BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Sherlock’s Sexuality: An In-Depth Contemplation and Study

besleybean · May 26, 2014 2:01 pm

You do know Ian Hallard wrote that piece?

Harriet · May 26, 2014 2:07 pm

Oh yes, that explains it!

SusiGo · May 26, 2014 2:09 pm

Ian Hallard had a mini part in the show and is the husband of Mark Gatiss which is fine. But do I have to believe everything he says? I do not think so.

Honestly, looking at some of the things Amanda Abbington has said about series 3 (and I am NOT talking about Johnlock and she is even part of the series) I really prefer to rely on my own eyes and ears.

Last edited by SusiGo (May 26, 2014 2:16 pm)

besleybean · May 26, 2014 2:15 pm

Everybody's choice, of course.
But I wouldn't deem to pretend to know better than cast and crew.
Particularly in Ian's case, when he'd had to suffer the agony of constantly watching his husband attacked and villified.

SolarSystem · May 26, 2014 2:15 pm

besleybean wrote:
You do know Ian Hallard wrote that piece?

Actually: I don't care who wrote it. I just don't agree.

besleybean · May 26, 2014 2:18 pm

I find that staggering.

SolarSystem · May 26, 2014 2:19 pm

To be honest: I don't care.

MahnSherlolly03 · May 26, 2014 6:16 pm

I think that every interprehtation is valid, and that no one should, under any circumstances, be flamed for their opinion, whether be that Sherlock is gay for John or straight for Molly, or that Sherlock is pan and that many pairings are possible.

I personally am a multishipper who plays with multiple interprehtations and switches between them.

(For intsantce, today I'm feeling ace Sherlock, whether he's attracted romantically to Molly or John.)

LoveIsAViciousMotivator · May 26, 2014 9:07 pm

besleybean wrote:
Everybody's choice, of course.
But I wouldn't deem to pretend to know better than cast and crew.
Particularly in Ian's case, when he'd had to suffer the agony of constantly watching his husband attacked and villified.

There is always going to be disagreements between writers and actors/actresses and the fans. The writers: "We wrote it this way." The actors/actresses: "We portray it this way!" The fans: "We see it this way."

People aren't always going to agree because of the different performances and the different writers' writing of such characters. There are going to be clashes and differences of opinion.

What isn't okay is bullying and blatant lies and deception on both sides.

The writers and actors can write and portray a character anyway they want to, but it is open to be analyzed, speculated, and criticized by the fans. Not everything is going to come out the same way. In this fandom and others, writers can contradict themselves like for instance, in another fandom I'm a part of, I couldn't agree with the certain killing of a character when the show was building up this character's eventual redemption, but on interviews, the writers go like: "No, sorry, you got the wrong idea. We weren't doing that. Beside, that character is so irredeemable." I was angry because I felt cheated that the writers would write an entire episode showing a character questioning his own side than to be killed off and not be redeemed. And what made me even angrier is when they redeemed a character that was irredeemable! What???!!!

Writers aren't perfect and some rather say the fans are just seeing things rather than admit fault.

On the side of the fans, we all can get so caught up in our own interpretations that some can go overboard to the point of throwing vile and shoving their opinions down the throats of not just other fans, but at the writers and actors/actresses like what happened to Mark(which produced a response from Ian) and Amanda. That isn't right either. Fans have no right to tell other fans that their own interpretations are wrong or stupid nor do we have the right to demand writers' ship a ship or write the show like this.

People may disagree, but people must respect the writers' and actors/actresses' own views. That's why we have fan fictions and forums to discuss such things.

Last edited by LoveIsAViciousMotivator (May 26, 2014 10:11 pm)

tonnaree · May 26, 2014 11:25 pm

I just enjoy talking about sex and Sherlock at the same time as I am terribly fond of both.

ancientsgate · May 27, 2014 3:37 am

tonnaree wrote:
I just enjoy talking about sex and Sherlock at the same time as I am terribly fond of both.

And you would like to see them get together, right? Me, too. Preferably with the help of you-know-who.

besleybean · May 27, 2014 5:30 am

To quote Mick Jagger: you can't always get what you want.

nakahara · May 27, 2014 6:46 am

LoveIsAViciousMotivator wrote:
There is always going to be disagreements between writers and actors/actresses and the fans. The writers: "We wrote it this way." The actors/actresses: "We portray it this way!" The fans: "We see it this way."

People aren't always going to agree because of the different performances and the different writers' writing of such characters. There are going to be clashes and differences of opinion.

What isn't okay is bullying and blatant lies and deception on both sides.

The writers and actors can write and portray a character anyway they want to, but it is open to be analyzed, speculated, and criticized by the fans. Not everything is going to come out the same way. In this fandom and others, writers can contradict themselves like for instance, in another fandom I'm a part of, I couldn't agree with the certain killing of a character when the show was building up this character's eventual redemption, but on interviews, the writers go like: "No, sorry, you got the wrong idea. We weren't doing that. Beside, that character is so irredeemable." I was angry because I felt cheated that the writers would write an entire episode showing a character questioning his own side than to be killed off and not be redeemed. And what made me even angrier is when they redeemed a character that was irredeemable! What???!!!

Writers aren't perfect and some rather say the fans are just seeing things rather than admit fault.

On the side of the fans, we all can get so caught up in our own interpretations that some can go overboard to the point of throwing vile and shoving their opinions down the throats of not just other fans, but at the writers and actors/actresses like what happened to Mark(which produced a response from Ian) and Amanda. That isn't right either. Fans have no right to tell other fans that their own interpretations are wrong or stupid nor do we have the right to demand writers' ship a ship or write the show like this.

People may disagree, but people must respect the writers' and actors/actresses' own views. That's why we have fan fictions and forums to discuss such things.

When I was watching Poirot, I didn´t see any hint of romance between him and Captain Hastings - because the writers didn´t write them that way.

But here in BBC Sherlock? We were provoked to read subtext into scenes from the very start and it was deliberately written that way. All those one-liners like: "Would you want the second bedroom?" and "Mrs. Turner next door has married ones!" are not just normal conversation, they are Johnlock baits. So the authors of the story can´t be really surprised that fans see things that way - they were the ones that started it at the first place.

Zatoichi · May 27, 2014 11:11 am

nakahara wrote:
When I was watching Poirot, I didn´t see any hint of romance between him and Captain Hastings - because the writers didn´t write them that way.

But here in BBC Sherlock? We were provoked to read subtext into scenes from the very start and it was deliberately written that way. All those one-liners like: "Would you want the second bedroom?" and "Mrs. Turner next door has married ones!" are not just normal conversation, they are Johnlock baits. So the authors of the story can´t be really surprised that fans see things that way - they were the ones that started it at the first place.

Oh yes, they gave us massive Johnlock baits.. together with a lot of contradicting messages.. they passed the bottle and now it is on us to figure out what game they are playing. What´s real, what´s bluff, double bluff, triple bluff? Do they have an agenda or do they just like to tease, traumatize and drink our tears in the end?

SolarSystem · May 27, 2014 11:20 am

Whatever it is, they gave us something. Johnlockers are not just making things up.

Harriet · May 27, 2014 11:28 am

Agree. And when I think of arguments like "I just don't want it to be like that", I wonder who is actually making things up.

Zatoichi · May 27, 2014 11:36 am

@Solar: Of course they don´t..
But people really absolutely not even seeing the slightest bit of Johnlock in the show are in the vast minority, aren´t they? So I wouldn´t worry too much about that..

@Harriet: I feel personally offended, I wrote that I don´t want to see Johnlock.. Please don´t destroy my happy bromance-bubble!

Last edited by Zatoichi (May 27, 2014 11:37 am)

Harriet · May 27, 2014 11:42 am

Oh, my dear, you may Not Want to See Whatever You Like. I just wonder if that counts as a valid argument. Have fun!!!

Zatoichi · May 27, 2014 11:51 am

My sincere thanks! *Drifts back into happy pre-S3-pre-tumblr-land*

SolarSystem · May 27, 2014 11:54 am

It's quite interesting that it's mostly the Johnlockers who find proof after proof after hints after hints after proof for their Johnlock theory, whereas most anti-Johnlockers rarely present any proof. At least no proof that's based on what we actually see in the show.