BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



November 2, 2014 10:47 pm  #1


John´s nastiness

We already have a thread here called "Sherlock´s arsemanship".
But is Sherlock really the nasty one among two flatmates?
I just found this interesting meta that sugests otherwise:

http://loudest-subtext-in-television.tumblr.com/post/101457108589/loudest-subtext-in-television-kinklock-fanon

It seems a bit extreme but... isn´t it in fact the truth?

 


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

November 3, 2014 12:17 am  #2


Re: John´s nastiness

Yup.
Several times called John a bit of a whiny meanie here and said it's about time he started taking some responsibility in the relationship.
Everyonee blahs about Sherlock being rude and messy and bleh..but he is kinda nice ish @ John...who is often just as rude and additionally..... nags and nags and......is a bit like an annoying teacher/mum at times.
They are such a well matched couple that way .

Last edited by lil (November 3, 2014 12:33 am)

 

November 3, 2014 12:26 am  #3


Re: John´s nastiness

That John is not nice doesn't equal that he is nasty. Also being nice doesn't equate with being good.

I saw the tendency on the tumblr on the last week and i can only wonder how can people see John so unidimensional. I can only thank the writers of the show that they don't write a character with the issues he has being nice or pitiable. 

First when we meet John we learn that he has at least depression ( i won't dwell on the PTDS, i will do it in the right thread). Now, i was in my life only at the border of a depression and it was hell. It sucked all my life power from me, all my joy, all my wish to meet other people. I felt that i cannot bring them so much negativity but at the same time I felt that they cannot understand in which place i was (they didn't). I had no power to laugh, to be friendly or nice, i stop meeting other people, i really had no power to meet social expectations of being nice and positive about life and and and. I wanted to dig a hole and live there quietly. No, depression is nothing romantic, nothing "nice", nothing that you can switch over when you meet other people. All you can hope is to guard it, to don't let the other feel how vulnerable you are, to don't wound them, to don't spill your depression on them. Your self-esteem is low, and every slightly negative remark strikes you to the bones. So please, please, if you have friends or colleagues who are going through something like this, do not expect from them smiles and nice discussions...
 
So, we meet John at his low, depressed that he is injured, that he has lost his career and his place in society. No, he is not happy to meet Mike, because Mike knows the old John Watson. He is very wounded by Ms. Hudson ". But you’re more the sitting-down type, I can tell." , because he doesn't want to be like that, as an army-doctor he was anything but sitting-down type. He is angry with his life at that moment, not at Ms. Hudson, when he reply so angry back. (and by the way he apologizes right away, he knows that he was a "bit not good"). With the "colleague" vs "friend" is just a big misunderstanding between him and Sherlock and none is here nasty: at that moment John is plagued by the worry that he has no money and no job, no place in society and feels better presented as a professional than as a friend (we know why for Sherlock "friend" was more important than colleague, but at that moment John has not the knowledge of Sherlock past). Yes, Sherlock offers money and free meals but we see how reluctant is John to ask for it and how bad he feels about it - to ask for money means that he is not able to be independent and a whole man. He is proud, not good for someone in his position - but how many people would feel good to receive money from other instead earning by their own power? So John makes the right decision and is very important that he has the power to move on with his life and take a job especially under his value.
 
For true, Sherlock cures his limp and give excitement to his life, but one thing it does not : the depression won't disappear just like that. It will go quiet and hide in John's soul, but when life strikes back it will come in full power, like we see after the fall. Is not Sherlock fault that the depression is not going away, neither John's. He genuinely believes he is over it till the Fall, he believes he doesn't need a therapist, that is this kind of illness for you, the tricks it does, you believe that you are over it, but if you don't work on it, it is just an impression. John learns his lesson after the Fall and gets back to therapy (and is still at it at the time of his wedding).
 
John is very compassionate, but being compassionate doesn't mean that you walks with a smile on your lips and say only nice things to other. We see his face when he sees the dead woman, when he speaks about the still born baby, when Ms Hudson was in danger, when he decide to lie to Sherlock about the Woman, during the Great Game and during the Reichenbach Fall, when he hears about the fake engagement . It is not a "social" mask he just puts on, it is shown how he hates to lie, how he is not able to really lie even when he wants to protect Sherlock, he genuinely believes what he preaches to Sherlock and is true to himself. By his chosen professions he cares about the others, he wants to protect them. He doesn't choose to have a Moriarty as a friend, he chooses a Sherlock.
 
He has his own issues and his own demons to beat, his bottled anger, his difficulty to adjust to civilian life, his low-esteem which doesn't bode too well with Sherlock's kind of compliments (nobody should see him as an angel, he is not), but nastiness is not one of his character traits.
 How he is messed more by Sherlock fake suicide and how explains the way he acts in S3, i will discuss later, this post is already very long, i will let now only this link here http://leandraholmes.tumblr.com/post/85798197888/leandraholmes-sherlock-is-straight-im-going  . 

 

November 3, 2014 4:48 am  #4


Re: John´s nastiness

I just wanted to say that you put all of that really really nicely.  Especially the first sentence's reminder, and the 'being nice' aspect that depression can affect (even as much as you wish you had been a little more lively with a friend after the moment is over, for example).  I didn't read the entire original link, but just agree he's blunt/a little rough around edges, but not outright 'nasty'.


_________________________________________________________________________

We solve crimes, I blog about it, and he forgets his pants.  I wouldn't hold out too much hope!

Just this morning you were all tiny and small and made of clay!

I'm working my way up the greasy pole.  It's… very greasy.  And…  pole-shaped.
 

November 3, 2014 7:48 am  #5


Re: John´s nastiness

Well, I appreciate that it's difficult for John to compete (by the end of S3, anyway).  Sherlock does come out the better person in the big ways, with generally more noble motivations.  John never really gets a chance to show how far he would go to save the world. 

It's an odd relationship, but I think they have a kind of understanding.  It goes both ways - I wasn't quite comfortable with the way Sherlock keeps information from John.  I really struggled with that in S2.  Obviously, he had to keep John in the dark in TRF, but in ASIB?   I've just been thinking about the scene with Janine at 221B recently, and Sherlock quite blatantly deceives John over that, for no good reason - John's going to find out the truth a little later that same day.   I would think that the deception would be a huge issue ... but funnily enough, it's not for John.  The only time he gets really angry about it is about the fall, and only because he was left to grieve for Sherlock.   Otherwise, he valiantly puts up with being misled over and over again with barely a complaint, AND whilst having complete faith in Sherlock. 

That, for me, helps to equalise the relationship.  Otherwise, yes, I do think John can seem unappreciative.  I was frustrated by his reluctance to forgive Sherlock for something Sherlock had to do (and that was for John's protection too - the fall) - that's about John's issues.  I didn't like John getting angry with a very vulnerable Sherlock because Mary shot him (you know what I mean) - that's a great scene, but difficult to watch.  He allows the public perception that he's the one who saves Sherlock, when in fact we know that it's at least 50/50 (if anything, Sherlock functions better without John than John does without Sherlock - he knows Sherlock saved him, but he mostly keeps that under his hat). 

Also, I don't think his blog is very good. 

 

November 3, 2014 8:58 am  #6


Re: John´s nastiness

I see a strong dichotomy in John´s character.

On one hand he is a loyal, dependable and a loving friend to Sherlock. On the other hand, he somehow feels he has to compensate for that and tries to demonstrate that he is one of the "normal" people. And he compensates in a bad way - by badmouthing Sherlock behind his back (on his blog, mostly).

When he first meets Sherlock, he is immediately taken with him and just as Mycroft said, he is "very loyal, very quickly". Yet on his blog he calls Sherlock a madman and uses some very unflatering epithets to describe him.

At the end of ASiP Sherlock as good as cured his limp and lead him out of depression by offering him a new meaning in life - John thanked him by describing him on his blog as a callous individual who wouldn´t bet an eye if he found John and Mrs. Hudson with their throats cut, bleeding on the floor. He wrote that despite admitting earlier in the story that he barely knows Sherlock because they had just met.

In TBB he borrowed money from Sherlock (and later collected a nice fee from the bank that Sherlock earned by successfully solving the case) yet he made sing-and-dance about the fact that Sherlock used his laptop:
http://loudest-subtext-in-television.tumblr.com/post/101511403954/loudest-subtext-in-television-i-wouldnt-give

In TGG John was annoyed because Sherlock dared not to like being described as "spectacularily ignorant" and hated that his weaknesses - like his deletion of Solar System - were made public. John seriously got mad over the fact that a man he villified didn´t put with it with a smile. WTF?

After TRF and after the revelation that Sherlock wasn´t dead John had every reason to be angry. Yet that was still not an excuse to write about his allegedly best friend "well, I know he is a psychopath..." Did John swapped bodies with Donovan, or what?

Before the bonfire incident we saw John standing in front of Baker Street 221B because he wanted to go in and meet Sherlock. After the bonfire incident he appeared again, still "smoked" because he couldn´t be a minute more without Sherlock. Still, on the blog he accused Sherlock that he staged the bonfire incident himself, in order to bring John to his side out of a sense of thankfullness. Did he really think that? Yes, Sherlock lied to him - but that was done in order to save John´s life! Lying because I wanted to save you and severely endanger your life by sticking you into the bonfire (using some rough gorillas to assault you and drug you beforehand) - those are two very different things. Yet John callously indicted Sherlock publicly from doing just that.

So well, John is being a true friend but he has some nasty traits that he should get rid of. Sherlock is often being called an arsehole for less than this.


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

     Thread Starter
 

November 3, 2014 9:14 am  #7


Re: John´s nastiness

Yes, I agree. I think S3 shows John's worst side and Sherlock's best side, and I've been working to equalise things myself!  I think part of the trouble is that the primary thing that draws him towards Sherlock is Sherlock's more negative side - the danger, the recreation of the battlefield atmosphere.   Although I think there are a lot of other things that draw him to Sherlock, that's the biggy, the one that we're shown repeatedly and which both John and Sherlock acknowledge.   So I sometimes get a sense of John making Sherlock into that, whilst ignoring some of his better qualities - it's as if he WANTS him to be a sociopath (but at the same time, he must know he's really not - as evidenced by his trust in him). 

Sherlock doesn't really help matters by keeping things from John, because John ends up seeing more of the sociopathic stuff, and less of the compassionate, heroic stuff.   He doesn't know that Sherlock saved Irene's life, for instance, and Sherlock makes sure he doesn't know that. 

 

November 3, 2014 9:31 am  #8


Re: John´s nastiness

Don't you think that is a biiiiig diference between lending money with consent and lending a laptop without the consent of the owner? A laptop includes a lot of privacy, so for me is a boundary i woudn't cross toward a friend without his consent (yes, i used to use a friend's computer when i was young, as they were not on each corner as they are now - but i asked EACH time if is ok, even at work i woudn't logg on anyone else computer without asking, even when there is nothing personal on them). 

Look, if you want to see only a part of an character, go on. I cannot see John as a nasty person because he has a hot temper and backfires when he feels attacked, i cannot see him nasty because of his blog (even when he writes "madman" or something like that, he still admires Sherlock profoundly, but you have to see that he is a man not a woman and the way he writes is tipically for an alfa man, who on top of this was an army doctor, both two careers who make someone to express himself very boldly). I cannot see Sherlock as a nasty person because of his lies to John and fake suicide (which by the best intensions of his part, is really a big issue and nothing to forget and go over in a week after grieving over two years - and hallelujah that Sherlock doesn't expect that from John and gives him time), i can see him as a flawed person like i see John and i see both as good persons. Do they have issues? Oh yeah, both, plently. But do they match each other? Is their friendship a lie? Is their friendship forced on them? Why on earth should i be upset on their behalf if something works for them like it is and they are not angry about it and they like it or is not a big issue? Why should be for me on their behalf? Neither is an angel and (for me) neither is more noble than the other one, or better, or special. They are different, they have their own strenght, their own mistakes and flawes, they are like real human beings - and that makes for me this series so special. If i woud wanted a perfect person, i would watch Superman or other Marvel film... 

I quarell with my friends for nothings, i misunderstood them and i was perhaps not every time grateful for their time and efforts and good will (perhaps i was even not aware each time about it). Does it makes me a nasty person? Does it make my friends nasty because they did the same? I lend someone in a dark time 300 Euro and she forget about it and i remembered too late to ask for them back. I still think that person as one of my best friends. 

I think Sherlock is not the best place to look after a perfect friendship with two perfect people. By God, i wound not give my time to such a show, as that is the most unrealistic as it gets. 

 

November 3, 2014 9:57 am  #9


Re: John´s nastiness

I know where you are coming from. I also don´t see John as really nasty. I just wish that he would get rid of his trait to write ugly stuff about Sherlock behind his back.

Consider - after Sherlock´s public image had just recovered in TEH, his best friend suddenly publicly accusses him of a crime. He writes verbatim that Sherlock hired two cutthroats to assault him, violently seize him and drug him and stick him into the blazing bonfire, dangerously playing with his life - "because he is a psychopath". This is no light stuff - this is a dangerous libel able to destroy Sherlock´s career anew. Because what would the members of society (whose belief in Sherlock was badly shaken by the accussations against Sherlock in TRF) think when they would read such stuff? "Oh, John is a former army doctor, he doesn´t really mean that..." No! They would think: "The man was a dangerous wacko all along, it´s a pity he didn´t really die."

John is not stupid, so why is he doing an irresponsible stuff like that? Is that a retaliation for Sherlock´s lies? But those lies didn´t had the power to injure John. A libel of this kind, on the other hand, could destroy Sherlock completely....


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

     Thread Starter
 

November 3, 2014 10:38 am  #10


Re: John´s nastiness

nakahara wrote:

I know where you are coming from. I also don´t see John as really nasty. I just wish that he would get rid of his trait to write ugly stuff about Sherlock behind his back.

Maybe we should keep in mind that most members of the audience don't know a thing about this, because they don't read the blog. I don't read the blog, either, so all I know about the blog is what is mentioned on the show. And yes, John writes about Sherlock not knowing anything about the Solar System, and I suppose it's not the only not so nice stuff he writes about him. But most of the things that were mentioned about the blog in this thread - I've never heard about this before in my life.
So what I concentrate on is what is presented to me on the show. And A lovely light has wonderfully put into words what I think about that.
 


___________________________________________________
"Am I the current King of England?

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant
"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

 
 

November 3, 2014 10:38 am  #11


Re: John´s nastiness

Well, I would not take it that seriously. We know John tends to be sassy and does not mince his words but these sentences are immediately followed by:
=14px"Nah, I know it wasn't really."

And later:
"But then the whole kidnapping/bonfire thing happened. And he saved my life, of course. And I went to say thanks and... I was hooked. He's like a drug. He told me about the terrorist plot and I was hooked. I had to help him."

Which is quite telling. 
 


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)



 
 

November 3, 2014 11:29 am  #12


Re: John´s nastiness

It's kind of interesting that he has a blog at all.  I know it's because Watson wrote about Holmes, and because it's supposed to be therapeutic.  But he feels (to me) as if he should be a more private sort of person - but clearly, he's not.   He writes the blog with his real name and identity and obviously wants the publicity (even though Sherlock clearly doesn't at the beginning).  He doesn't seem to have much of a notion of client confidentiality either (surprising in a doctor! Linking Buckingham Palace to Irene Adler, for instance!). 

Inadvertently (or perhaps deliberately - perhaps it's all part of Sherlock's plan), he's feeding people selected information about Sherlock, including his enemies.

 

November 3, 2014 1:17 pm  #13


Re: John´s nastiness

nakahara wrote:

I know where you are coming from. I also don´t see John as really nasty. I just wish that he would get rid of his trait to write ugly stuff about Sherlock behind his back..

 
I just want to point out that John's blog can hardly be considered "behind Sherlock's back."   We and John knows that Sherlock reads every word of it and often responds.  I think in a way John is taking the piss when he writes those things because he knows Sherlock will read them.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proud President and Founder of the OSAJ.  
Honorary German  
"Anyone who takes himself too seriously always runs the risk of looking ridiculous; anyone who can consistently laugh at himself does not".
 -Vaclav Havel 
"Life is full of wonder, Love is never wrong."   Melissa Ethridge

I ship it harder than Mrs. Hudson.
    
 
 

November 3, 2014 3:08 pm  #14


Re: John´s nastiness

Reminded..of the old..actions speak louder than words..and Sherlocks..."will caring help them?"
Sherlock does good...and John...says and acts the way manners and society dictate....
I don't think this makes Johns intentionally nasty...but sometimes..thoughtless words and actions can be quite cruel.

Why did John deny Sherlock was his friend @ Smarmy Seb...that was thoughtless and hurtful wasn't it?
Was he embarassed  by Sherlock....over a guy he never met before and likely would never meet again....careless cruelty...caused idk by stupidity?
Or was that a misunderstanding...and John admired Sherlock and his work so much..he wanted Seb to think of him as a kind of equal / colleague / part of Sherlocks work...thus in Johns mind colleague is an upgrade from friend...?
Eitherway... he didn't think his words through again did he..because Sherlock did look hurt when John seemed to deny being his friend.

I think it was the latter..and as usual Sherlocks right again..people are idiots sometimes.....fortunately they seem to have moved on from that and have an understanding now...even is John is still..a bit of an idiot sometimes..which is annoying.

 

November 3, 2014 5:00 pm  #15


Re: John´s nastiness

I was rethinking this scene again, today. What do we say about coincidence?!
I may have mentiond before, I have always read that scene completely differently to everybody elseI
To me, Seb says' Friend?' Meaning' Boyfriend.'
This would make a lot more sense as to why John then says 'Colleague'...and would fit into his usual denial of them being a couple.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

November 3, 2014 8:54 pm  #16


Re: John´s nastiness

I just wanted to say that I love Lovely Light's analysis. Thank you for posting it.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I still believe that love conquers all!

     

"Quick, man, if you love me."
 

November 4, 2014 7:59 am  #17


Re: John´s nastiness

Lovely light - I really enjoyed reading your very thoughtful post, too.


I'm among those (the minority though, I think) that think that John correcting Sherlock's "friend" to "colleague" in TBB was more about protecting both himself and Sherlock from any snide remarks (or even just thoughts) on Sebastian's part, than about pushing Sherlock away. It happens before Sebastian reveals how he knew Sherlock and how they all hated him at uni, but I always thought that John somehow immediately instinctively felt that Sebastian was the type that would gloat over any (real or supposed) weaknesses of Sherlock's, and that he stepped in and tried to shield Sherlock from any of that, even before Sebastian confirmed that it was necessary.

I also agree with what others have said in this thread, that John, in TBB, was at a real low point in terms of money, social standing and professional self-esteem, and that he would rather not be seen as someone who depended on Sherlock both emotionally and economically.


As for John's blog and the tone of some of his posts, particularly concerning Sherlock, that is a matter that keeps puzzling me. I think most of the blog is fun to read and it's nice that it exists, but I often feel that that is not really John's voice speaking there. Like the John from the blog and the John from the show are two different persons.

Of course, within the Sherlock universe, the blog is the "official" face of things, while what we see in the show is kind of the private, uncut version of events. So of course John would not put each and every detail in the blog, and he wouldn't be too keen on revealing too much of just how much he loves (bromance or romance, it really doesn't matter in this context) Sherlock (and neither would Sherlock be). But still, a lot of it just jars. Maybe it's just due to the fact that the blog is not written by Moftiss but by someone else...
 

Last edited by La Jolie (November 4, 2014 8:09 am)


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t move, don’t speak, don’t breathe. I’m trying to think.

 
 

November 4, 2014 9:22 am  #18


Re: John´s nastiness

I really like your post, La Jolie. I think you got to the heart of things here.

Thank you for reminding me that John reply "colleague" came before Sebastian´s cruel taunts - I have entirely forgotten about that. You are right that John could be motivated by an effort to protect Sherlock and himself from that douchebag´s judgemental sneering.

John hardly sided with Sebastian, anyway. He repayed Sebastian for his deliberate stupidity at the end of an episode with a wonderfully sarcastic remark: "Nail a plank across the window and all your problems are over."

I fully agree with you concerning John´s blog. We see something nice on screen, some scene full of mutual understanding and warm-heartedness between Sherlock and John... and the scene is later described on John´s blog in clipped, macho terms full of names-calling and disparaging of Sherlock.

Sherlock and John hardly ever call each other names on screen - and when they do, it´s usually in jest. John´s blog, on the other hand, uses them oftenly and in a very unpleasant manner.

It creates a strange imbalance and casts a dubious shadow over John Watson´s character so beautifully portrayed by Martin Freeman on screen.


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

     Thread Starter
 

November 4, 2014 9:46 am  #19


Re: John´s nastiness

Moftiss don't write the blog?  That explains a lot.  I don't feel it's John's voice either. 

Actually, my main complaint about is that it's just not that great to read.  Doyle's Watson managed to do some quite gripping write-ups of Sherlock's cases, but BBC John's are rather dull, to be honest.   I'm not convinced it would take off as a famous, followed blog in the way that Watson's stories did. 

 

November 4, 2014 10:14 am  #20


Re: John´s nastiness

John's blog doesn't come across as particularly bitchy or nasty to me. I've never really had a problem with it that way. I think there's a hell of a lot of affection and admiration hidden behind those blithe remarks in the sort of banterish way that guys stereotypically show for one another.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eventually everyone will support Johnlock.

Independent OSAJ Affiliate

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum