Liberty; engrossing thread!
 
My thoughts:  I remember back before Season 3 aired, there were a lot of Post-Reichenbach fics posted on AO3. I mean, at least a couple hundred. And almost EVERY SINGLE ONE had the same reunion scenario-- Sherlock comes back, approaches John, and John (a) punches him in the face, (b) beats him up even more severely, or (c) the entire fic is about John finding ways to punish Sherlock. 

I think Moffttiss' people problably were aware of those fics, and thought that scenario was what the fans wanted. 

I didn't like the scene, I thought it went overboard, and that cheapened it. And John didn't just punch Sherlock, he went to his default--strangulation. Twice. Then, head-butting. Fisticuffs are one thing, but strangulation implies that one is attempting to murder the strangle-lee.

I can understand the beffudlement at John's actions-- for the last two years, Fanon has painted him as a Saint (which is even listed in the tags in some fics) who is saddled with and burdened by being forced to deal with Sherlock, as if Sherlock were John's problem autisic/socipoathic/idiot savant/Vulcan child. There's a tendency to see the debacle with Moriarty as all Sherlock's fault, as if he sought him out.

Then, there the viewpoint that Sherlock should have just not engaged Moriarty.

Would we ask anybody else NOT to do their work? To stop being themselves? Sherlock is a detective, and if the Government, MI6, and Scotland Yard trust him to solve problems like Moriarty, why do we think that Sherlock should have just dropped the case, when Moriarty was threatening not only the people he cared for, but Greater London as well?

Sherlock didn't ask for the events leading up to TRF. Moriarty was the villain, not Sherlock. 

John's rage often seems to come from feeling duped, feeling foolish, disrespected-- taken for granted, and I get that-- but I can't see how Sherlock *could* have confided in him; John--as much as I love him, he's not MI6. He doesn't have that skill set. And, it's pretty obvious that Sherlock is MI6, at least on a freelance basis. (He gets sent on missions? Mycroft's resources?, Yeah, MI6.) 

John (as we see in TEH) doesn't have the greatest impulse control, is not the most observant person, doesn't always reach helpul conclusions (he's more likely to go off on an unfruitful tangent) ex., he thinks it's the cat in ASiB, he's positive that flashes of light on the horizon are morse code in HoB. John is also bad at lying. It's a wonderful trait in a cop, a soldier, a doctor or a boyfriend-- it's not great for covert work. And that anger-- he's a bit of a loose cannon. You really want to send him-- with PTSD, nightmares every night, hand tremor-- on a dangerous covert mission? 

Biggest reason that Sherlock shouldn't have contacted John? They tell us in TeH-- John was a marker. And I can't believe that Mary wasn't placed at John's clinic as a way to keep an eye on him; if Sherlock was alive, all you'd have to do was watch John Watson. Or is it that common for ex-assassins to take up work in GP clinics? Especially *that* clinic? And just happen to "fall in love" with John? Really? 

How can Sherlock say this to John, when Mary is sitting right there? When it's still a secret that he's
even alive? Hmmmm. 

This is just my convoluted way of saying, no-- I didn't like the assault scene in TEH, but I understand why they did it. And not all men have to resort to violence because they can't use their words. 
 
Yes, I think that John could hit Mary, and yes-- he could, in a fit of rage, and especially if he's been drinking (which seems to be becoming a theme) shake the baby. I don't think they'll ever have that happen, but I could see a scene where he comes dangerously close to it.  And in the confrontation scene in HLV, John's threatening Sherlock in exactly the way an abuser threatens those he/she abuses. Exactly. 

Molly: I hated that scene. Somehow, (and this was just how I saw it) her hitting him three times, very , very hard--- that seemed more vindictive-- and I think a lot of us liked it, because we have never forgiven Sherlock for the way he treated her in the last two seasons. I didn't like that scene, either-- that sort of Hollywood dramatic (and violent!) "Intervention" is probably the WORST way to deal with a addict. That was just another scene about Punishing Sherlock. 

Though, I wonder if many look at Sherlock being beaten and hit as really, more like coporal punishment. You know--like a spanking. 
 
I think John's and Molly's violent behavior towards Sherlock was really about punishing Sherlock for the last two seasons-- for who he is, for his lack of tact, for Baskerville--- it was all payback.  Personally, though-- I don't think it makes it right; imagine if we got punished by our "friends" in that way. 

My last point: I think it's interesting that it's easier to forgive physical violence than being poorly socialized. And I also think that in the next season, if John does something truly rephrehensible, and Sherlock beats him the way John beat Sherlock-- John will be seen as the victim. It won't be funny or excusable anymore. 

I'm rambling again.. more cofffffeeeeeeeee........



 

Thank goodness for small mercies!

Because the writers have said they don't look at it.
I would think less of them if they did.

Last edited by besleybean (September 2, 2014 7:57 pm)

Well unless thery were(ahem) lying again they have said they don't.
Apparently this is quite common for two of the best writers of modern times...why the heck would they want to?

Aha. Sherlock ASKS to be hit. :-) 

This goes to the orginal post: why the violence that John, and to an exent Molly dish out to Sherlock can give some of us (myself included) the heebie-jeebies. 

That's called victim blaming-- and the attitude that John can do no wrong reminds me of a parent with one kid who always gets the blame for everything, while the other kid is the "darling" , and can do no wrong. 

And also, as far as deserving to be hit, why not Mary? If what we are saying is that the penalty for causing emotional pain, whether purposely, or through selfishness, or unintentionally, or through ignorance-- if the penalty is phsyical violence, then why *not* Mary--for what she did to John? Shouldn't she at least get a slap? Maybe even from Molly, on John's behalf? 

It seems to me that this criteria for when it's okay to hit someone is only applicable to Sherlock. 

 

A lovely light wrote:

tonnaree wrote:

Sometimes I feel like I am the only person who finds John's reaction to Sherlock that night as both in character and understandable.

In order to maintain the standards of deciency established in this forum I will not comment on the idea of Sherlock being spanked.

Count me as the third person to think that. 

But i might have other view on the whole situation as i was myself on the verge of getting depressed (not that kind of depressed when you have a bad day, but that kind of depressed when life makes no meaning anymore) so i feel a lot for what someone in John's position getting through all the trauma of grieving and suicide witnessing might feel. I might write someday how i see John in S3, but i don't know if you would be interested.  

I don't feel well when someone is getting physical abuse, i don't like it, i don't look at it - i wathced the beginning od TEH when Sherlock is tortured only once and cound't watch it again. And still i see the answer of John to the way Sherlock choose to present himself at the reunion as in his character, compatible with both his issues and with the world of alpha-men he was living in for quite a time. Yeah, the writers could have choosen a more PC reunion, but that would have not feel real for me. 

For example i didn't find Molly slaps as understable from  her character and development. She was depicted as very emphatic , especially to Sherlock, and everybody knows that addiction is an illness and should be handled with care. She is a smart woman and emphatic and all of the sudden she is so out of her character and without letting Sherlock explain himself she slaps him?  They didn't argue before, she was totally shy to him and all of the sudden, this? 
 

I agree with your point about Molly. 

Molly and John treated Sherlock like a convicted criminal, not someone with an illness. 

@Raven, you've pretty much described how I feel about the whole thing.   That's not to say that I think it's out of character (it WAS out of character for John as I thought I knew him, but I've had to assimilate it into my view of the character), or that I think it shouldn't have been included, or that I think people shouldn't like the scenes. 

I'm actually wondering if Molly's violence was even worse than John's.  I understand that John was dealing with extremes of emotions and a two year build up of grief and loss.  Molly hadn't gone through that, and yes, it does seem more like a punishment.   And in both cases, regardless of what you think of the violence, Sherlock was in the right.  He really was working on a case.  He did need to engage Moriarty and afterwards, he didn't have any option than the course he took, at great personal sacrifice.  Or rather, he did have an option.  He could have let people be killed and cleared his name and got on with his life, but he chose to sacrifice himself.

I also feel that with both John and Molly, Sherlock can be an arse at times, but they choose to be involved with him, knowing that.   I don't feel that Sherlock led Molly on, for instance.  What you see is what you get.  Not that that means he can behave how he likes because he's open about it ... but I do think he's upfront - they know he won't tell them everything, for instance. 

Anyway, I've been thinking a lot about the idea of Mary watching John, or whatever is going on there (I agree that it doesn't seem likely to be coincidence), and it's interesting watching the scenes with that in mind.  She's just watched her husband being unexpectedly violent, but seems pleased and almost triumphant at the end. 

Liberty, i don't think that Sherlock was right, He was not right at all. He might have his reasons, but the way he choose to deal with it affects other people, sometimes badly, and than they have all the right in the world to don't feel ok about that. Because no means can excuse all the ways you deal with it, even if it is a noble one. It's not John fault that Sherlock can trust loads of people, to whom he has only a professional relationship, like the 25 homeless but not his friend - and i am very unhappy with the dealing of "why" in S3 actually. Because everytime when Sherlock thinks he will protect John by not telling him what is going on, it gets actually pretty wrong for John, he doesn't protect him at all. And MI secret at all, but also his parents knew, the 25 homeless knew, Molly knew. What should John think about it? What would you think if your closest friend would share something so important with loads of people but you? Would you take it graciusly? Would you think that the friend was right? Woudn't it hurt you deeply? Add this to what John already accumalted in the last two years andyou have the reason why he exploded.

And sacrifice and all, John was also sacrificed - and he hasn't got a choice about it - and he becomes as answer a joke?  To his grief and emotions? Said that he was not to be trusted?That makes my blood boiling and i am not invested in it, not grieving, not having two empty years behind me.  

If i would have a friend doing me something similar, i woudn't punch him for sure. But the anger would be deep, very deep, and would eat out the friendship. So actually, from a certain point of view, for Sherlock is better that John let his anger out, because after that he can move on and rebuilt the friendship. Anger is anger, you can keep it deep burried, but the thing is that is coming back over and over and bits your soul. You cannot transform it  in positive feelings, when is such a deep feeling and so corelated with other deep feelings. You have to deal with it and is a very hard thing to do, one of the hardest especially in our society who has such a huge problem with expressing the anger and let so little possible outlets to canalise it, 
 

He is right about jumping in that moment. But he isn't right to keep John in the dark for two years, also he is not right about the way he choose to do the reunion - he so should have give more thought about it, about how and where he would meet John and explain him .... 

About that reunion-- Sherlock had just been rescued from being tortured and beaten. He had to be on pain meds. He was obviously nervous. Maybe that's a partial explanation for his poor judgment in the way that he approached John?