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

Kenogami · July 31, 2014 6:56 pm

Hi, I'm new here

I've been reading this "debate" for a while, and I finally wanted to join it. (and english is not my first language, sorry in advance...)

I am a fan of Sherlock since it first aired in my country. But its probably because it is translated that I don't really see all the Johnlock thing, in the series.

I can say that I am a part time shipper, because I can ship them in fanfiction, but not in the series... Every Johnlocker say that there is so much evidence in the series, and I have read metas, but I am always "yeaaahh, but no...I could come with a totally other interpretation/explanation of that exact scene"

And I always have this question to the Johnlockers (I don't consider myself a Johnlocker) : are you really waiting for it to happen? Because, everyone say that Moftiss are lying, that we don't know what to expect in the series, and for me all the evidences of johnlock seems too obvious to be a real thing.

I am not against John and Sherlock being a couple. But I don't think it will happen in the series.

besleybean · July 31, 2014 7:00 pm

I entirley agree with you and your English is excellent.

SolarSystem · July 31, 2014 8:50 pm

Kenogami wrote:
And I always have this question to the Johnlockers (I don't consider myself a Johnlocker) : are you really waiting for it to happen?

Of course.

SusiGo · July 31, 2014 8:50 pm

Me, too.

Schmiezi · July 31, 2014 9:05 pm

Same here. But only after watching S3. Before, I only shipped them in fanfics.

Pav · July 31, 2014 9:42 pm

Maybe I didn't want it to happen when I started to be a Johnlocker but now I definitely want to see it and I believe we will. When I was watching some S3 scenes for the first time I remember thinking "how can anyone doubt that Johnlock exists after watching this?".

Last edited by Pav (July 31, 2014 9:43 pm)

besleybean · July 31, 2014 9:47 pm

Some may find the marriage a distraction, or the fact that Sherlock doesn't seem interested in relationships or just knowing what the team have said.

Last edited by besleybean (August 1, 2014 7:22 am)

tonnaree · July 31, 2014 10:05 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
Kenogami wrote:
And I always have this question to the Johnlockers (I don't consider myself a Johnlocker) : are you really waiting for it to happen?
Of course.

With all my heart and soul.

Kenogami · July 31, 2014 11:41 pm

Pav wrote:
Maybe I didn't want it to happen when I started to be a Johnlocker but now I definitely want to see it and I believe we will. When I was watching some S3 scenes for the first time I remember thinking "how can anyone doubt that Johnlock exists after watching this?".

Can you give me some examples of thoses scenes, because I'm not following you ?

I have a friend who really loves this series but is not in the "fandom" (or in any kind of fandom...). When I talked to her about Johnlock, she started laughing because she couldn't believe that some people could put them together, as a couple. She is more in the complete opposite :" how can anyone think that Johnlock exist?" She was clearly not seeing what Johnlockers see, even after S3. So it's not that obvious...

Maybe there is a cultural part to that, and the translation surely doesn't help. But even after watching the series in english I still don't see it. Because, to me, John is not gay, nor bisexual, he is straight. (I could be wrong, and if they finish together in like 100 years at the series rhythm, it wouln't bother me, I wouldn't be happier or angrier) Sherlock, I don't know.
Because of that, I don't think they could end up together... Technically, your sexuality dosen't make a 180 degree turn even if you really love someone of the same sex. It dosen't depend on how much you love someone. You still can share everything with the other person, except sex...

To me John is straight because :
- his own sister is lesbian and he seems totally fine with it. (so he seems fine with homosexuality in general) Why wouldn't he be comfortable with his own sexuality, if he was gay?
- he is denying being gay, so why would he deny it so vehementhly if he was bisexual?
- he seems to genuinely love Mary Morstan (before the shooting), and that's why he is marrying her in the first place, and I think it is why (or a part of) he forgives her

Last edited by Kenogami (July 31, 2014 11:42 pm)

tykobrian · August 1, 2014 5:56 am

Well, personally after watching A Study in PInk, the Pilot I was convinced that the showrunners are planning to put the leads together. The narrative is so masterfully designed, there is an underlying struggle going on in our leads' minds and it's very cleverly masked.

Anyways, the gist is that from the very beginning John and Sherlock were both attracted to each other. John even propositioned Sherlock in the Pilot (Angelo's cafe) but it appeared that Sherlock declined. And then everybody and their grandmother including Sherlock incdicated to John that SH is a high functioning sociopath with zero empathy. This misconception of John is stopping him from making any move on Sherlock. But still he has deep feelings for SH. He tired to keep him out of his mind by serial dating in S1 and then marrying Mary. But SH still pretty much occupies his heart.

Then there's Sherlock. Well, at first SH has very low opinion of love and romance. He thinks it's "a chemical defect found on the losing side". He's seen in his line of work that people do horrible things in the name of love. Also he thinks nobody would be into him and his lifestyle. That's why he turns down John in the pilot. And besides the nasty things John was writing in his blog about Sherlock kinda convinced him that his flatmate doesn't even like him. I mean look how dumbfounded he looked when John said SH is his best friend.

So that's the absolute summary for you to skim. But there are tons and tons of hints and indication of the things happening beneath the surface. To tell the truth I've never seen any show keeping their main story arc beneath the surface like this. Anyways, If you wan't to know more I suggest you to take a look at these links (1, 2) to a blog dedicated to analyze the show. Also if you wanna know anything specific you can mention here.

EDIT: Also looks like for some reason the showrunners decided to Structure Sherlock similar to The Princess Bride, a romance story.

Last edited by tykobrian (August 1, 2014 7:16 am)

SusiGo · August 1, 2014 6:55 am

Kenogami - you said have read this discussion. We have filled more than 100 pages with it and have enumerated all the pros and cons. I really to not understand what else we could say. There are pictures, interpretations of music, lighting, photography, cultural allusions, quotes by the creators and actors ...
There are people who do not see evidence for Johnlock/do not wish to see it in show but this does not mean that lots of others think differently. And I do no understand how anyone after S3 can truly say that Sherlock does not love John (in whatever way).

besleybean · August 1, 2014 7:27 am

Just one point, Susi.
Where have the actors/creators said they play/wrote the show as Johnlock?

SusiGo · August 1, 2014 7:35 am

Oh, I was talking about this discussion in general. My enumeration of course includes evidence pro and contra Johnlock.

besleybean · August 1, 2014 7:41 am

Thank you for clarifying.

Mattlocked · August 1, 2014 8:31 am

Kenogami wrote:
And I always have this question to the Johnlockers (I don't consider myself a Johnlocker) : are you really waiting for it to happen?

Yes and no.
All I am waiting for is another excellent series (which we will undoubtly get) and I can imagine it would be great if they'd let Johnlock "happen", but I would also be fine if they'd let it stay "under the surface" because looking for and analyzing all those big and little hints is so much fun.

Kenogami wrote:
Because, everyone say that Moftiss are lying, that we don't know what to expect in the series, and for me all the evidences of johnlock seems too obvious to be a real thing.

This you have to explain. You don't see it, but all the evidences seem too obvious?
You mean, that's why it can't be true and is nothing more than a running gag?
I don't understand.

Kenogami wrote:
I am not against John and Sherlock being a couple. But I don't think it will happen in the series.

We all don't know if it "will" happen, but I think it "could". Then again... somehow it already does.

SolarSystem · August 1, 2014 8:42 am

Mattlocked wrote:
Kenogami wrote:
Because, everyone say that Moftiss are lying, that we don't know what to expect in the series, and for me all the evidences of johnlock seems too obvious to be a real thing.
This you have to explain. You don't see it, but all the evidences seem too obvious?
You mean, that's why it can't be true and is nothing more than a running gag?
I don't understand.

Good point.
So, Kenogami, what you're saying is that you see the evidence for Johnlock, even pretty obvious evidence, and because it is so obvious it won't happen. I don't get the logic behind that, either.
Furthermore, I don't get why you're asking for example Pav to give examples when you see it yourself. Like Susi already said, there are countless examples in this thread (as well as in other threads). Why do Johnlockers always have to explain themselves over and over again?

besleybean · August 1, 2014 9:03 am

(I only say this to be helpful, if it isn't, then fine)
Well not so much 'explain yourself', but consider this:
Because in debate, that's how it works.
You have to prove a positive claim, you don't have to prove a negative.
Example: I am atheist.
I am not claiming there is a god.
It's up to the theists to prove there is one.

Likewise: I'm not claiming there is Johnlock.
I have nothing to prove.

Having siad all of that, I keep stressing.
For me on a discussion forum:
You say what you want.
Others say what they want.
What's the problem?
As long as nobody is abusive, launches a personal attack or incites hatred.

Last edited by besleybean (August 1, 2014 9:04 am)

Mattlocked · August 1, 2014 9:07 am

besleybean wrote:
You have to prove a positive claim, you don't have to prove a negative.
Example: I am atheist.
I am not claiming there is a god.
It's up to the theists to prove there is one.

...

I see what you mean.
But you could also say "I don't believe there is a god because...."
Instead of: "There is no god. There is no god. There is no god."
The first one sounds much better to me.

SusiGo · August 1, 2014 9:07 am

I am just getting tired of having to repeat myself again and again. This makes the debate a little bit unequal.

Mattlocked · August 1, 2014 9:13 am

The thing is, Susi, that everyone in here repeats oneself. Just some with several different points and others only with one or two.

Mattlocked wrote:
besleybean wrote:
You have to prove a positive claim, you don't have to prove a negative.
Example: I am atheist.
I am not claiming there is a god.
It's up to the theists to prove there is one.

...
I see what you mean.
But you could also say "I don't believe there is a god because...."
Instead of: "There is no god. There is no god. There is no god."
The first one sounds much better to me.