Offline
*waves to her happy day* bye bye....you have been short but all the good things come to an end...
Offline
Yes, yes, but - so I have learned in this very thread just recently - all of this takes place before the scene on the dance floor. And then John knows. Right?
Offline
This will haunt me the rest of the day.
Offline
SolarSystem wrote:
Yes, yes, but - so I have learned in this very thread just recently - all of this takes place before the scene on the dance floor. And then John knows. Right?
I really believe John knows then. The way he moves and looks at Sherlock just screams it.
Offline
So then let's forget about what John said before that. What counts is that he finally comes to realize that Sherlock is the one he doesn't just care about, but the one he loves.
Offline
It was a miscomprehension of Sherlock´s side anyway.
Offline
And think of John's face on the tarmac when the plane is turning around.
Offline
Girls, I'm not just saying this because it would make me sad but actually this is not convincing: the author argues that love and care would be redundant which, at least for me, are two completely different matters, so loving and caring is not just one applying to one exclusively and leaving out the other. Both applies to both as I see it.
Offline
Brilliant! You saved my day, mrshouse.
Offline
I suppose the author would now argue that when you love someone you also care for him/her, whereas when you care for someone you aren't necessarily in love with him/her - which again would bring us to the question whether or not 'to love someone' and 'to be in love with someone' are two different things.
Anyway... I love your reasoning, mrshouse, and have decided to agree with it.
Offline
But but but, Solar, the prelude us " The two people....". Not " the one I love and care and the one I only care about..."
Offline
I just translated the sentence into German and used another word instead of care about for the sake of clarity. "Ich möchte mit den beiden Menschen dort stehen, die ich auf der Welt am meisten liebe und schätze." On reading this, I would never suppose that one verb refers only to one person but that both refer to both people.
Offline
Honestly, I love detecting little details after all the long time but this neat separation never occurred to me, neither in English nor in German. And I'm not a stubborn Johnlocker who closes his eyes at stuff that does not fit with my personal opinion. I just find the stuff supporting the johnlock view much more convincing. Aaaahhhh, good science...
Offline
Well, I can follow the author's argumentation, at the same time this distinction never would have occured to me, either. I always understood it in the way that John doesn't really make a distinction between Sherlock and Mary here - just as he doesn't make a distinction when he's talking to Sherlock while sitting on the bench. He loves both of them and he cares about both of them.
Offline
I agree, especially as he says "two people" instead of Mary and you. This comes only at the end of the sentence. When talking about his feelings he makes no distinction between them.
The scene on the bench is a bit different. And it is very conspicuous that Sherlock gets up and leaves while John is talking about Mary changing his life. I am qute sure he would have stayed if John had said: "See, the thing about Mary and you – you both have completely turned my life around; changed everything."
Offline
No one wants to sit and listen to their crush talk about the person they're in love with.
Been there done that.
Offline
But in this case Sherlock should have stuck around just a few seconds longer...
Offline
Indeed. But then John has said that they are not a couple, that he is not gay, that Sherlock is a machine, etc. Maybe he just did not want to hear him talking about Mary.
Offline
...and because emotions are involved on his part, Sherlock seems to be a bit not good at deducing what John is about to say about him...
Offline