See, when Martin explodes in rage  , it's just like when John does. I am saving my pennies so i can buy the @#$% you, I won a BAFTA t-shirt, not sure if I will wear it in public or keep it for PJs.

It's from a talk show called The Graham Norton Show. I'm pretty sure it's okay to swear on TV if it is after a certain time. 9pm pr 10pm, depending on the country. If I was going on television I would need a list of words I couldn't use cus I swear like a drunken @#$%^& sailor. It's very liberating.

As long as John stays loyal to Sherlock.

hypergreenfrog wrote:

I find "pacifist" an interesting choice of words for an ex-army doctor. I don't think he is too easy going, quite the contrary. I rather get the impression that he frequently has to fight an urge to boil over with rage, or even punch people, which is why he feels so comfortable around Sherlock, who always speaks his mind.
His figure is quiet, yes, but that makes it even more effective when he does strike out (verbally or literally).

Yeah, but you gotta admit-- he most often errs on the side of uber-patience. In that cringe-worthy Xmas eve scene, Sherlock deserved to be tossed out one of the front windows of 221B. Instead, all John did was stand there mutely, looking as though someone had fed him a week-old prune. His only comment I can remember was when he once quietly told Sherlock, "Take a day off, will ya?" How many men would stand by while a male friend dissed his girlfriend(s) so thoroughly? Or while his friend shut a door in his face when all he wanted was to make sure said friend was okay? Sometimes I want to take John by the lapel and shout at him, "Tell him off, will ya? He NEEDS telling off!"  I dunno, I suppose that would make the show boring and change the nature of both their characters. All I know is, someone who's uber-patient like that seems almost abnormal in his own right.

And I LOVE John, everything about him. I just want to give him a push sometimes. *g*

I'm not entirely comfortable with labels like 'bad ass' and positively detest terms like' BAMF'.
But John is certainly a man of action and the perfect partner in the double act.

It's quite amusing for the audience, when John gets cross/moralising.
But I tend to be with Sherlock.  I particularly dislike ' false' sentiment.

besleybean wrote:

It's quite amusing for the audience, when John gets cross/moralising.
But I tend to be with Sherlock.  I particularly dislike ' false' sentiment.

False is in the eye of the beholder. What one person might think is false/fake/baloney, another would think was true/real/just.  John's wondering aloud why Sherlock couldn't seem to show concern for others whose lives were in imminent danger, for instance-- something most people would understand and agree with-- might strike Sherlock as false sentiment, but....  what's fake or sentimental about that? I see John in those cases as being the Voice of Everyman-- he gets to say things to Sherlock that most of the rest of us are sitting there thinking. In that way, he himself (his nature, his personality and character) and the words he's given to say are a plot device inside the story.

besleybean wrote:

I think Sherlock's: there are plenty of people dying in this hospital Doctor,is particularly pertinent.

I love that line!

And also the, "will caring about them help save them?" and John has to admit, "no" and Sherlock replies "then I'll continue not to make that mistake." It sounds cold and heartless but it's so true - caring about them won't help save them!

ancientsgate wrote:

Sherlock Holmes wrote:

besleybean wrote:

I think Sherlock's: there are plenty of people dying in this hospital Doctor,is particularly pertinent.

I love that line!

And also the, "will caring about them help save them?" and John has to admit, "no" and Sherlock replies "then I'll continue not to make that mistake." It sounds cold and heartless but it's so true - caring about them won't help save them!

But most people wouldn't make a conscious decision about that.  They would just care, because that's what they do. Sherlock implies here that he can turn his caring on and off.

THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE DOOOO!! (sorry couldn't resist)

And yes, I think he CAN turn his caring on and off. We've seen that he can and does care about others, but at the same time he's able to detach himself and look at things from a purely logical clinical point of view, which is an essential skill for his detective work.

Swanpride wrote:

I don't think that Sherlock sees caring as "false", but as useless most of the time. And I guess that he sometimes wonders if there is something wrong with him, because he doesn't react like the other people.  But, to be fair, John can be very uncaring, too, if he feels the situation calls for it.

John's "uncaring" is more in the line of taking care of dirty business. The soldier in him coming out, I suppose. He's also a doctor, and they can be very resolute when they have to do things that cause physical pain, as well as tell people things that are hard to hear and deal with, etc. Either way, soldier or doctor, I think John is one of those get-things-done people, just in a much different way than Sherlock. But I would never categorize John as uncaring. Just my take on that.