Speculation: What Would You Like To See In Series 3?

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Just to clarify, I do not believe that it was a half alive Moriarty in a mask falling from that roof. I too believe that he was left dead on the roof while Sherlock actually stepped off to take a short free fall.

[T.o.b.y]

Which leads to the theory of a body switch after the fall, right? Apologies, I can't remember whether you've written anywhere if you liked that one. But just to comment on it anyway: Why would he need another body after he's already on the ground? It would be much less complicated to just smear blood on his own face and play dead. Yes, John is a doctor, but they took care he was also in shock, concussed, and did not get a close look, let alone the chance to perform any kind of medical examination. He'd as soon not realize his friend was alive as he wouldn't notice it wasn't him at all.

 

The real question is, of course, what makes the best story. And it's impossible to agree on that - it's a matter of taste. I just favor the theories that I think are nice dramatically and logic go to hell, I guess... Will be so exiting to see what the writers decided on. I can't imagine it will be bad either in a dramatic or a logical sense.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  I like the theory that the people that gather so quickly are members of Sherlock's homeless network. It is clear that they are keeping John from taking Sherlock's pulse at the most reliable spot, that of the carotid artery in the neck, leaving John the wrist on the right side where the pulse is being suppressed by that little blue ball in his arm pit. As you pointed out they have made sure John is in no real shape to be sharp and focused being in shock from Sherlock's apparent suicide and from being further shook up by being knocked down by the cyclist.

[T.o.b.y]

Yes, he must have had helpers, you can't explain what you see any other way. That whole scene on the pavement is obviously staged. And, Fox: nice medical observation!

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  The "medical observation" was helped by one of the Forum members who posted a close up of a young man with a stethoscope draped over his neck, holding his fingers to Sherlock's carotid.

[T.o.b.y]

Yup, and that makes perfect sense, because John might not have been confused enough to forget that that is the best place to feel for a pulse when in doubt - and it's quite impossible to stop the pulse in your neck without actual damage, obviously.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

This is very true.

[T.o.b.y]

Since this is the thread for wishful thinking: of course it would be awesome if it somehow miraculously turned out that Sherlock did the whole thing on his own and improvised it at the spur of the moment, but not even I am capable of ignoring the probabilities that much for the sake of heroism. Besides, heroes do not exist and if they did, Sherlock would not be one of them... (another favorite quote).

 

But I can't really give much credit to any theories that require long-term, elaborate preparation. I also think the way the scene after Moriarty's death is acted gives the impression that things didn't go quite as planned and that there was some actual reluctance on Sherlock's part to act as he eventually did.

 

I just hope he managed to do it without Mycroft. Please, please, please leave the big super-brother out of it...

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  There were a few hours of preparation, because Sherlock was already contemplating the use of that little blue ball in the lab, and he did ask Molly for her help, because "I am afraid I am going to die" statement the night before he set up the meeting with Moriarty.

 

Whether are not Mycroft was in on it.....I don't know. That pendulum can swing either way.

[T.o.b.y]

Oh yes, he must have realized that was the final plan when he left Kitty's apartment. There's that "aha" moment when he's standing on the street. So preparation was that night and the following morning, I guess. I just got the impression that what we saw was not exactly plan A, and one of the many reasons why I don't like the Moriarty-in-a-mask idea is that it suggests Sherlock knew Moriarty was going to kill himself - which is totally contrary to his reaction when he does. Of course, you usually can't trust Sherlock's emotional reaction to anything, but for who's benefit would he be putting on an act there?

 

My point, I guess (if I have a point) is that the more brilliant and daring the solution makes Sherlock, the better I will be pleased. I mean, I love him for all his imperfections but I still want him to be great - because he's Sherlock Holmes, for god's sake!

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

I mean, I love him for all his imperfections but I still want him to be great - because he's Sherlock Holmes, for god's sake!

 

  Absolutely! No arguments there! I have always seen him as a hero, as probably have some people he has saved through his cases. But anyway, no one cannot trust Sherlock and his emotional responses. But I, for one, trust what was shown on that roof top. He didn't count on Moriarty's suicide, nor were the tears when he was talking to John on the phone. He could have easily faked the sound of emotion in his voice, but there were no reason for the tears nor the trembling chin. John couldn't see them, so why bother.

[T.o.b.y]

...nor were the tears when he was talking to John on the phone. He could have easily faked the sound of emotion in his voice, but there were no reason for the tears nor the trembling chin. John couldn't see them, so why bother.

 

 

Oh, this is getting rather fun Isn't it funny how one wonders and wonders about whether a man really cried or faked it - and that man does not even exist? It either means we are nuts (don't like that explanation) or this is just really good TV (and I'll go with that, thank you).

 

I thought until a few days ago that it was all fake, he was just acting and he probably didn't feel a single pang of guilt, because he thought he was justified in what he did and so the "ordinary" people should just forget their petty heart-aches and be grateful he protected them. But then I saw the episode again and changed my mind. I think he starts out just acting and when he finds how hard it is to convince John that he's a fake, when John says "you could", he is affected, after all.

 

It would be really hard to act that scene as if there was no feeling at all, because Freeman is so damn convincing you actually forget that John Watson is not real and didn't really have to watch his best friend (I still think that's the most correct term for it) kill himself.

 

[Karie]

Sorry for jumping in, I'm brand new to the forum (been looking for a good place for Sherlock discussion ever since I started watching a few months back)! 

 

Some great ideas here about the faking of Sherlock's death. I still agree that everyone on the ground surrounding his body (except for John) was in on it.  Those people were way too eager to keep John away from him (while he was steadily yelling,"Let me through, I'm a doctor!", which is very suspicious). They were quick to take his body away, too, where Molly could easily have faked the death records (just like Irene Adler was able to fake her own records convincingly enough to fool Sherlock). 

 

I definitely think that Sherlock's tears on the roof were genuine. I think it really did upset him to hurt John like that, and he knew he was hurting him. I have a feeling that Sherlock never intended to reveal himself after the events of that day, and is only brought out of hiding in season 3 due to unforeseen circumstances. I think he said goodbye to John that day believing it would be the last time he ever spoke to him. And I think that really did break his heart. 

 

I could be wrong, but I don't get the feeling that Mycroft was in any way involved. I think he was as in the dark as John. It'll be interesting to see his reaction. He looked destroyed in that scene where he's reading about the suicide in the paper. 

 

I think what I want most in season 3 is the fallout between John and Sherlock. Obviously there will be mixed emotions for John, because he's happy his friend is alive but angry that Sherlock put him through that. And then I'm sure he'll be hit with 100 new emotions when/if he finds out WHY Sherlock did what he did. I think all of that is pretty much a given, but more than anything I want to see how SHERLOCK is feeling. Obviously, he's missed his friend. I'm sure he's anxious over the anger he expects John to feel. I just want him to let some of that bleed through, instead of locking it all away and pretending to be indifferent to it all. 

 

Most of all, I just want season 3 to get here RIGHT THIS SECOND. Against several million warnings, I let curiosity get the best of me last night and I read that fanfic "Alone on the Water", and OMG, my feels are so sore right now. I need affirmation that my boys are safe and well and TOGETHER. 

 

Thanks for listening, by the way. Feels good after so many weeks of having no one to discuss this show with, to finally get all that out! 

[T.o.b.y]

 Feels good after so many weeks of having no one to discuss this show with, to finally get all that out! 

 

Doesn't it? Go on all you want...

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Hi, Karie -- welcome to Sherlock Forum!    And don't apologize for jumping right in with your ideas -- that's what keeps this forum active.  Please stick around and join the fun!

 

I definitely think that Sherlock's tears on the roof were genuine. I think it really did upset him to hurt John like that, and he knew he was hurting him. I have a feeling that Sherlock never intended to reveal himself after the events of that day, and is only brought out of hiding in season 3 due to unforeseen circumstances. I think he said goodbye to John that day believing it would be the last time he ever spoke to him. And I think that really did break his heart. 

 

I think I agree with you about the tears being genuine (though I've gone back and forth on that question a few times).  It had never occurred to me that Sherlock might have been planning to leave for good, but with John being his only friend, that certainly would be tough.  What are you thinking, that he's planning to stay behind the scenes for the rest of his life, helping Lestrade to solve crimes by sending him anonymous tips?  Or perhaps create a new identity for himself?

 

 

This is a story first and foremost, so why is "he dressed the guy who just killed himself in his clothes, put a mask on him and threw him off a roof" a better story than "he heroically threw himself off the roof, avoided the pavement because of clever planning and tricked his best friend into believing he was dead with the help of a few tears and a good concussion?"

 

JIM: I knew you’d fall for it. That’s your weakness – you always want everything to be clever.

 

I assume that the writers anticipated -- and even encouraged -- some of the elaborate theories, and may even have aimed that line (from Ariane DeVere's transcript of "Reichenbach") at us.  They certainly gave us plenty of material to use -- the Rhododendron ponticum, the hallucinogenic drug in "Hounds," a convenient corpse, the laundry truck, the rubber ball -- some of which may turn out to be actual clues, with the rest being red herrings.

 

So. There. That said, the great thing about fiction is that nothing is set in stone. Whoever likes the first story better can continue to believe in it even if the show declares something else "the truth", can write it out if they like and store it away in the picture gallery of their mind palace. That's certainly my plan if they come up with an explanation that I find completely unpalatable...

 

That's certainly what fan fiction is for!

 

[T.o.b.y]

I have a feeling that Sherlock never intended to reveal himself after the events of that day, and is only brought out of hiding in season 3 due to unforeseen circumstances. 

 

That's an idea my mind has played with, too. It's sort of along the lines of the classic hero who comes to realize that he can't have friends because they'd be in danger all the time and so sacrifices his happiness for their safety.

 

And a terrorist attack, either happening or threatened to happen, would certainly count as "unforeseen circumstances". It's exactly the kind of thing to bring a hero back.

 

On the other hand, this is Sherlock, not batman or somebody like that. He's very much a human being, and a pretty vain, egocentric, self-important one, too. I don't quite see him give up anything he really wants. He might have thought he was better off alone, might have felt safer that way. After all, it seems like he was alone for most of his life and it worked out fine (okay, except for drugs and not caring whether he died at any given time as long as it was during a good game of wits). But I expect that, much like the original Holmes, he'd get tired of traveling after a while and want to go home, where, of course, everything has to be just as he left it. And while he is coming back, he might as well make something fun out of it and so stages a dramatic reappearance.

 

I can't wait to see the encounter between the main characters, either. I really hope the writers used a lot of source material for it, because there is loads. Especially Holmes' killer arguments why he never lets Watson in on anything important:

1.) you're a terrible lier

2.) you're just too kind to be trusted

Plus his laconic "you won't be offended, Watson".

Now, add the original Holmes' reaction to the announcement of Watsons' impending marriage to the picture... This is getting fun!

 

[Karie]

Thanks for the warm welcome, guys!   Forgive me while I figure out the multi-quote function...

 

 

I have a feeling that Sherlock never intended to reveal himself after the events of that day, and is only brought out of hiding in season 3 due to unforeseen circumstances. 

 

That's an idea my mind has played with, too. It's sort of along the lines of the classic hero who comes to realize that he can't have friends because they'd be in danger all the time and so sacrifices his happiness for their safety.

 

And a terrorist attack, either happening or threatened to happen, would certainly count as "unforeseen circumstances". It's exactly the kind of thing to bring a hero back.

 

On the other hand, this is Sherlock, not batman or somebody like that. He's very much a human being, and a pretty vain, egocentric, self-important one, too. I don't quite see him give up anything he really wants. He might have thought he was better off alone, might have felt safer that way. After all, it seems like he was alone for most of his life and it worked out fine (okay, except for drugs and not caring whether he died at any given time as long as it was during a good game of wits). But I expect that, much like the original Holmes, he'd get tired of traveling after a while and want to go home, where, of course, everything has to be just as he left it. And while he is coming back, he might as well make something fun out of it and so stages a dramatic reappearance.

 

I can't wait to see the encounter between the main characters, either. I really hope the writers used a lot of source material for it, because there is loads. Especially Holmes' killer arguments why he never lets Watson in on anything important:

1.) you're a terrible lier

2.) you're just too kind to be trusted

Plus his laconic "you won't be offended, Watson".

Now, add the original Holmes' reaction to the announcement of Watsons' impending marriage to the picture... This is getting fun!
 

 

 

Oh, I agree to a point. I don't know that he would have stayed away forever. But I do believe that, in that moment, on top of that roof with those tears rolling down his face, he thought that might well be his last chance to speak to John. I believe that he had decided then that, if he couldn't make it so that John (and the others, but specifically John) was safe in his presence, then he'd stay away from them.

 

That's something else I'm interested in learning... how much of that was planned out and how much of it was on the fly? Obviously, the jumping off the roof part was planned, as he arranged to meet Moriarty up there, and he had to have organized that ground crew.  And he arranged the fake shooting of Mrs. Hudson to get John away.  But did he know that John was going to arrive back at exactly that moment? How could he? It seemed like he saw him arriving in the cab and then called him on the phone to say his goodbyes, keep John from getting too close to the hospital, and to deliver his "note".  I want to know if that's right. Because if John showing up at the last moment really was unplanned, then it makes me believe more fully that the emotion he showed on that rooftop was genuine. Maybe he never actually planned to do it right in front of John, with him on the phone. Being forced to put John through that would certainly have affected him. 

 

 

 

Hi, Karie -- welcome to Sherlock Forum!    And don't apologize for jumping right in with your ideas -- that's what keeps this forum active.  Please stick around and join the fun!

 

I definitely think that Sherlock's tears on the roof were genuine. I think it really did upset him to hurt John like that, and he knew he was hurting him. I have a feeling that Sherlock never intended to reveal himself after the events of that day, and is only brought out of hiding in season 3 due to unforeseen circumstances. I think he said goodbye to John that day believing it would be the last time he ever spoke to him. And I think that really did break his heart. 

 

I think I agree with you about the tears being genuine (though I've gone back and forth on that question a few times).  It had never occurred to me that Sherlock might have been planning to leave for good, but with John being his only friend, that certainly would be tough.  What are you thinking, that he's planning to stay behind the scenes for the rest of his life, helping Lestrade to solve crimes by sending him anonymous tips?  Or perhaps create a new identity for himself? 

 

 

 I would buy that he would have created a new identity for himself (if it had come to that). As John said, "Sherlock Holmes got too big." 

 

I'm really anxious to see the time frame between season 2 and season 3. Some people have suggested that there will be a three year jump. I'm really hoping that isn't true.  I don't want their lives to be too progressed, although with John about to be married it certainly suggests that it's been more than a few months. 

 

 

I think I accidentally deleted the quote, but someone mentioned drugs... that's something else I would love to see in season 3. I'm desperate for more backstory on Sherlock and why he is the way he is, as far as his upbringing and social detachment. I'd love to see how he got into the drugs and what that was like. It's not hard to imagine a young man with exceptional intelligence, no friends, and no one he can really *talk* to on his own level, turning to drugs as a way to cope or remove himself from the present. But I would love to see a bit of that, or even hear Sherlock mention what it was like for him. 

[T.o.b.y]

Speaking of drawing from the source, here is a little indicator of what Sherlock might think of John working as a doctor again:

 

" 'My practice—' I began 'Oh, if you find your own cases more interesting than mine—” said Holmes, with some asperity. 'I was going to say that my practice could get along very well for a day or two, since it is the slackest time in the year.' 'Excellent,' said he, recovering his good-humor".

 

I do think that if John wants to continue to solve cases and get married, the job will have to go out the window...

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for the warm welcome, guys!   Forgive me while I figure out the multi-quote function...

 

You're more than welcome.  And once you figure it out, please let me know how it works!

 

I don't know that he would have stayed away forever. But I do believe that, in that moment, on top of that roof with those tears rolling down his face, he thought that might well be his last chance to speak to John. I believe that he had decided then that, if he couldn't make it so that John (and the others, but specifically John) was safe in his presence, then he'd stay away from them.

 

OK, now I see what you mean, and you're right, he'd have had no way of knowing for sure how long it would take him to remove the danger, or even for sure if he could ever do it.  Very sad, indeed!

 

... if John showing up at the last moment really was unplanned, then it makes me believe more fully that the emotion he showed on that rooftop was genuine. Maybe he never actually planned to do it right in front of John, with him on the phone. Being forced to put John through that would certainly have affected him. 

 

I believe that John was always part of the plan -- or at least, part of Plan B, AKA what to do if Moriarty's dead (and we may never know what Plan A would have been).  He's the star witness, after all, the one that the entire elaborate charade was staged for.  Sherlock presumably figures that although it's regrettable to put him through that, it's nevertheless necessary.  And it's for his own good!

 

I'm really anxious to see the time frame between season 2 and season 3. Some people have suggested that there will be a three year jump. I'm really hoping that isn't true.  I don't want their lives to be too progressed, although with John about to be married it certainly suggests that it's been more than a few months.

 

The scuttlebutt is that it's two years, same as in realtime.  They did the same realtime thing for the eighteen months between John's therapist appointments (from "Study in Pink" to "Reichenbach").  In the original Conan Doyle stories, however, it was three years.

 

I do think that if John wants to continue to solve cases and get married, the job will have to go out the window...

 

I don't think anyone would expect him to hold down two jobs at once, and I seriously doubt that they'll have him tell Sherlock to go find another crime-solving partner -- so I suspect you're right!

 

[Karie]

 

 

I believe that John was always part of the plan -- or at least, part of Plan B, AKA what to do if Moriarty's dead (and we may never know what Plan A would have been).  He's the star witness, after all, the one that the entire elaborate charade was staged for.  Sherlock presumably figures that although it's regrettable to put him through that, it's nevertheless necessary.  And it's for his own good!

 

 

 

I was thinking there was really no way for him to know when/if John would show up, and John's timing was so precise... but then I remembered that bike rider slamming into him as he tried to cross the street, and that always felt very staged to me, so obvious that the guy was meant to keep John from getting to "the body" too quickly.  It's a little far-fetched to me that Sherlock could have predicted exactly when John would show up, but I suppose there are a lot of things on this show that just have to be looked over.  Moriarty's magical, ever-present-no-matter-where-you-turn-up snipers, for instance. *Shrugs* 

 

 

The scuttlebutt is that it's two years, same as in realtime.  They did the same realtime thing for the eighteen months between John's therapist appointments (from "Study in Pink" to "Reichenbach").  In the original Conan Doyle stories, however, it was three years.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm a bit disappointed with that much of a time jump, but I can definitely see that being the case.  I'm curious as to how the marriage will be portrayed. I'm certainly not interested in a Three's Company of Consulting Detectives. And I really want John and Sherlock to be flatmates again, without a third-wheel moving in. I'm wondering if Mary will be a permanent fixture, or a plot device (as, sadly, I have not yet read the original works, I have no clue what her role in the works of ACD was meant to be). Or will she be relegated to newborn-baby status? Like how when a character has a baby on a show, and then they only ever casually mention the baby in passing, as it is always "sleeping in the next room" or "spending the night at Grandma's" once its usefulness to the plot has ended.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone would expect him to hold down two jobs at once, and I seriously doubt that they'll have him tell Sherlock to go find another crime-solving partner -- so I suspect you're right!

 

 

 

He barely seemed to be holding down his job at the clinic the first time around! I'm still wondering how he made rent. I'm assuming he had begun collecting payment on the cases he helped Sherlock solve.  I also suspect that, as Sherlock seemed pretty well off (and I doubt he really did need a flat share to help him make rent), Sherlock possibly lied to John about the cost of the rent and was paying the lion's share. (Or at least, that's my sweet little head canon.) I think, for Sherlock, getting a roomie was never really about the money, but rather an attempt (possibly subconscious) to reach out to someone in all his loneliness.  

[T.o.b.y]

 

 I'm certainly not interested in a Three's Company of Consulting Detectives.

 

Oh, thank you. Neither am I, but I am afraid that that is exactly what we're going to get - for reasons of political correctness, because there have been accusations of sexism directed at the series (or rather, the people behind it).

 

My reason is not that I don't want anybody "between" the main characters. I don't think they're supposed to be a romantic couple, "just" really good friends, and in a good friendship, there's always room for other people (which is why I find friendship in many ways more appealing than romance, but that is another story).

 

In the old stories (do read them, they're so much fun! You can get them for free on the internet - legally, because they're so old they're not copyright protected anymore), Mary has no real point, as far as I can see. I think she was introduced in "The Sign of Four", because Doyle thought the novel would sell better if there was a love story in it (back then, very few people would have as much as  dreamed of seeing that between Holmes and Watson).  Also, getting Watson married might have been a device to end the series, because he says at the end of "The Sign of Four" that he won't be able to work with Holmes anymore (in response, Holmes dismally groans and reaches for the cocaine bottle).

 

After that, Mary in the books is very much like the baby you describe. She sometimes has a few lines at the beginning of a story and her role there is usually encouraging Dr Watson to go help out Holmes - that's it.

 

I think when Doyle resurrected his hero, he killed her off because he found it annoying to have to explain for every case why Watson was there. So he just sent him back to Baker St as a widower - and even in the original, saving money was not the point for Holmes then (he even paid money to make it happen), so your theory about why Sherlock was looking for a flat share in the first place is actually pretty interesting.

 

Getting back to modern Sherlock and what I want to see: I like the idea of Mary because I think John deserves to be happily married. Sherlock might have nothing left to wish for with a nice murder to figure out and a trusty helper to do so, but John seems to be more like a "normal" human being, at least when it comes to love and sex. I also see a lot of potential humor in that constellation, stemming from Sherlock's attitude about those things. There are plenty of hints in the source that Holmes thought Watson's marriage was unnecessary and inconvenient, and he thinks nothing of ordering his friend to just tell his wife (by telegram), that he's not coming home for a while because of some pressing case.

 

Finally, while Mary herself does not play a big role in the original, a lot of the stories feature a brave and beautiful woman, usually the client of the day, who is actively involved in whatever adventure unravels (Miss Stoner, for example, or Violet Hunter). So it's like a woman belongs somewhere in there and instead of introducing a different one each time (whom Dr Watson fawns over and Holmes "handles like a specimen"), it might be nice to just have one permanent character.

 

So why don't I want a fully fledged crime solving trio? Because the more people are like Sherlock, the less special he becomes.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Welcome to the Forum, Karie! Fabulous having you here, really! So glad you found us.

 

 

He barely seemed to be holding down his job at the clinic the first time around! I'm still wondering how he made rent. I'm assuming he had begun collecting payment on the cases he helped Sherlock solve.  I also suspect that, as Sherlock seemed pretty well off (and I doubt he really did need a flat share to help him make rent), Sherlock possibly lied to John about the cost of the rent and was paying the lion's share. (Or at least, that's my sweet little head canon.) I think, for Sherlock, getting a roomie was never really about the money, but rather an attempt (possibly subconscious) to reach out to someone in all his loneliness.  

 

  In canon, Dr. John H. Watson does become a very well to do doctor, and a husband, and Sherlock Holmes's biographer. The first paying very well, not sure if Sherlock paid him in money, but anyway, as you say, Sherlock did seem to be well off so Watson didn't have to worry about money there. And yes, in the books it does state that Sherlock Holmes paid Mrs. Hudson a princely sum of money for 221b. Enough to have been able to by the whole house many times over.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I was thinking there was really no way for him to know when/if John would show up, and John's timing was so precise... but then I remembered that bike rider slamming into him as he tried to cross the street, and that always felt very staged to me, so obvious that the guy was meant to keep John from getting to "the body" too quickly.

 

I assume that Sherlock simply waited for John to return, then proceeded with his plan.  But then after his goodbye speech, I agree, the bicycle was to keep John from getting to Sherlock before they had everything arranged.

 

I'm curious as to how the marriage will be portrayed. I'm certainly not interested in a Three's Company of Consulting Detectives. And I really want John and Sherlock to be flatmates again, without a third-wheel moving in. I'm wondering if Mary will be a permanent fixture, or a plot device (as, sadly, I have not yet read the original works, I have no clue what her role in the works of ACD was meant to be)

 

Another forum member (and I'm too groggy right now to be absolutely certain who, so I won't say) has stated that marrying off Watson was ACD's first (unsuccessful) attempt to end the Holmes series.  Shortly thereafter, he bowed to public pressure and began writing the stories again, but Mary was never again a major character (more like the baby you mentioned).

 

My guess is that Moftiss wouldn't have brought Mary into the show if they hadn't figured out how to make her into a real character, serving a real purpose in the plots.  I don't think you need to worry that she'll get in the way -- we've already got lots of other continuing characters, but that doesn't stop the focus from being on Sherlock and John.

 

I'm still wondering how [John] made rent. I'm assuming he had begun collecting payment on the cases he helped Sherlock solve.  I also suspect that, as Sherlock seemed pretty well off (and I doubt he really did need a flat share to help him make rent), Sherlock possibly lied to John about the cost of the rent and was paying the lion's share. .... I think, for Sherlock, getting a roomie was never really about the money, but rather an attempt (possibly subconscious) to reach out to someone in all his loneliness.

 

Right, I assume that Sherlock and John were splitting the fees they collected, or just applying them directly to the rent.  Each of them had their own independent income (John's pension and Sherlock's -- umm -- family trust fund?) which they could use for personal expenses like clothing.  Interesting conjecture about Sherlock wanting the company more than needing to split the rent -- though I doubt that he'd ever admit it, even to himself.

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

Another forum member (and I'm too groggy right now to be absolutely certain who, so I won't say) has stated that marrying off Watson was ACD's first (unsuccessful) attempt to end the Holmes series. 

 

 

That was me, Carol - and I'd just like to point out here that it is merely a pet theory of mine, not anything I know for a fact. What do the Holmes scholars say, Fox?

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  There has been rumbles by the scholars that Doyle did try to kill Sherlock off earlier in his works then "The Final Problem". But as far as I know, Doyle himself makes no remarks to that intent until his publisher asks Doyle why he killed Holmes off in the story mentioned above, especially when all of London is in an uproar over it and demanding that Doyle retract and bring him back. He simply says that it was time that Holmes be made an end of.