Schmiezi wrote:

Liberty wrote:

I think one of the reasons there aren't really metas about the friendship, is that it's just there and obvious.   It's not at all hidden.   We don't have to go looking for clues.   So there's nothing to write, nothing to prove (I'm sure even the people who think they will get together still see the friendship).    I suppose I could point out lots of instances where there's evidence of friendship and nothing sexual going on, but it's a bit pointless! 

I hereby challenge all of you to present a meta based on analysing the tropes and other cinematographic devices like cuts and camera angles that rules out love and proofs that Sherlock and John are just friends.

But why would I want to rule out love when they so obviously and openly love each other?     There's tons of evidence for them loving each other and having a beautiful friendship in the show. 

I hereby challenge all of you to present a meta based on analysing the tropes and other cinematographic devices like cuts and camera angles that rules out ROMANTIC love and proofs that Sherlock and John are just friends.

Schmiezi wrote:

I hereby challenge all of you to present a meta based on analysing the tropes and other cinematographic devices like cuts and camera angles that rules out ROMANTIC love and proofs that Sherlock and John are just friends.

That's kind of my point. I don't see how it could be done.  Friendship in itself doesn't rule out romantic love - it would be possible for them to be lovers and still be friends, so what would showing the friendship prove?  And it doesn't need camera angles, etc. - they're clearly and openly shown as friends.

Last edited by Liberty (January 27, 2016 7:22 pm)

To me, it's quite simple:

There is nothing we have seen so far in the show that can be viewed exclusively as romantic. Every scene, every trope, that exists between Sherlock and John can both be explained as a budding, yet unspoken romance or as a deep and platonic friendship.

And as long as there isn't anything shown that would exlude platonic friendship, I see that as just a viable option as romance. 

But as I've often said - I'm a Johnlock shipper myself, and if I am proven wrong and Sherlock and John end up together, I will be the very first to pop the champagne and dance on the table. 

Harriet wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

I hereby challenge all of you to present a meta based on analysing the tropes and other cinematographic devices like cuts and camera angles that rules out ROMANTIC love and proofs that Sherlock and John are just friends.

I thought it was obvious that you were talking about romantic love from the beginning, Schmiezi, but, yes, better to put that right.
And I'm looking forward to the results. I think it would be a worthy task for the friendship thread as well. There is not much activity going on, it seems.

I love that idea and think that there are some who would accept the challenge. But as a Johnlocker, I would never post in that thread. Not because I don't want to but because the thread is not made for Johnlockers.

But if there are some non-Johnlockers from the friendship thread around: feel free to quote my challenge there. :-)

Vhanja wrote:

Let's turn the challenge around, then:

Can anyone give me an example of a scene between Sherlock and John that excludes platonic friendship?

Just take a look at the Johnlockers only thread. There are like hundreds of metas that do.

(thanks, Xistential Angst's Johnlock Blog)

So I gave you a scene of which you admit it's not something platonic, but has a sexual connotation, and you reject it as pure fun and giggles? Really, I had hoped you'd go deeper.

Liberty wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

Liberty wrote:

I think one of the reasons there aren't really metas about the friendship, is that it's just there and obvious.   It's not at all hidden.   We don't have to go looking for clues.   So there's nothing to write, nothing to prove (I'm sure even the people who think they will get together still see the friendship).    I suppose I could point out lots of instances where there's evidence of friendship and nothing sexual going on, but it's a bit pointless! 

I hereby challenge all of you to present a meta based on analysing the tropes and other cinematographic devices like cuts and camera angles that rules out love and proofs that Sherlock and John are just friends.

But why would I want to rule out love when they so obviously and openly love each other?     There's tons of evidence for them loving each other and having a beautiful friendship in the show. 

On metas:
a) SH fandom exists for 120 years. I refuse to believe that absolutely no metas on S and J friendship were written during that time. 
b) The argument "there are no metas on the subject, because the subject is self-evident" is risky. Non-existence of something is not proof that some other thing is self-evident. I never saw meta on mutual love of Mrs. Hudson and Moriarty - does that mean people never bothered to write some, because the thing speaks for itself and Mrs. H and Jim are all over each other all the time? Such claims should be corroborated by the examples from the show, not just generally swept under the carpet, stating that it´s pointless.

On Sherlock-John connection:
Yesterday, I cited Elementary as an example of SH adaptation where Sherlock is obviously straight and S and J are definitely not romantically connected. No-one bothered to explain to me, why BBC Sherlock couldn´t be written in the manner of that show, in an honest and straighforward manner which would lead no doubt about the orientation and the attraction of the characters. Any thoughts on that? Any explanation from Moftiss why they couldn´t follow this path and avoid gay jokes and ambiguity?

I already did.

I'll just drop one randomly: When Sherlock grabs john's head in the dark, John is startled and starts saying something like "sdfjldks", he's probably thinking that Sherlock is about to kiss him because, Sherlock tells John to close his eyes, John closes he's eyes and they start spinning. Trope-> unresolved sexual tension.