BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Johnlock: The Official Debate

Liberty · December 14, 2014 10:54 am

I think the difficulty that we'd get into (by avoiding sex and looking at other aspects) is that there isn't anything to distinguish them. I don't think that the Johnlock view is solely about sex any more than I think that the romantic friendship view is solely about there not being any sex. It's just that sex (in the very broad sense) is what distinguishes the two views. That's why we keep coming back to it on this thread (rather than because we're all sex-obsessed!). We could talk about the other aspects of their relationship (love, etc.) but it wouldn't be so much a debate, I don't think.

Kind of incidentally, though, I don't think sex (again in the broad sense) is minor. It's a hugely important and powerful biological drive. That drive does partially include other things like romance and love too, and is behind a lot of what people do, how they conduct their relationships, their societies, etc. I know that's all obvious, but just wanting to point out that what we're talking about here (whether there's a sexual aspect to their attraction) is not trivial or frivolous.

mrshouse · December 14, 2014 11:20 am

Oh, don't get me wrong there, Liberty. I never meant to say that sex is minor or trivial, not at all. In general this is rather not the show for hot sex, be it Johnlock, Adlock, Mystrade, warstan, whatever. It's a show about love and romantic tropes though. And there are some fans out there who don't even see this between Sherlock and John. So I think there are still a couple of things to discuss.

besleybean · December 14, 2014 11:32 am

Well and god this is opening a can of worms...
Hang on, let me try and pick my way through this...
Ok, this is how I see it:
Irene states she is gay and I have no reason to disbelieve her.
She is a clever, manipulative woman who knows that people are weak and she can use sex and S&M to control them....hence her work.
She has few scruples, so she works for Jim.
She thinks it'll be fun to play the Holmes boys...so on she goes.
Trouble is when she meets Sherlock she actually likes, respects and even feels attracted to him...
Yet she still delivers to Moriarty and thinks she'll get away with it.
However Sherlock out wits her.
The moot point is: does Irene win in the end by making Sherlock care enough to save her?
Now for Sherlock:
The most interesting point about him,is that when Mycroft' accuses' him of falling under Irene's spell..the exact response of Sherlock is 'absurd'.
Now I've just checked the definition of that, to be sure and am now really wondering what Sherlock meant..
Why ' absurd'?
Because he was incapable of feeling any attraction to anybody, or to a woman, or just that Mycroft should know he didn't do relationships...or was Sherlock merely objecting to the caracature that Mycroft portrayed?!
I suppose the big issue is:
Was Sherlock not attracted to Irene?
Did he not recognise the attraction?
Was he just embararssed/irked that his brother called him out on it?
Possibly the biggest outrage to Sherlock would be the suggestion that he would be so weak as to fall to normal human emotions.

Last edited by besleybean (December 14, 2014 11:34 am)

Liberty · December 14, 2014 11:53 am

Oh yes, he would definitely see it as a weakness. What Mycroft is saying is quite insulting to Sherlock. We know he's not incapable of feeling of attraction, but he likes to believe that he's capable of resisting it, of not allowing it to affect his judgment. Yes, I think he's possibly embarassed too - unusual for him.

At that point I think it's only just dawning on Sherlock what he's done - that it was him who effectively gave the information to Moriarty. I think when he makes the comment that Mycroft should screen his staff more carefully, he actually believes it - he doesn't yet realise that HE's the security risk. So when he says it's absurd, he's only just starting to see it himself (and it's absurd to him too!). I would guess that he was quite aware of his feelings for Irene, but thought that everything was under control and that it wouldn't affect him - he's Sherlock Holmes.

But when Mycroft mentions the speed of the deduction, I think that's the absolute giveaway - Sherlock knows it, we know it.

silverblaze · December 14, 2014 11:56 am

He wasn't aware that he had been played until Mycroft points it out to him.

On the other topic: IMHO, if you think or wish there's love between them, but no sexual attraction, you're a nonlocker. If you think or wish there's love and also sexual attraction, you're a johnlocker.

Anyone disagree with that definition?

IMO love and no sexual attraction is a very deep friendship. Love plus sexual attraction is romance.

Vhanja · December 14, 2014 11:59 am

That scene in the "plane of the dead" is almost painful to watch, because I think it's the most humiliating moment for Sherlock in the entire series. To make it worse, Mycroft isn't just angry - he apologies and sounds honestly sad and regretful. "I didn't know."

Really good scene, great dialogue and so well executed by them all.

God, I love this series.

mrshouse · December 14, 2014 12:00 pm

Yes, maybe, silver, I wanted to point out that Johnlocking is not about seeing them having sex on screen. That is not the show. Neither for them nor for other pairings with much less electric chemistry than Martin and Ben.

mrshouse · December 14, 2014 12:03 pm

About the scene in the plane of dead, its clearly mirrored in the scene with CAM and the damsel in distress. Only this time does not answer with "absurd". He comes to terms with having feelings.

besleybean · December 14, 2014 12:09 pm

I was just thinking about this today...well we now all know the answer to the question CAM posed: how far will Sherlock go to protect John?...
He will murder for him.

Last edited by besleybean (December 14, 2014 12:10 pm)

Liberty · December 14, 2014 12:11 pm

It's fantastic, isn't it, Vhanja? That episode is one of the best, I think. Mycroft really didn't know what he was doing, and probably if you'd asked anybody, including Sherlock, if Sherlock could have been thrown by falling for somebody, they'd have said it was absurd. "The woman" suggests that Irene was very much the exception, a one-off, so Mycroft couldn't have anticipated that. I agree - I love the way he says it. There is some caring for Sherlock there, despite the huge damage Sherlock may inadvertently have done (to Mycroft as well as to the country).

Silverblaze, I mostly agree, except that the meaning of romance/romantic is hazy. I know what I mean by it, and I do think it exists in friendships and I see it on screen. The kind of friendship where you feel a sort of elation around the person or when you know you're going to see them - I would say that is romantic. And doing big things for a friend because you love them - I would say that is romantic too. I definitely see that sort of romance in John and Sherlock's friendship, but I know others would say that romance is limited to sexual relationships (and they'd be right - it's just that there are different definitions).

Last edited by Liberty (December 14, 2014 12:13 pm)

Liberty · December 14, 2014 12:12 pm

besleybean wrote:
I was just thinking about this today...well we now all know the answer to the question CAM posed: how far will Sherlock go to protect John?...
He will murder for him.

Well, John did that for Sherlock practically on the first day, so it's only fair .

Vhanja · December 14, 2014 12:20 pm

Yes to get back to Johnlock..

I think that if you take sex out of the equation, there is still a difference between a friendship and a romantic relationshiop. And the latter is what I think we are seeing in the series.

mrshouse · December 14, 2014 12:29 pm

Exactly this. And there can be sex but it must not be explicit on screen.

Liberty · December 14, 2014 12:41 pm

I'd say that some friendships have a romantic element and some don't. But I think we all agree that there is something there - romance is an easy name for it, but I don't think there's anything else that fits. If you would lay down your life for a friend, that's romantic, isn't it? If you yearn for them, and become elated when you see them, that's romantic to me. What would the rest of you call it? (In a friendship, I mean, not with any sexual attraction).

Vhanja · December 14, 2014 12:50 pm

For me it has to do with the importance the other person has in their life. Sherlock and John see to each other before anyone else (at least before Mary), they live(d) together, the first thing on their mind was always the other. Their lives revolved around, and was customized to, the other.

I think there is one quite telling scene in ASiB, where Sherlock and Irene are alone. John as gone out, and Sherlock doesn't know it. His "Where's John? I was talking to John." sounds like a lost child. The two of them depend on each other to be happy. I have never heard of a pure friendship that has all these things.

Liberty · December 14, 2014 1:55 pm

It's a very special relationship. Maybe even more romantic because they don't have that sexual bond - they don't have the usual, conventional reason to be tied together, but they very much are. It's kind of sweet that they really aren't that young - this isn't a relationship that was formed during the growing, bonding school or student years, but one between mature men who have seen a lot of the world.

I'm just wondering if this discussion is more suitable for the friendship thread.

tonnaree · December 14, 2014 2:25 pm

What Irene does with her clients is absolutely sexual. I just meant that as far as most of her clients go they get sexual satisfaction from being dominated not intercourse.

Many times I've seen people assume Irene is having intercourse with everyone she works for, male or female.

Vhanja · December 14, 2014 2:44 pm

Liberty wrote:
It's a very special relationship. Maybe even more romantic because they don't have that sexual bond - they don't have the usual, conventional reason to be tied together, but they very much are. It's kind of sweet that they really aren't that young - this isn't a relationship that was formed during the growing, bonding school or student years, but one between mature men who have seen a lot of the world.

I'm just wondering if this discussion is more suitable for the friendship thread.

I agree with what you say here. It's not sexual attraction or wanting to have a "relationship" that draws these two together. They don't have a crush or a fling, they just bond perfectly.

I don't think it belongs in the friendship thread because I think everything we've talked about now is a good indicator that this is romantic.

Liberty · December 14, 2014 2:53 pm

I see what you mean, Tonnarree. No, I didn't assume that - I thought that her day job would involve the normal femdom stuff ("recreational scolding" as they call it). But I think she'd go the extra mile to manipulate people for her protection. She knows what people like, i.e. she'll change what she uses with them to suit the person.

She manages to manipulate Sherlock because she knows what he likes - even if Mycroft didn't expect it.

In the fireside scene (the original question was about whether she really would have had sex with him) that turned out to be what she liked too (judging by the elevated pulse, etc.). Which I'm sure is why Sherlock has a lightbulb moment when she says that Moriarty is her kind of man - no, he isn't. So yes, she wanted to, and it would have been pleasure, not work.

Last edited by Liberty (December 14, 2014 2:53 pm)

Vhanja · December 14, 2014 2:54 pm

"Recreational scolding" has me in stitches every time.