BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Johnlock: The Official Debate

SusiGo · May 13, 2014 8:58 pm

I did a little research and can only agree with you.

nakahara · May 13, 2014 9:00 pm

Here - a little Greek disco as a peace offering.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCbqSznk68M

SusiGo · May 13, 2014 9:05 pm

Sounds beautiful.

nakahara · May 13, 2014 9:09 pm

Its a love song:

Sta sintrimia ti zois mou / In the wreck of my life
ta komatia tis psychis mou / the scraps of my soul
peftun kato ena-ena / break one after another
ki ola odigoun se sena. / to be all pulled to you.

Last edited by nakahara (May 13, 2014 9:09 pm)

nakahara · May 13, 2014 9:13 pm

More accurate translation:

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/Ola-Odigun-Se-Esena-Ola-Odigun-Se-Esena.html

nakahara · May 13, 2014 9:23 pm

And one more, just for the kick of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q092zwiCdz0

http://lyricstranslate.com/en/Olo-Leipies-you-are-never-here.html

silverblaze · May 13, 2014 9:24 pm

I'm not bored at all. I just learned four new words! And having four words for love instead of one allows us to talk about love in a more layered and nuanced way. Greek for the win.

So no one said sex is exlusive from love, we said Eros is exclusive from Agape. We didn't introduce four new words just to have them mean exactly the same as some English words, defies the purpose a bit don't you think? Nice strawman though.

I'm actually not sure about that one but to be fair I still don't entirely grasp the concept of Agape. Don't many romantic relationship start out in Eros territory and then slowly move to Philia or Agape? Or friendships that become romantic over time?

nakahara · May 13, 2014 9:35 pm

silverblaze wrote:
I'm not bored at all. I just learned four new words! And having four words for love instead of one allows us to talk about love in a more layered and nuanced way. Greek for the win.

So no one said sex is exlusive from love, we said Eros is exclusive from Agape. We didn't introduce four new words just to have them mean exactly the same as some English words, defies the purpose a bit don't you think? Nice strawman though.

I'm actually not sure about that one but to be fair I still don't entirely grasp the concept of Agape. Don't many romantic relationship start out in Eros territory and then slowly move to Philia or Agape? Or friendships that become romantic over time?

You are probably right - no one starts loving other selflessly just from the sudden whim - so Agape probably stems from other three kinds of love.

tonnaree · May 14, 2014 12:21 am

Harriet wrote:
No, Greek is not boring at all

Why? Why do you guys do this to me?
*bites lip*
*hides in corner*

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 1:12 am

silverblaze wrote:
So the Greeks used categories that are very different from our cultures now and you can't entirely superimpose it onto how we think about love now. I mean, the bond between two gay men, we would call 'eros' but they would call it 'philia'.

Just curious, why would you (or anyone) exclusively use the eros word to describe the love between two gay people? Their relationships are as complete as those of heterosexuals, after all, and sex/lust/physicality is just an offshoot of what they feel for each other. Sorry, it disturbs me when people (not you necessarily, people in general) think that the only thing gay folks are in it for is the sex.

Getting back on topic a bit, it's so obvious that, whether or not there's sex going on between S/J off-camera, whether it ever did, it does, or it ever will, there is a complete relationship there between them; both good and bad characteristics (ordinary ups and downs, plus some extraordinary ones) of any true friendship are there for anyone to see.

Anything in quotes here I found on Wiki:

First and foremost, they have philia, which means " loyalty to friends, family, and community, and requires virtue, equality and familiarity". This is the true friendship we see between them.

They also have a big measure of storge between them: "natural affection, like that felt by parents for offspring. It is also known to express mere acceptance or putting up with situations, as in "loving" the tyrant."

Eros is expressed physically, through sexual activity or at least sexual thoughts and desires. "Physical, passionate love, with sensual desire and longing. Romantic, pure emotion without the balance of logic."

Agape is more complicated, and a rare thing to find between humans. "This love is selfless; it gives and expects nothing in return." Most of us know nothing about selflessness, about prefering the other, about suppressing our own wants and needs for the betterment of the other person and/or for the betterment of our relationship with him. Christians believe that only God himself shows real agape, in his love for his creation in general, and for people specifically.

And there are no words for friendship between women, would that be philia or agape then?

All of these Greek words for what we call "love" in English apply to humans, not males nor females exclusively.

If we were to use those terms in our culture, I suspect philia would be better suited. Agape remains a bit of a mystery then; when does a relationship extend beyond eros, philia or storge and enter the realm of agape?

God. And if you don't believe in a Creator God, then there is almost no place to use the agape word, IMO, except perhaps for those who do charitable work-- missionaries, relief workers, those who help and support the poor, the sick, the downtrodden, etc, expecting nothing in return.

I would also suspect that one can feel different kinds of love for the same person at the same time.

Oh, definitely! Simultaneously, consecutively, back and forth, together, whatever. For sure. And these love words do not only apply to lovers, obviously. Just human relationships of all kinds. And the God thing, for those who believe in that.

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 1:20 am

silverblaze wrote:
Anyway, back on topic, I agree. I don't see why they should be shipped, it's beautiful as it is, it doesn't need to be sexualised. Why do people always do that?

Forbidden fruit.
Fun.
Interesting, exploring that aspect of their relationship.
Challenging, to think of how and why they would step over the boundaries society puts on people and find their way into each other's lives in "that way".

And fun. It's fun.

If someone doesn't want them shipped, then they shouldn't ship them. *shrug* Stay away from fan fic, stay away from threads like this one (!!) and go live their lives happily ever after without Johnlock. And we Johnlockers will do the same, except we will be enjoying our forbidden fruit, fun, interest and challenges. And *our* Sherlock and John will be happy-happy together-- we shall all see to it! heh

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 1:21 am

besleybean wrote:
Over sexualisation of society, reflected in every single TV show and film and also: human animal instincts...

Watch yer mouth there, young'un. We are not animals, and neither are our Sherlock and John. Please don't go there. Thank you.

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 1:25 am

SusiGo wrote:
Love and sex to not have to exclude each other. But I am getting tired of repeating this.

And I'm getting very tired of coming to Johnlock threads and having to repeatedly justify the existence of Johnlock. Sigh. Why are people who don't see, and/or don't like, and/or don't approve of Johnlock even here? Just wondering. I know it's a free forum, and we can go and read and comment where we like, which is fine. But why are we Johnlock folks always asked to explain ourselves? Makes me want to run for the hills. And don't tell me I'm bowing to my "animal instincts" and making Sherlock and John do the same. Ye gods!! *eyes hills and thinks about running for them*

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 1:27 am

tonnaree wrote:
Harriet wrote:
No, Greek is not boring at all
Why? Why do you guys do this to me?
*bites lip*
*hides in corner*

Yeah, it's like the penetrating and probing words we were using in a discussion we had the other day. lolololol

LoveIsAViciousMotivator · May 14, 2014 1:35 am

Well, this is a debate thread. I think you would expect people who don't ship them or see anything romantic about Sherlock and John discuss their views of the relationships here. I mean there is a Johnlock thread for just Johnlockers, so you have that if you want to go there.

Johnlock seems to majority view around the Sherlock fandom. I think it is good to have a thread like this so people could put up the reasons why Johnlock isn't their cup of tea. Outside of this website, people who don't ship this pairing are either called blind or homophobic. There are even some incidences where some Johnlockers actually seem passive-aggressive towards other pairings, which is so uncool.

It doesn't happen here, and that is cool. This is actually the only place where I can post my opinion without being called names.

Last edited by LoveIsAViciousMotivator (May 14, 2014 1:39 am)

SusiGo · May 14, 2014 7:18 am

Mod's note:
This is how I see it - this thread is a debate where Johnlockers and non-Johnlockers can discuss their respective views. And if you read the first post, you will see that also Canon and every single SH adaptation may be discussed in here.

The comprehensive Johnlock guide on the other hand is aimed at people who ship Johnlock, wish to collect evidence and have fun without having to defend their opinions.

If we all respect this distinction there should be no problems whatsoever.

Last edited by SusiGo (May 14, 2014 7:18 am)

nakahara · May 14, 2014 8:23 am

ancientsgate wrote:
SusiGo wrote:
Love and sex to not have to exclude each other. But I am getting tired of repeating this.
And I'm getting very tired of coming to Johnlock threads and having to repeatedly justify the existence of Johnlock. Sigh. Why are people who don't see, and/or don't like, and/or don't approve of Johnlock even here? Just wondering. I know it's a free forum, and we can go and read and comment where we like, which is fine. But why are we Johnlock folks always asked to explain ourselves? Makes me want to run for the hills. And don't tell me I'm bowing to my "animal instincts" and making Sherlock and John do the same. Ye gods!! *eyes hills and thinks about running for them*

Since there always will be conflicting opinions on the matter, I guess it can´t be helped - it is not possible to avoid such debates completely.
But I think that presenting your arguments and the way you see Johnlock to others can be fun instead of an aggressive polemics. If people debate politely and consider the opinions of others with an open mind, I see no harm to that.

The words about sex being something animalistic are the heritage of the past, I´m afraid. Especially in 19-th century, sex was slightly pathologised in the eyes of the "properly raised" people (for example, the women were supposed not to have sexual feelings at all - it conflicted with the image of an angelical, modest female that society promoted at that time). The traces of that world-view remain to this day and they will last for some time, because you can´t eliminate such deeply rooted opinions in a fortnight. But I agree, it´s a faulty argument - our society is probably no more sexualised than it was in the past. We only speak more openly about it, so it just seems that way.

tonnaree · May 14, 2014 11:54 am

I WILL GO DOWN WITH THIS SHIP!

.................but that's just me.

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 11:58 am

SusiGo wrote:
Mod's note:
This is how I see it - this thread is a debate where Johnlockers and non-Johnlockers can discuss their respective views. And if you read the first post, you will see that also Canon and every single SH adaptation may be discussed in here.

The comprehensive Johnlock guide on the other hand is aimed at people who ship Johnlock, wish to collect evidence and have fun without having to defend their opinions.

If we all respect this distinction there should be no problems whatsoever.

Ah. So I need to un-sub from this one and stick to the other one. That's easy enough. Thanks for the clarification. Seems to me, though, that we also get into it over on the Comprehensive thread, lol. It must come with the territory or something.

ancientsgate · May 14, 2014 11:59 am

tonnaree wrote:
I WILL GO DOWN WITH THIS SHIP!

.................but that's just me.

Have fun. I have unsubscribed to this thread. Sigh. Wish I didn't hafta.