though if she did, it didn't have to be for killing Victor -- surely Eurus did any number of "naughty" things every day). I thought it was Mummy's hairband, but Eurus coveted it.

 

After reading your post, I read Ariane DeVere's transcript, and now consider it a toss-up. Here is all of Eurus's dialog on the subject:

 

Did you bring it?

My hairband. Did you bring it like I asked.

My special hairband.

The one I made you steal from Mummy.

It was the last thing I said to you, remember, the day they took me away.

 

 

It probably was a punishment for what Euros did to Victor when you consider what Mr. and Mrs. Holmes were saying offscreen in the flashback of Euros lighting the house on fire:

http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/91118.html

 

MR HOLMES (offscreen): She knows where he is!

MRS HOLMES (offscreen): We can’t make her tell us. We can’t make her do anything.

 

The 'he' that Mr. Holmes is referring to is clearly Victor. 

[Surelock]

So I decided to take another look at Euros' actions in The Six Thatchers and The Lying Detective so I can see if there's any plausible explanation for why she's dressing up and following John and Sherlock.

 

I think I've now got a semi-decent theory.

 

Essentially I think Euros was trying to reignite Sherlock's memories of herself before playing with him in Sherrinford.

 

In a way, she was doing that ever since she started with Moriarty's 'Miss Me?' videos. Mycroft had told her that Sherlock had rewritten his memories of her. He just didn't tell her that Sherlock had written her out entirely. So basically Euros knew that Sherlock's memories of her were altered but she didn't know to what extent. She wanted to remind Sherlock of herself before playing with him in Sherrinford.

 

The 'Miss Me?' videos may have been intended to not just stop Sherlock from being exiled but also to act as a subtle reminder to him of her presence.

 

Euros decided to follow this up by getting close to Sherlock's best friend, revealing herself and then threatening him. That would be a good way to remind Sherlock of who exactly Euros was because it would be similar to what Euos did to Sherlock's childhood friend Victor.

 

It should be noted that I don't think Euros just wanted to go up to John, tell him who she was and then shoot him with a tranquiliser. She wanted John to first get to know her and become comfortable around her. Then she wanted to betray him. She wanted to do this because it more accurately mirrors what happens to Victor. Victor was familiar with Euros as Sherlock's sister. He didn't fear her or anything so when Euros betrayed him it came as a big shock. This is why Euros goes to all the trouble to first getting know John as Eve (the lady on the bus) and then as his therapist.

 

Anyway I think Euros' initial plan was to dress up as Eve (the lady on the bus) and get John to fall in love with her. She was planning on eventually going on a date with him. Then she would reveal her identity to him and then shoot him with the transquilisier gun. 

 

However this plan failed at the end of The Six Thatchers because John got really depressed over Mary's death and stopped speaking to her. Remember the last scenes in The Six Thatchers even shows Euros (as Eve) calling John's phone but John doesn't pick up.

 

Then Euros realised that her initial plan wouldn't work so she had to reassess the situation. Her primary goal was to reignite Sherlock's memories by revealing herself to his best friend and then threatening his best friend. However Mary's death put a massive dent in her plans. John wasn't Sherlock's best friend anymore. He was no longer speaking to Sherlock and Sherlock had just accepted that and locked himself up in his flat. Euros' plan relied on Sherlock's current friendship with John. She had to find a way to bring the John and Sherlock back together before she could proceed.

 

So Euros went about achieving this goal in two ways:

 

1. Euros decided to impersonate John's therapist so she could help him to get better and eventually rekindle his relationship with Sherlock.

 

2. Euros decided to give Sherlock the case of Culverton Smith. She had to get Sherlock out of his reclusive lifestyle and back on the streets with John. The best way to do that was to give Sherlock a case that he couldn't refuse. That's why she opted to use Smith. Smith was a serial killer. Euros deduced that ever since Mary had died, Sherlock had probably developed a very strong hatred of serial killers. The reason is because serial killers murder for fun. Sherlock had just lost a loved one to a murderer and that had affected him a lot. Now Sherlock has acknowledged how bad murder is so in his eyes, serial killers are the lowest of the low. If she gave Sherlock a case to capture a serial killer, it would be very unlikely that he would refuse.

 

I think this second point is credible.

 

Sherlock does express a lot of hatred over Smith due to him being a serial killer. However Sherlock didn't express as much disgust when Moriarty was serial killing in The Great Game. I think it's because Sherlock's disgust of serial killers is a recently acquired view that was brought about in response to the murder of Mary.

 

Also I don't think Sherlock's original plan to go to hell involved capturing Smith. At the end of The Lying Detective, the Mary hallucination says that Sherlock's plan was basically to trash himself on drugs so John could use his doctoring skills to help him. All that stuff about Faith seemed to be something extra he decided to do.

 

Anyway at the end of The Lying Detective, Euros first asks John about how he's doing and then she asks him how Sherlock is doing. John tells her that both he and Sherlock are doing well. Thus Euros confirms that John and Sherlock are back together as best friends. Thus Euros decides to enact her plan so she reveals herself to John and then shoots him with a tranquiliser gun.

 

After that's done, she's certain that Sherlock's memories of her would reignite. So Euros then returns to Sherrinford preparing to play her games with Sherlock.

[Redbeard]

I really enjoyed re-watching [blind Banker]. It has lots of humour in it (I love Sherlock running away from the cops and leaving John holding the spray can, that still makes me laugh out loud. I remember it was so unexpected to me at the time) and I love the tease of Moriarty at the end.

 

One thing I noticed on this viewing, the whole thing with Soo Lin being killed by her brother reminds me of Eurus. Both times he appears at the museum it's shown with a kind of breeze entering the room (when the veil is fluttering on the statue, and later when the papers flutter across the desk), he is from China (the East), he is her brother....The East WInd gets us all in the end. :(

Edited January 30, 2017 by Carol the Dabbler
post moved here from The Blind Banker thread because of spoiler

[Arcadia]

@Surelock...

 

Sounds pretty good. A couple of other things to consider:

 

- Sherlock said serial killers were his "favorites" all the way back in the first episode, so maybe that's why Eurus chose the Smith case to approach him? She knew that's the kind of case that would get his interest. In other words, it was the kind of game he liked to play.

 

- In her video, Mary doesn't tell him to get on drugs. She specifically tells him to "pick a fight with a bad guy" and put himself in danger. My theory is that the drug problem is mostly real, although I'm sure Sherlock justified it to himself in any number of ways. But I also think he was partially faking just how drugged up he really was part of the time. His manic recitation of Henry V was designed to get Mrs. Hudson to deliver him to John at just the right time, for example.

 

At any rate, the Smith case definitely was THE plan to "rescue" John, not just something extra. He set the whole thing up, remember? Everything happened the way he planned, albeit with a hiccup or two along the way. But the whole thing was designed to bring John rushing to the rescue, so he could reconnect with the things that mattered to him. It's the drug use that was the something extra, imo.

[Surelock]

Sounds pretty good. A couple of other things to consider:

 

- Sherlock said serial killers were his "favorites" all the way back in the first episode, so maybe that's why Eurus chose the Smith case to approach him? She knew that's the kind of case that would get his interest. In other words, it was the kind of game he liked to play.

 

- In her video, Mary doesn't tell him to get on drugs. She specifically tells him to "pick a fight with a bad guy" and put himself in danger. My theory is that the drug problem is mostly real, although I'm sure Sherlock justified it to himself in any number of ways. But I also think he was partially faking just how drugged up he really was part of the time. His manic recitation of Henry V was designed to get Mrs. Hudson to deliver him to John at just the right time, for example.

 

At any rate, the Smith case definitely was THE plan to "rescue" John, not just something extra. He set the whole thing up, remember? Everything happened the way he planned, albeit with a hiccup or two along the way. But the whole thing was designed to bring John rushing to the rescue, so he could reconnect with the things that mattered to him. It's the drug use that was the something extra, imo.

 

Oh yeah I forgot about Mary's line of 'picking a fight with a bad guy'.

 

Still it should be noted that it doesn't look like Sherlock actually tried to pick a fight with a bad guy until Euros gave him the case about Culverton Smith. So it looked like that initially Sherlock wasn't trying to fulfill Mary's request. He was just getting high on drugs. Maybe Sherlock just lost his self-confidence and it took the case of a serial killer to finally convince him to get a move on?

 

Also I don't think Sherlock was faking how high he was. Remember when Molly examined him, she specifically said that at the rate he was taking drugs, he only had weeks left to live. So yeah I really think Sherlock was in a really bad state. Sure Sherlock used that speech from Henry V but maybe he's just capable of acting like that when he's really high?

[bedelia1984]

It is weird how there are some ways that Mary seems almost interconnected with the Eurus storyline, despite being dead before it started. Parts of TFP would make more sense if Mary had been working with Eurus, and been the one to guide Sherlock into working on the CS case knowing that it would bring him closer to her. Not just this, but also because Eurus took such a particular and personal way into John's life... like if Mary was always bad, and weighing up whether to leave John behind or not, it would have made sense for her to ask Eurus to test him for her, to see how loyal he was. It is interesting to me that Eurus knew to try and gain access to John through his shaky marriage. That shouldn't have been something Moriarty could have advised her on.

 

I don't really think that is an aspect to the story they ended up telling, but I have to wonder was it ever a possibility, to make Mary the villain at the end of s4, and then they rewrote it with Eurus in her place? There is a Mycroft connection there for both of them too.

[T.o.b.y]

I wish my DVDs had come and I could rewatch before I dive into the discussion here, because I believe my ideas about Euros / Eurus / whatever will change a lot over time. But the delivery has been delayed and though I could theoretically stream on Amazon (legally, I hasten to add!), our internet connection is not good enough for the experience to live up to watching on DVD. And my husband has refused to watch with me until the discs come. So... I'll just babble along and then probably eat my words in a few weeks.

 

The little girl on the plane. I am not sure how literally we're supposed to interpret that dream / vision / nightmare. Sherlock called it a metaphor. Maybe Euros just uses this picture to describe the feeling she has about herself when not distracted by the outside world, a feeling of isolation, otherness, inability to connect with her fellow humans, helplessness. Who knows if she really truly envisions herself as a child on a plane full or corpses. Maybe that's just a story she tells to give her "idiot" brother Sherlock a chance to understand her state of mind?

 

Btw, the very first impression I had of the girl was "oh, this is Euros as a child". I was confused and a little irritated when it looked like that was wrong and actually relieved when in the end it turned out to be the truth after all (in a way). The child was so... weird! She was disturbingly calm about the whole thing. There was one scene where she sat on the ground among the dead people, drinking juice (I still think they were dead, not asleep, probably because of the "flight of the dead" motif that I am familiar with from A Scandal in Belgravia but also because they all look really lifeless, not as if they were merely sleeping). That gave me chills.

 

I thought it was very clever that the plane did not really exist. Because both we in the audience and Sherlock are so used to Moriarty taking hostages and connecting them via phone to our hero from The Great Game that this frankly preposterous scenario wasn't immediately rejected by him or us (well, me) as too "out there". Maybe that was another reason to have Moriarty involved, it made the whole plane thing seem more plausible.

 

Of course it's actually a much better story without an actual plane. And without explosives in Molly's flat, too, I think. Euros has apparently had a hell of a lot of resources at her command as it is.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Yeah, I too was having a bit of trouble with the plane story on first viewing. What was supposed to have killed / knocked out everyone else and yet left the little girl fully functional? How had whatever-it-was disabled everyone (*except* the girl) *before* deploying the oxygen masks? Why were the oxygen masks deployed at all if the girl still had good air to breathe?

 

It made a lot more sense as an analogy. Or was at least a whole lot less paradoxical.

[Surelock]

It is weird how there are some ways that Mary seems almost interconnected with the Eurus storyline, despite being dead before it started. Parts of TFP would make more sense if Mary had been working with Eurus, and been the one to guide Sherlock into working on the CS case knowing that it would bring him closer to her. Not just this, but also because Eurus took such a particular and personal way into John's life... like if Mary was always bad, and weighing up whether to leave John behind or not, it would have made sense for her to ask Eurus to test him for her, to see how loyal he was. It is interesting to me that Eurus knew to try and gain access to John through his shaky marriage. That shouldn't have been something Moriarty could have advised her on.

 

I don't really think that is an aspect to the story they ended up telling, but I have to wonder was it ever a possibility, to make Mary the villain at the end of s4, and then they rewrote it with Eurus in her place? There is a Mycroft connection there for both of them too.

 

I doubt Mary was ever planned to be the big bad considering that I think one of the main reasons Euros was brought in as a narrative hook to delve into Sherlock's past. It would be difficult to do that with Mary.

 

I do believe it's possible that initially Mary was supposed to survive much longer and may have been manipulated by Euros to some extent in this season. I'm basing this off the fact that Gatiss said in an interview that one of the reasons why they killed off Mary in the first episode is because everyone saw her death coming so the only way to throw the audience off is to kill her earlier than expected.

 

Also Euros didn't necessarily need to know that John had a shaky marriage in order to enact her plan to make him fall for her. Remember Euros has mind control powers. She could have easily mind controlled John into falling for her.

 

This is another reason why I dislike Euros' mind control powers. They take away agency from other characters and that cheapens some of the development that characters receive. For example, that scene at the end of The Lying Detective, where John admits to the Mary hallucination that he cheated on her is now a lot less effective since we know Euros has mind control powers. Maybe it wasn't John's fault at all that he felt like cheating on Mary?

[T.o.b.y]

This is another reason why I dislike Euros' mind control powers. They take away agency from other characters and that cheapens some of the development that characters receive. For example, that scene at the end of The Lying Detective, where John admits to the Mary hallucination that he cheated on her is now a lot less effective since we know Euros has mind control powers. Maybe it wasn't John's fault at all that he felt like cheating on Mary?

 

I think "mind control powers" might be taking it a little too far. Euros isn't a supervillain from a comic book (even though she does live in the Sherlocked Arkham Asylum). What I understood her to be is a very good manipulator. Only of certain people, though, apparently, because none of her own family members seemed particularly susceptible to that skill of hers.

 

And neither did John! In fact, I thought it seemed as if John was particularly resilient in this area. But then, he's just the kind of person who would be least impressed by Euros.

 

So I don't think he can blame is infidelity (or longing therefore) on her.

 

(Btw: I read somewhere else that Doyle once wrote a short story about a man falling prey to a "mesmerist", a Victorian idea that seems like a form of hypnotism. Here's a link to the text on project gutenberg: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/355. Maybe the character of Euros was inspired in part by this? Sherlock has always been very clever in brining in Victorian elements).

 

 

[Arcadia]

... Still it should be noted that it doesn't look like Sherlock actually tried to pick a fight with a bad guy until Euros gave him the case about Culverton Smith. So it looked like that initially Sherlock wasn't trying to fulfill Mary's request. He was just getting high on drugs. Maybe Sherlock just lost his self-confidence and it took the case of a serial killer to finally convince him to get a move on?

 

Also I don't think Sherlock was faking how high he was. Remember when Molly examined him, she specifically said that at the rate he was taking drugs, he only had weeks left to live. So yeah I really think Sherlock was in a really bad state. Sure Sherlock used that speech from Henry V but maybe he's just capable of acting like that when he's really high?

 

Yeah, I wondered about both of those things too. But in the first case I thought maybe Sherlock just had to wait until the right case came along? But I like your idea too; in which case, Eurus really did him a favor, there!

 

I wondered if maybe Molly was in on Sherlock's plan, and was faking how bad off he was. But we'll never know, I guess. But they have made it clear over and over again that you can't take everything Sherlock says for granted. (The stinker. )

 

...Mary seems almost interconnected with the Eurus storyline, despite being dead before it started.

 

I'm sorry, I don't think you meant to be funny, but for some reason that line left me rolling on the floor. 

 

I wish my DVDs had come and I could rewatch before I dive into the discussion here, because I believe my ideas about Euros / Eurus / whatever will change a lot over time.

For what it's worth, Ariane DeVere has finished her transcripts of the episodes. http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/

I discovered it's often easier for me to find what I'm looking for there than on the DVDs.

 

I do believe it's possible that initially Mary was supposed to survive much longer and may have been manipulated by Euros to some extent in this season. I'm basing this off the fact that Gatiss said in an interview that one of the reasons why they killed off Mary in the first episode is because everyone saw her death coming so the only way to throw the audience off is to kill her earlier than expected.

I read that too, and have been wondering how they would have done the story differently if they'd decided to keep her around longer. Someone's probably working on a "fix it" fic as we speak.

 

Anyway, I don't think they ever entertained the notion of making Mary a bad guy, other than her shooting Sherlock. Increasingly, I'm thinking the only reason she was introduced into the story at all was so Moffat could write the best man's speech. Then she immediately became an inconvenience to be got rid of. :( And I still find it weird that they created the child, Rosie.

[T.o.b.y]

Funny how differently we all think sometimes... When I saw Euros, I thought oh - this is why Mary had to die early, she had to be out of the way to make Euros a big enough threat for the boys.

 

Oh my god. Can you all imagine "Euros vs Mary"? It would be like Godzilla vs King Kong or Alien vs Predator and the Holmes brothers and John would just be bystanders trying not to get trampled on and looking after Rosie while Mommy is busy.