It's an obvious comparison to make, but what I think John means is "I am moving on with my life". As in, not being stuck in limbo due to grief without going anywhere or doing anything. 

But ,of course, I do see why it easily could be interpreted that way, I think these things concerning John's marriage (changes for Sherlock, Sherlock's role and importance in John's life) are balancing on tip-toes between friendship and romance in the way it is written and done.

Then again, a friend reacting with fear/jealousy because their best friend gets a romantic partner is not new, it happens all the time (although perhaps more with teenagers when their BFF suddenly changes focus from them to the other sex). That does fit, I think, seeing as Sherlock - at that time - was emotionally immature in some ways (and very mature in others), so I think his reaction is quite fitting.

I think that also there's a set up for Mrs Hudson's misunderstanding.   So yes, it could be interpreted in a romantic way, which is how Mrs Hudson (mistakenly!) hears it.   But that's from her point of view of assuming they were boyfriends.   We know that they weren't "together" in that way (whatever people's interpretation of their feelings towards each other!), and I think it's clear that John wasn't implying that they were.

I think Mrs Hudson's warning is purely about friendship.  She talks about how her friendship with her best friend changed after the wedding, which plays into Sherlock's fear. The same with Sholto - it's John's friendship with him that makes him that makes Sherlock jealous. (If he was jealous in the romantic sense, then he would be jealous because of Mary, John's current lover!).

Mycroft's comment - again, he seems to be talking about friendships changing after marriage, in the same way as Mrs Hudson - the end of an era.  After TST, I do wonder if he was also alluding to the fact that Mary was likely to be killed soon, and Sherlock would be hurt again.  He uses the "Redbeard" trigger, doesn't he? 

Mary's comment about neither of them being the first doesn't make any sense if she meant only as lovers - I just can't see it as Mary thinking that Sherlock has been seeing John as a lover (and that Sholto is also a lover).   Again, I think it's the friendship theme - Sherlock wasn't John's first antisocial best friend, much to his chagrin.  (The point being, I think, that Mary isn't the first [serious?] girlfriend, but is the one John is with now - that's what matters). 

Last edited by Liberty (January 13, 2018 8:13 am)

Vhanja wrote:

It's an obvious comparison to make, but what I think John means is "I am moving on with my life". As in, not being stuck in limbo due to grief without going anywhere or doing anything.

I agree. "Moving on" can mean a lot of things and not necessarily in a romantic or platonic way.

Vhanja wrote:

But ,of course, I do see why it easily could be interpreted that way, I think these things concerning John's marriage (changes for Sherlock, Sherlock's role and importance in John's life) are balancing on tip-toes between friendship and romance in the way it is written and done.

I love this balancing in the show. Although I for myself see more the friendship aspect.

Last edited by Rache (January 14, 2018 12:45 pm)

I've never seen any fine balancing.
Sherlock loves John and always has done, though I don't think he realises until the Pool scene.
I used to think it was the love of a best friend.
But in S 4, we learn that he considers John a brother.

With balancing, I don't mean that the show strays into romantic territory per say. Only that it's written and performed in such a way that it's easy to understand how someone could interpret it as romantic. Whether that was done deliberate or not is impossible to know, but, yeah, I miss that too.

It seems I am completely unable to make myself understood in this thread these days. I blame the language barrier!

I do not mean that the show is written as if it's supposed to be romantic.I mean that some scenes are written and acted in such a way that makes it possible to interpret it as romantic. It might be meant as platonic, but it's done in such a way that leaves it open to interpret it otherwise.

Yes, but the question is whether the ambivalence (is that the right word in this settnig?) was done intentional or not.

We don't know that, really. 

Nice to see that nothing has changed over here while I was away. :-D

My guess is that it's not intentional at all.  I have wondered in the past if it was, but I think not.  I think it's just that characters do tend to get "shipped", and we see things there that were never intended (it IS difficult to interpret facial expressions, etc).  I think both actors have been clear that they haven't been playing the characters that way too.