BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Violence at the reunion

nakahara · September 3, 2014 8:56 am

Zatoichi wrote:
Liberty wrote:
And I accept that the show does do awful things to Sherlock and makes it attractive - humiliation comes up a lot in the show and they show him dirty and drugged, or in pain and near collapsing, and still make him beautiful. This is definitely a thing, and I suppose John's violence is actually a mild example of how far they will go to bring Sherlock down for our viewing pleasure.
I´m still struggling with accepting this.. It´s just a personal thing, because I find very little pleasure in watching him shattered, humiliated and devastated. Struggling and shaken by his emotions like in S2 was just the right amount of drama for me, S3 left me feeling confused and emotionally drained (and as a result a little angry and less emotionally invested in the show).

Althrough I love S3, I also found this way in which Sherlock´s acquaintances uniformly decided to put him down and humilitate him loathsome. It bordered on "Tall poppy syndrome":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TallPoppySyndrome

The idea that someone whose capabilities exceed those of his peers must be put down seems harmless at the first sight (as if you are saving those overachievers from their own ego), but in reality it is quite dangerous way of thinking. Because with such a mindset, the people are led to belive that an overachiever is their "enemy". Genius is then forced to bow to mediocrity. Good, ingenious ideas of how to make things better get dismissed only because the unpopular person made them, while the people maintain tired status-quo perpetuated by "the nice people". People are taught to extreme conformity and are bullied if they "stick out" from among their peers. "Socrateses" of the world are forced to poison themselves so as not to disturb the cowardly souls of their less enlightened political enemies. If such a "tall poppy syndrome" continues unhindered for some time, society as a whole becomes stagnant and repugnantly totalitarian.

It therefore disturbs me that Sherlock S3 seems to propagate an idea that a man with an exceptional abilities whose way of doing things is eccetric but otherwise beneficial has to be physically punished, humiliated and broken for his difference. That´s just wrong, wrong, wrong!

The pleasure of watching Sherlock comes from the fact that the main protagonist of the story is unique in every way, clever, rebelious, unconventional. It is amusing to watch him juxtapositioned against the "normal" protagonists of the story, for example John, Lestrade or Molly. But all that viewing pleasure will disappear completely if Sherlock will be forced to conform and to be lowered to the levels of others, to become a polite, docile sheep. I hope the authors won´t steer the story into that direction - that would be a "shark-jumping" of an epic proportions!

SusiGo · September 3, 2014 9:01 am

I do not think that they will go in this direction because it would be a complete deviation from Canon. There he remains an eccentric and and extraordinary character until the end. I think this is more about what Steven and Mark have said more than once - starting with a very young Sherlock who has to learn some lessons and maturing into the man we see later on.

And by killing Magnussen he also kills someone who goes against people who are different, a group in which he probably includes himself. So, no, I do not see him becoming tamed in such a way.

Last edited by SusiGo (September 3, 2014 9:02 am)

Liberty · September 3, 2014 6:07 pm

Zatoichi wrote:
Liberty wrote:
And I accept that the show does do awful things to Sherlock and makes it attractive - humiliation comes up a lot in the show and they show him dirty and drugged, or in pain and near collapsing, and still make him beautiful. This is definitely a thing, and I suppose John's violence is actually a mild example of how far they will go to bring Sherlock down for our viewing pleasure.
I´m still struggling with accepting this.. It´s just a personal thing, because I find very little pleasure in watching him shattered, humiliated and devastated. Struggling and shaken by his emotions like in S2 was just the right amount of drama for me, S3 left me feeling confused and emotionally drained (and as a result a little angry and less emotionally invested in the show). But I seem to be in the minority, many people got really hooked after S3 so it seems to be the right thing to do to make the show successful .

I'm still coming to terms with S3, so I'm not sure exactly where I stand on it. I think I'm fine with the awful things that happen to him, but I'm really bothered by what seems to be lost - I loved him being supremely clever, and rejoicing in that and sometimes showing off about it. That was part of the character, for me. In TEH, he's physically abused, in TSOT he's mentally demeaned (or seems to be). By HLV, he seems to be mentally and physically dragging himself through the episode.

I suppose we're told right at the beginning of S3, seeing him running away and being captured, tortured, that he's going to have a hard time. Maybe there's a lovely irony in him faking his own death and sacrificing himself, only to have to go through a real death and yet another sacrifice at the end of S3.

There are some things I love about S3 (the scenes with Mycroft, for instance, and the confirmation that Sherlock is morally good, selfless, heroic, etc.). I think I just want to see the cleverness back more than anything. Which is maybe why I keep suspecting that it's there all along, under the surface (he must have known about Mary, etc. I'm still really struggling with TSOT). I'd like to see him come out victorious.

mrshouse · September 3, 2014 6:12 pm

Yes. This!

SusiGo · September 3, 2014 6:16 pm

Well, I think this is a phase. Because I am sure we will not get back the Sherlock from series 1 and also series 2. He was supremely clever but emotionally completely suppressed. In series 3 his brilliance is clouded by emotion, he cannot process all the things that happened in those two years and keep happening after his return. He struggles to keep to his old self but it does not work anymore. As I said before, for me this is part of the storytelling arc. I am sure his brilliant mind will return, but complemented by a milder and softer manner towards other people. But he has to learn it the hard way and the process may not be over yet.

Liberty · September 3, 2014 6:59 pm

I suppose I can see that's what we're being shown, but I think his cleverness is his defining feature - it's what's really special and different about Sherlock Holmes. I don't think you can take that away and it still be him. (And that's why I prefer to see it as being there, under the surface, throughout S3). I actually thought he was quite emotional in S2. S1 is more ambiguous but in S2 there was no doubt that he was repressing emotion rather than not feeling it. He's practically brimming over with emotion at some points, and at other points so steadfastedly in control that you feel he has to have something to need so much control over .

As for learning the hard way, why? I mean, why do the writers think he needs that? What is this lesson that he has to go through unthinkable hardships to learn?

SusiGo · September 3, 2014 7:29 pm

I have not said that they took him cleverness away. It is still there. He solves the Moran case, he is solving a murder case while making a best man speech which is quite an achievement. I just said it is clouded, especially regarding Mary and Magnussen. And I think the reason for his getting Mary to wrong is that he is emotionally compromised. He wants to make up to John, give him a perfect wedding and a happy married life and does not see what is in front of his eyes. Or chooses not to see that.

I do not say that he has to learn it the hard way but that this is what the writers chose to show us. And I find it fascinating. They said that they wanted to show his development as a character, how he changes as a man while in Canon IMO he is far more static. If he has to suffer these hardships to tell a good story, I am fine with it.
Btw, I do no think that he deserves to be punished. His physical and emotional suffering it is the outcome of a story that began long ago with Moriarty choosing him as an antagonist. Everything we see in series 3 is a consequence of Moriarty's involvement. And for me this is good storytelling.

Zatoichi · September 3, 2014 8:53 pm

Liberty wrote:
I actually thought he was quite emotional in S2. S1 is more ambiguous but in S2 there was no doubt that he was repressing emotion rather than not feeling it. He's practically brimming over with emotion at some points, and at other points so steadfastedly in control that you feel he has to have something to need so much control over .

Yeah, right? Together with Mycroft´s "He has the mind of a scientist and a philosopher, yet he chooses to be a detective.. initially he wanted to become a pirate" and the little glimpses into his caring side we get it was crystal clear to me that beyond the surface there were a lot of very strong emotions. And that he is so concerned with righting the wrong it borders on romantic (sorry Sherlock, I know you´d hate to hear this). And that in order to be functioning as an effective deduction-"machine" he just has to keep himself distant from all those strong emotions that´d cloud his judgement.. as it happened in S3 when he was so weakened he couldn´t really do it anymore. Aand last but not least that his disregard for social niceties and people´s feelings doesn´t come from general indifference towards human beings but from seeing the big picture and by doing so loosing the sense of importance for tiny details like not putting additional stress on already distressed people or breaking bad news gently.

To see this man kind of gleefully put down and humiliated in S3 just because he had hurt people´s feelings while saving their as*** under great personal sacrifices, to see how nobody seemed to care for his side of the story felt horribly unfair..

As nakahara put it so eloquently:

nakahara wrote:
It therefore disturbs me that Sherlock S3 seems to propagate an idea that a man with an exceptional abilities whose way of doing things is eccetric but otherwise beneficial has to be physically punished, humiliated and broken for his difference. That´s just wrong, wrong, wrong!

I really hope it´s just a chapter in a bigger story arc, and that there´ll be some comfort in S4 to counterbalance all the hurt.. but it doesn´t sound like the latter will happen in the "darker than ever" next series, does it?

besleybean · September 3, 2014 8:56 pm

Though we do have the stand alone episode as well.

SusiGo · September 3, 2014 9:10 pm

I like to remember Lestrade's words from ASiP:

"Because Sherlock Holmes is a great man, and I think one day—if we're very very lucky—he might even be a good one."

IMO this is Sherlock's story arc. He has been cruel at times, especially to the very people who love him - just think of Molly at Christmas, of drugging John and locking him up in the lab. So there is room for becoming a better person.

RavenMorganLeigh · September 3, 2014 9:37 pm

nakahara wrote:
Zatoichi wrote:
Liberty wrote:
And I accept that the show does do awful things to Sherlock and makes it attractive - humiliation comes up a lot in the show and they show him dirty and drugged, or in pain and near collapsing, and still make him beautiful. This is definitely a thing, and I suppose John's violence is actually a mild example of how far they will go to bring Sherlock down for our viewing pleasure.
I´m still struggling with accepting this.. It´s just a personal thing, because I find very little pleasure in watching him shattered, humiliated and devastated. Struggling and shaken by his emotions like in S2 was just the right amount of drama for me, S3 left me feeling confused and emotionally drained (and as a result a little angry and less emotionally invested in the show).
Althrough I love S3, I also found this way in which Sherlock´s acquaintances uniformly decided to put him down and humilitate him loathsome. It bordered on "Tall poppy syndrome":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TallPoppySyndrome

The idea that someone whose capabilities exceed those of his peers must be put down seems harmless at the first sight (as if you are saving those overachievers from their own ego), but in reality it is quite dangerous way of thinking. Because with such a mindset, the people are led to belive that an overachiever is their "enemy". Genius is then forced to bow to mediocrity. Good, ingenious ideas of how to make things better get dismissed only because the unpopular person made them, while the people maintain tired status-quo perpetuated by "the nice people". People are taught to extreme conformity and are bullied if they "stick out" from among their peers. "Socrateses" of the world are forced to poison themselves so as not to disturb the cowardly souls of their less enlightened political enemies. If such a "tall poppy syndrome" continues unhindered for some time, society as a whole becomes stagnant and repugnantly totalitarian.

It therefore disturbs me that Sherlock S3 seems to propagate an idea that a man with an exceptional abilities whose way of doing things is eccetric but otherwise beneficial has to be physically punished, humiliated and broken for his difference. That´s just wrong, wrong, wrong!

The pleasure of watching Sherlock comes from the fact that the main protagonist of the story is unique in every way, clever, rebelious, unconventional. It is amusing to watch him juxtapositioned against the "normal" protagonists of the story, for example John, Lestrade or Molly. But all that viewing pleasure will disappear completely if Sherlock will be forced to conform and to be lowered to the levels of others, to become a polite, docile sheep. I hope the authors won´t steer the story into that direction - that would be a "shark-jumping" of an epic proportions!

THANK YOU!!!!!!!

Yes.

Liberty · September 3, 2014 9:58 pm

I think he's already a good man at the beginning of S3. He doesn't need any progression to get there.

I think the Molly at Christmas scene is interesting: he looks really upset when he realises he's misjudged it, and apologises very genuinely. (I think he learns during that scene, and it's also something that helps him "win" with Irene). He's rude, but I don't think he meant to be cruel and hurtful. There are times when he is vindictive but I don't think this is one of them. I think he intended to be clever and funny (and maybe if she did have a special date, she'd have laughed and responded in kind).

But I do think that any moments of rudeness or lack of caring are eclipsed when he gives up two years of his life for others after TRF. How much of a better person does he really need to be?

Maybe you're right, Susigo, that he's choosing not to see things in TSOT. He's filing them away for later use. And I agree that he still functions, and can solve crimes, but there is so much odd behaviour and out of character, well, almost stupidity, that doesn't fit just with him wanting to make things up to John.

Zatoichi, it bothers me too that nobody cares for his side of the story. The questions are about how he faked his suicide, or why he didn't tell John, but nobody seems to bother about how it felt for him, what the two years in exile were like, etc. That would be too touchy-feely of course, but it means he's left bearing that burden, with no recognition or understanding (beyond Mycroft).

besleybean · September 4, 2014 5:41 am

Well I don't know who these people are you speak of, because they are certainly not me.
I have always been totally on board wirh Sherlock, henece my annoyance with John at the Reunion.
I had been totally in sympathy with John at The Fally(while understanding Sherlock's motives0, but it didn't last into series 3.
But I do hope Sherlock eventually told him all.

mrshouse · September 4, 2014 6:21 am

I think Liberty rather meant the charcters on the show.

besleybean · September 4, 2014 6:26 am

Ah, the mist clears...

SusiGo · September 4, 2014 6:53 am

Well, before the fall Sherlock has usually given the impression of a man who does not talk about his personal life or feelings, going so far as pretending he has none (which of course it not true). Think of him saying in ASiB "John Watson thinks love is a mystery to me". He has built up this image. "Alone is what I have. Alone protects me." Molly at least gets a glimpse when talking about him looking sad when John cannot see him but as for the others - they do not know about his inner life or accept his absolute reluctance to show anything other than his intellectual side.

When he returns in series 3 he gives no sign that he wishes to talk about these two years. And John expressly asks him why he faked his death and does not get the correct answer. Believe me, I wish Sherlock would have said "I did it for you, and Mrs Hudson, and Lestrade" but he chooses not to. And at the end of TEH John asks how he did it and again does not get a truthful answer.

Therefore I cannot blame the other characters for not asking. He clearly does not want to talk about it, not even with John. He chooses Anderson of all people to reveal his - true or false - story of how he did it.
They could have gone for all sorts of things - Molly/John/Mrs Hudson/Lestrade asking him about those two years, someone seeing the wounds on his back, whatever. They did not. So this is a deliberate choice on the writers' side. It is "Alone is what I have" all over again. Sherlock may have friends now, even a best friend, and yet he cannot/does not want to reveal his feelings.

Think of HLV - we, the viewers, see what happens in his mind when he is dying. John does not. He never realises Sherlock came back for him. Which is quite tragic in a way. But it is at the core of Sherlock's character and the fault of the other characters.

Liberty · September 4, 2014 7:19 am

Yes, I don't think Sherlock is ever going to be a talk-about-his-feelings sort of guy. But it's so frustrating that we're shown that the two years were hell on earth, but nobody else knows (apart from Mycroft), or asks. John is building his judgment of Sherlock on very little information again, and wondering about whether to forgive when he should be thanking. John not asking is typical of John (and of their relationship), but difficult for me . According to his blog, John does eventually know that Sherlock did it for him (but he still struggles to forgive). But I agree that it seems to be a choice that Sherlock keeps some things secret, as he has done in the past.

I like the parallel you draw with the mind palace. It's interesting that Sherlock's mind palace is now populated with people and relationships, but ultimately he's alone in what happens there. And it's in character, again, for him not to share that. Although I do think John must have wondered why Sherlock risked his life (again) to sort out the Mary situation.

(And yes, I mean the characters in the show, not us! We care!).

Last edited by Liberty (September 4, 2014 7:22 am)

mrshouse · September 4, 2014 7:42 am

As much as I would love to see a proper talk between the boys about what Sherlock has done for the sake of John and his well-being, I'm not quite sure if it would not be too cheesy. As someone said, a scenario of sit-on-the-floor-with-c-cuppa-and-talk (or as a friend of mine called it-for the german fans- "die Problemkerze anmachen") is not excactly in character with the show.

SusiGo · September 4, 2014 7:52 am

Yes, that was me, mrshouse. It would be nice to see the boys like that (love the "Problemkerze") but also very much out of character. They must prove their feelings more via their actions than their words. And if there will be words - and I really hope it - they will be not cheesy. We know that the writers can do feelings in words and I am sure they will find the right way for this.

mrshouse · September 4, 2014 7:54 am

You're probably right. Now that I come to think of it they wrote: " I was so alone and I owe you so much... One more miracle, Sherlock...for me, don't ...be...dead"
Yes, they could do it!
*gross sobbing*