Subtext Interpretation... What Do You See?

[J.P.]

You know what I just realized? The strongest hint that might support Johnlock and Co: in TEH, the crazy fans Conspiracy Theory (= Sherlock lives) turned out to be true. :P

 

OMG, now I give arguments to the other side. Your obsession ins really bad...

 

Still I don't see any other evidence (beside Mofftiss poking fun at us), and the only thing that will convince me, is to see it on the screen in an unambiguous scene. Like them both riding into the sunset on a bike, dragging a lot of empty bins and pink balloons with JUST MARRIED on them.

[T.o.b.y]

 

Still I don't see any other evidence (beside Mofftiss poking fun at us), and the only thing that will convince me, is to see it on the screen in an unambiguous scene. Like them both riding into the sunset on a bike, dragging a lot of empty bins and pink balloons with JUST MARRIED on them.

 

 

If they ever marry off Sherlock to anyone, I will stop watching (unless it's a fake wedding for a case, that might be funny).

 

But I do understand the fervent wish for two fictional characters to get together, and I have a lot of sympathy for "shippers" of (almost) all pairings. I think Sherlock does a really good job of giving everyone their little tidbits and leaving the rest to our imaginations. That way, each can see what they want and we all stay happy.

 

I was just thinking... personally, Sherlock and John remind me of two guys I know at work. They went to university together and have the same specialty, they have been working together for years and they're really attuned to each other's job routine. And they constantly make jokes about how their working relationship is like a marriage and how they're like an old couple. They're  both happily married (to women), but I do think they spend more time with each other at work than with their families, and they're happy with that (I hope the families are happy as well... I know one of the wives and she certainly has never complained in public).

 

Being part of a really good team (of two or more) is one of the most fulfilling experiences I know. It's not the same as friendship or a relationship, but it's a bond that's not to be underestimated.

 

[Boton]

There's a lot of overlap between a platonic life partnership and a romantic partnership, and I really think that's all the subtext has to say.  In the end, very little about a marriage or a romantic partnership has to do with sex and physical attraction.  A whole lot of it depends on a commitment to be together forever, to always have one another's back, to protect one another from the irritations of the world, and to be there in good times and bad.  

 

That's what Sherlock and John have.  While I don't think there's anything sexual or romantic between them, it really doesn't much matter, because they aren't acting on it.  John's married (for the moment).  Sherlock's (mostly?) celibate.  Sex isn't in this relationship.  Commitment and caring and support and love ARE in it.  That's what matters to me.

 

I think that's why I get so irritated at fan fics that show Sherlock running off in tears after his best man's speech, wishing it had been his own marriage to John.  To me, it's a different relationship entirely.  I always think how lucky John really is:  on that day, he had the woman he loved promise to be by his side forever, and he had his best friend promise to do the same.  At that point, sexual attraction to either of them or from either of them seems to be very much beside the point.

 

(As a parenthetical side note, if you want to sell me on a H/W pairing where there is some repressed sexual/romantic feeling, I'll buy it for the Granada Holmes/Watson.  Those two always strike me as a romantic couple, and they have every reason (due to Victorian norms) to hide such feelings from the public, from each other, and even from themselves.  But I suspect that opinion will get me a lynching from the Granada fans!   ;) )

[Inge l-w]

Dear Boton, certainly not from this almost life-long Granada series fan! Since they were doing the series within the ACD copyright, within a time-lapse which was entirely against same-sex relationships (1895 is also Oscar Wilde Trial year, not just Mr Holmes' s best period) , and given how Edward Hardwicke portrayed Dr Watson, Anything Goes, as the song in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom said, especially given the late very much lamented Jeremy Brett's larger than life interpretation of the iconic character.

His exuberance alone could have been a trigger for a happily married Dr Wason ( talk about drama queens!).

It is just that as a concept, I find it distasteful, opting for life-long, monk-like celibacy.

And don't let me get started on how much subtext 'platonic' carries! Where's a fire-breathing Smaug -like dragon in this place when you need one? I shall have to settle for the cute little guy !

[Boton]

Dear Boton, certainly not from this almost life-long Granada series fan! Since they were doing the series within the ACD copyright, within a time-lapse which was entirely against same-sex relationships (1895 is also Oscar Wilde Trial year, not just Mr Holmes' s best period) , and given how Edward Hardwicke portrayed Dr Watson, Anything Goes, as the song in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom said, especially given the late very much lamented Jeremy Brett's larger than life interpretation of the iconic character.

His exuberance alone could have been a trigger for a happily married Dr Wason ( talk about drama queens!).

It is just that as a concept, I find it distasteful, opting for life-long, monk-like celibacy.

 

Yeah, I actually agree, Inge.  And I prefer to see the two as platonic partners in that interpretation too, but it's just easier for me to see a "romance" in that one than in any other interpretation.  But I do prefer my Holmes men celibate, in most incarnations.   :D

[Inge l-w]

Dear Boton, to paraphrase the gentleman himself (I like my doctors clean-shaven), I like my Mr Holmes a mystery in his own right as far as personal details are concerned! And by the way, your friend Jolie_Black did marvellous work in the sequel to the Ashram plot! It's hilariously funny, contrary to what can be said about her Aiding and Abetting heartbreakingly beautiful story!

[T.o.b.y]

I've browsed around a few other Sherlock-related sites and blogs lately, and I was struck by how sure some people seem to be that the interpretation they come away with must be right, that what they see on screen cannot mean anything else than they think it does.

 

Well, all I can say to that is: nope.

 

Example:

 

When I saw His Last Vow, during the scene where John, Janine in Sherlock are in the flat together, John certainly came across as a little jealous to me. I didn't get the impression that he would have wanted to trade places with Janine exactly, but his chair is gone, the kitchen has been rearranged, and here's this half-naked stranger stomping around the flat giving Sherlock and Mycroft silly nicknames. It seemed to me as if the point was being driven home to John that he is no longer Sherlock's number one person in life, and that he's not altogether happy with that, the way best friends sometimes just are when the other person finds a romantic partner.

 

Then I read through the audio commentary and found out that the scene had been redone, because in the first few takes, John appeared jealous to the makers and that was in fact not the effect they wanted (if so, I don't think they did a very good job the second time round, either, but oh well).

 

In A Scandal in Belgravia, on the other hand, Irene asks John "are you jealous?", so the writers must have assumed there was something in the story until that point that could give her such an idea, but for me, it was one of those WTF moments. John doesn't come across as jealous in that episode to me at all, he just seems concerned. I mean, Irene is a dangerous person, if my best friend was falling in love with her, I'd be worried as well. That's not jealousy, that's a reasonable fear that someone you love will get hurt.

 

I'm not saying my interpretations (or anybody else's) must be wrong, I'm just trying to point out that what we see as subtext seems to be very rarely intentional, and sometimes the intended effect was probably quite different. Which is no reason to stop obsessing about details or making up our own minds, headcanons, whatever. That stuff is way too much fun to let go of. But it can't hurt to remind ourselves that we are seeing not necessarily what we are being shown.

[J.P.]

Interpretations and playing with them are absolutely fine (how many time did I have pointed out Johnlock hints myself?)

What annoys the hell out of me is the conviction that those people's interpretation is the truth.

That they run around trying to convince everybody else.

That they don't check the facts and don't answer when confronted with facts.

That they take it so damn seriously. <- what the heck, I don't even take my RL opinions seriously. *shrug*

 

That's why I see the resemblance to Conspiration Theorists.

 

They all miss the fun of speculating and playing with ideas.

And again, I don't get why strait young women would want their TV heroes to be gay. They miss the fun of some nice fantasies including themselves and said heroes. What a self-abandonment :P

 

End of rant.

[Inge l-w]

Dear J.P., it's 'conspiracy' theories , and the creators intentionally leave things open-ended, and about 80% of Ao3 fan fiction is about both of them together in any imaginable way possible, and most of THAT is produced by young female writers, some with families and/or heterosexual others. It's a strange phenomenon, but it's there!

[J.P.]

I know it's there, for many years now. But I still don't understand. *waves John Watson's T-shirt inspired by CAM*

[Shadow Dweller]

Probably the same phenomenon with yaoi fan base, they want to experience something that count as taboo for female according to society. By placing themselves in a male character's shoes they can taste 'the forbidden fruit' by themselves if only in imagination.

[T.o.b.y]

Some things we just don't understand. Others we understand, but don't (fully) agree with. And sometimes we think we understand something, and then it turns out we really don't.

 

I think I understand the phenomenon of young, mostly heterosexual women becoming emotionally invested in fictional gay relationships and "shipping" in general, but perhaps I don't. Who knows. It doesn't seem to do much harm. The only problem I see is when it shifts from fictional characters to real people, or when viewers get it into their heads that they are entitled to a certain storyline and act upset when they don't get it.

 

Whether we understand it or not, our personal wishes influence our interpretation of what we see - heavily. I kind of love how the show allows for all kinds of different readings. Maybe sometimes it is too unclear, but if that means keeping everyone happy, so be it. We're reasonably intelligent fans, we can fill in a lot of blanks and pot holes.

[Caya]

Dunno, I'm firmly in Switzerland with Sherlock (well, no, that's not quite true - Molstrade for life :P). But from my observer's point of view, the slash shippers (Johnlock, Mystrade or all the Moriarty variants) seem the most peaceful of the lot in discussions, since most of them at least realize that their ship is never going to sail for real. Some of the het shippers, on the other hand, react a bit not good if anyone dares suggest that Sherlolly is as of yet not canon or Mary might not be around forever.

 

(note: I'm speaking about my observations from lurking at tumblr and similar places, not about this forum, which probably couldn't do a shipping war if we got paid for it, and I love you all for that  )

[Inge l-w]

Most certainly not, we were brought up to keep our feelings and emotions for real life, and although we can wage endless bickering based on curls , we keep our fan fiction predilections to a mostly civilised level. Because I'm a firm ACD believer, I lean towards Boton's and TOBY's views, but in the fandom it's Sherlock and Irene or nothing, although I read everything I stumble upon in Ao3 that catches my eye, and if it's well-written, I leave kudos and flee.

[T.o.b.y]

 

I don't get it either, but evidently it's all in the subtext ... and some of the arguments for it are pretty convincing, imo, if you're in the right mood.

Yes, some actually make sense.

But I have to roll my eyes to the back of my head and roll them back again for the so called subtexts some point out regarding the stag night drunk and vomit scene. That is is so bloody arghhhh.. (I don't have the slow head banging emoticon)..

 

What's that? What has vomiting to do with anything except being drunk and disgusting? Oh, wait, I think I know what you are referring to... Yes, that's ridiculous. Agreed.

 

I see the subtext in general though. Especially in series 3. I've gone on and on about that before, I won't now, don't worry, but I definitely see it. Just look for example at how they filmed the conversation with Tessa, the things she says and the facial expressions and body language of the guys. Nobody can tell me that wasn't deliberate.

 

But it's just subtext! It will never be text, never ever, the people who make the show have said this over and over. Why won't people believe them? They are just acknowledging a certain, probably involuntary, undercurrent in the original Doyle stories and poking fun at all the speculation and (mis)interpretation that has garnered over the decades. There is no indication at all that they ever intended to make John and Sherlock a regular couple on the series. It's a love story, but it's not that kind of love story.

 

I like the subtext, I freely admit. I don't want them to get rid of it or to stop making their sly little jokes and hints and could-bes. I think it's amusing, and besides, there are friendships like that in real life, where romance and / or attraction do lurk right around the corner, but it is still best to leave them there.

 

I'm happy with the way things are on screen, and I would like to keep them that way.

[Arcadia]

I see the subtext in general though. Especially in series 3. I've gone on and on about that before, I won't now, don't worry, but I definitely see it. Just look for example at how they filmed the conversation with Tessa, the things she says and the facial expressions and body language of the guys. Nobody can tell me that wasn't deliberate.

???? Okay, I haven't seen a subtext theory for this scene. What am I missing now? To me it's just two drunk guys trying to stay awake while a really boring lady talks. Heck, even I can barely stay awake when she's talking!

 

I almost never see any subtext until someone points it out to me, and then I'm never sure if it's actually there or not. Well, not homoerotic subtext. I do see a lot of subtext about how it's okay to be different, but that's about as racy as it gets in my safe little cocoon. :P

 

But it's just subtext! It will never be text, never ever, the people who make the show have said this over and over. Why won't people believe them?

Maybe it's because the people who make the show keep denying that the subtext is there too. If it's deliberate, why deny it? That's the part that really throws me. Well, they've admitted they were originally poking fun at people who thought the original Holmes and Watson were gay, I guess. But it seems to me, if the subtext IS deliberate, that it's gone well beyond that now. But they deny it's deliberate, so how can the subtext actually be there? And if it is deliberate, and they say it's not, then why should we believe them when they say it will never be text?

 

And now I've managed to confuse even myself with that paragraph, so good luck figuring out what I'm trying to say! :D (Maybe it's all in my subtext....)

[T.o.b.y]

 

I see the subtext in general though. Especially in series 3. I've gone on and on about that before, I won't now, don't worry, but I definitely see it. Just look for example at how they filmed the conversation with Tessa, the things she says and the facial expressions and body language of the guys. Nobody can tell me that wasn't deliberate.

???? Okay, I haven't seen a subtext theory for this scene. What am I missing now? To me it's just two drunk guys trying to stay awake while a really boring lady talks. Heck, even I can barely stay awake when she's talking!

 

I almost never see any subtext until someone points it out to me, and then I'm never sure if it's actually there or not. Well, not homoerotic subtext. I do see a lot of subtext about how it's okay to be different, but that's about as racy as it gets in my safe little cocoon. :P

 

Okay. When Tessa says "I would have loved to have gone further", Sherlock gives a slight start and takes his arm away from the sofa behind John's back. When Tessa says "maybe he wasn't as keen as I was", the camera shifts to John who makes a sort of "meh  - I don't know about that" face. When Tessa becomes teary and says she thought he'd at least have called her, Sherlock makes a sad face in sympathy.

 

It's as if in their drunk state, the boys were comparing their own experiences with Tessa's. This wouldn't have caught my attention necessarily if the whole stag night hadn't been set up so much like a date. Actually, the very moment Sherlock came to Molly with his folder on John, my naughty little brain started shouting "dating advice!". And the atmosphere during the "who am I" game strikes me as rather flirtatious, what with John asking if he's a pretty lady and even getting a teeny little bit physical in his attempt not to fall out of his chair.

 

Someone on the team must have a sly, wicked sense of humor. It doesn't necessarily have to be part of the scripts - maybe it's the directors, or the guys who do the editing... But this is fiction, so there is no coincidence whatsoever. Every second of film is precious, nothing is shown for no reason, and things that would mean absolutely nothing in real life are most often deliberate choices that were made to convey something to the audience.

 

 

I can't shake my initial impression of series 3, which I swear formed totally on my own before I read up on other fan's views, that it's a legitimate question what exactly Sherlock thought was going to happen with him and John once he was back. That scene in Mycroft's office right after Serbia... Where he's vainly prancing around with his tight shirt and saying things like "we need to get rid of that" / "I can't be seen wandering around with an old man" / "Maybe I'll (...) pop out of a cake". Add the frequent cuts to Mrs Hudson still thinking they were together and John yelling "I am not gay". Hm. What was all that about? And like I've said before, what's eating our hero during the wedding episode anyway? John has forgiven him, he's a major part of his and Mary's life, Mary likes him, he likes Mary, she even encourages the case-work - theoretically, Sherlock should be over the moon and not casting sad glances at an empty chair. Or talking about filling the "vacancy" in his life with an attractive woman - after, an episode before, he tried giving the position to Molly, who has a known crush on him. And called her "John" by mistake.

 

God knows what went on inside that funny old head while he was away. Maybe he met up with Irene and she said her "you guys are a couple" line so often to him that he started either believing her or thinking that wouldn't be so bad an idea. Maybe he just became really lonely and realized for the first time just how great it actually was to have John around. I can't imagine Sherlock actually wishing or planning a romantic, let alone sexual relationship (I still think the only person he ever thought was sexy was Irene), but it does seem as if he expected something - something that's not entirely compatible with John having a wife and family.

 

As for John... I don't know. Sherlock is a pretty fascinating being. Maybe he does feel that at times, a bit, just a little bit, just enough to become vaguely flirtatious when drunk. It wouldn't be something he'd ever acknowledge or want to act upon, but it could still be there, an echo of the original Dr Watson's gushing, borderline infatuated tone when writing about his great hero. Who knows. Getting married at any rate seems to make him a lot more comfortable around Sherlock - no need to worry any more what people will think, that's for sure.

 

 

Of course we all see what we want to see. Only I never wanted to see this. It just hit me in the face during series 3 and I went from "shipping these two guys is the dumbest idea ever" to "shipping these two guys is actually totally understandable" within ninety minutes.

 

Maybe I'm just projecting my real-life experiences here. Or I'm just crazy. Anyway. You said "but if it's deliberate, why do they keep denying it?" To that I answer, because the subtext may be deliberate, but nobody intends to ever take it beyond that. It's just a joke, a game, a wink and a nod to the Sherlock Holmes fandom. Or I may be completely delusional. We'll never know for sure. We don't have to, do we? We all see something very different when we watch our favorite show, but we all like it and it leaves room for all our interpretations. It's all fine...

[Inge l-w]

Dear TOBY, as Donovan says at the beginning, "I was sort of sitting next to you" ! What a wonderful analysis, especially because I watched the episode the first time, and every time after that I fast-forwarded the stag night until the Rewatch, where perforce I had to keep notes.

It is deliberate, as is also evidenced by the club member's theory in TEH, involving Sherlock and Moriarty, as well as right at the end of their stag night when Sherlock has automatically commandeered the bunk and John is left to fend for himself on the floor propped up against the wall, because if they had shared the bunk all h*** would have broken loose.

By the way, in Ao3, there's this wonderfully funny meta on the various iterations of the fandom called Toplock Talent Search, by Anarfea, which pretty much deconstructs all the fans' head canons.

[Arcadia]

 

 

I see the subtext in general though. Especially in series 3. I've gone on and on about that before, I won't now, don't worry, but I definitely see it. Just look for example at how they filmed the conversation with Tessa, the things she says and the facial expressions and body language of the guys. Nobody can tell me that wasn't deliberate.

???? Okay, I haven't seen a subtext theory for this scene. What am I missing now? To me it's just two drunk guys trying to stay awake while a really boring lady talks. Heck, even I can barely stay awake when she's talking!

 

I almost never see any subtext until someone points it out to me, and then I'm never sure if it's actually there or not. Well, not homoerotic subtext. I do see a lot of subtext about how it's okay to be different, but that's about as racy as it gets in my safe little cocoon. :P

 

 

Okay. When Tessa says "I would have loved to have gone further", Sherlock gives a slight start and takes his arm away from the sofa behind John's back. When Tessa says "maybe he wasn't as keen as I was", the camera shifts to John who makes a sort of "meh  - I don't know about that" face. When Tessa becomes teary and says she thought he'd at least have called her, Sherlock makes a sad face in sympathy.

 

It's as if in their drunk state, the boys were comparing their own experiences with Tessa's. This wouldn't have caught my attention necessarily if the whole stag night hadn't been set up so much like a date. Actually, the very moment Sherlock came to Molly with his folder on John, my naughty little brain started shouting "dating advice!". And the atmosphere during the "who am I" game strikes me as rather flirtatious, what with John asking if he's a pretty lady and even getting a teeny little bit physical in his attempt not to fall out of his chair.

 

Someone on the team must have a sly, wicked sense of humor. It doesn't necessarily have to be part of the scripts - maybe it's the directors, or the guys who do the editing... But this is fiction, so there is no coincidence whatsoever. Every second of film is precious, nothing is shown for no reason, and things that would mean absolutely nothing in real life are most often deliberate choices that were made to convey something to the audience.

 .....

Maybe I'm just projecting my real-life experiences here. Or I'm just crazy. Anyway. You said "but if it's deliberate, why do they keep denying it?" To that I answer, because the subtext may be deliberate, but nobody intends to ever take it beyond that. It's just a joke, a game, a wink and a nod to the Sherlock Holmes fandom. Or I may be completely delusional. We'll never know for sure. We don't have to, do we? We all see something very different when we watch our favorite show, but we all like it and it leaves room for all our interpretations. It's all fine...

 

Okay, thanks for the explanation! I suspect you're right, how we read it has something to do with our life experiences, because based on mine, what you describe makes little sense to me. In my experience, people do all kinds of crazy s**t when they're drunk, and it never means anything. But as you say, it's all fine ... I'm happy to be "in the know," enjoy the joke, and still go my own way. So thanks.

 

As for someone on the team having a sly, wicked sense of humor, my money's on Benedict and Martin.... (although with (duh ) a lot of cooperation from everyone else...)

[Inge l-w]

Not really! When both of them have been fighting what I think is termed the Johnloc Conspiracy tooth and nail in the extras, in interviews, etc. ?

[Arcadia]

Yep, I really do!

[Fantasy Lover]

Not really! When both of them have been fighting what I think is termed the Johnloc Conspiracy tooth and nail in the extras, in interviews, etc. ?

Johnlock Conspiracy! You just used my two favourite words

[Inge l-w]

Yep! And I also got some more Ao3 authors for your entertainment, Aurelie. Check out Atiki, SilentAuror, wendymarlowe, DoubleNegative, iriswallpaper and TooManyChoices. It's like liquoriceAllSorts: you pick and choose your favourites

[J.P.]

Well, the subtext is definitely there. But not to be taken seriously. That's my take on it, and I have a lot of fun with it. :P

[Arcadia]

Oh, it's there ... but is it ... intentional? (Imagine Twilight Zone theme here.)(Or actually listen to it here. )