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

mrshouse · September 30, 2014 6:42 pm

Of course one does normally dream in bed, but he dreams of his BRO. And as I said, lots of ways to point out missing Sherlock in different ways. And sorry, I'm not sure what you wanted to say in your last sentence.

Harriet · September 30, 2014 6:42 pm

And his subconscious gives John's true desires away while he is lying next to his lovely wife

Last edited by Harriet (September 30, 2014 6:43 pm)

SolarSystem · September 30, 2014 7:07 pm

Thing is, we wouldn't have needed a dream sequence like this one at all to show us that John misses his best friend, as mrshouse already mentioned. Why go for a setting like this one? In a show like "How I met your mother" we see three real bros, but they don't dream of each other while they are in bed with a woman.

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 7:11 pm

Yes. Either you see the subtext or you don't. But Sherlock would not hold the appeal the show has if everything was in plain sight and nothing open to interpreration.

Liberty · September 30, 2014 7:11 pm

I agree with the earlier bit of the article, which says it's alluding to the scene at the beginning of the whole show, when we're introduced to John waking from a dream about Afghanistan. So obviously, he's going to be in bed for that scene. (I do think there's some significance to Mary in the scene - after all, we're about to find out that she's not what she seems - but it might be a little odd if she wasn't in bed with him).    The fact that it takes place in bed doesn't mean it's sexual, any more than that first scene is sexual.

I posted something over in the PTSD thread about this, but I think it's made clear later that that dream wasn't about fear but about a craving. He misses it. Mycroft points out - he's calm in the face of danger.   And then Sherlock replaces that with the same effect - provides the danger and excitement and calms him. I think that's reinforced througout the episodes, but particularly in this scene.   He's craving Sherlock (and not because of what Sherlock doesn't offer him - sex, but because of what Sherlock does offer him. I think he is genuinely happy and at peace when he's with Sherlock).

And of course, this isn't the way all friends dream about each other, because is this is no ordinary friendship. Various people involved with the programme have talked about how important the friendship is, and that it's central to the story - we're being shown something special. But I don't think any of them have said that it's sexual.   The way I see it, they have a need to be together and they "complete" each other in a way that others can't ... but the need they fulfil for each other isn't sexual. They genuinely don't need that, or even feel it.

Last edited by Liberty (September 30, 2014 7:13 pm)

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 7:26 pm

So, let us suppose the friendship is special but non-sexual. Then how do you explain that both Sherlock and John are clearly not happy at the beginning of HLV? That they obviously are not satisfied with what they have? That Mary is clearly annoyed as soon as John mentions Sherlock which leads me to believe that he has been mentioning him far too often during their time apart?

If the friendship is so special - which I think it is although for different reasons - then what would be a solution that could make both of them happy or satisfied? Not John being married and living away from Sherlock for sure.

For me the whole beginning of HLV shows that both of them are missing something. On the surface for John this might be the thrill of danger he is craving and addicted to, but what about Sherlock? He has The Work, he has the thrill of an undercover investigation and yet look at him. He is aggressive, possibly consuming drugs, has put away John's chair which is a symbol of their whole relationship.

My deduction tells me that we see two deeply unhappy men and the main reason for their unhappiness is that they do not have in their lives what they need and that is each other.

Last edited by SusiGo (September 30, 2014 7:27 pm)

SolarSystem · September 30, 2014 7:30 pm

Liberty wrote:
And of course, this isn't the way all friends dream about each other, because is this is no ordinary friendship. Various people involved with the programme have talked about how important the friendship is, and that it's central to the story - we're being shown something special. But I don't think any of them have said that it's sexual. The way I see it, they have a need to be together and they "complete" each other in a way that others can't ... but the need they fulfil for each other isn't sexual. They genuinely don't need that, or even feel it.

Yes, yes, yes, and as soon as it's sexual it's not special anymore. Their friendship can only be special as long as there is no sexuality involved.
Sorry, but I have no idea how often we've already been over this, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion what I would call a 'total package' is possible, even with Sherlock and John. They can have a very special friendship, they can complete each other and yes, at the very same time their friendship can be sexual.

mrshouse · September 30, 2014 7:30 pm

This, Susi

Last edited by mrshouse (September 30, 2014 7:31 pm)

mrshouse · September 30, 2014 7:34 pm

Aaaaand the trouble I have with arguing" Sherlock provides danger, Mary sex and normal life" is the following: We're shown at the end of HLV that Mary is a "good" girl providing both. So where will Sherlocks place be? And that bothers me apart from the sex. And Solar, agree absolutely that sexual relationships should be treated as special as well!

Last edited by mrshouse (September 30, 2014 7:36 pm)

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 7:42 pm

Count me in. I really do not get this idealisation of non-sexual relationships but we have been over this more than once. Is it not a wonderful thing to find a person who can give you everything, who can provide physical and emotional love?

So basically they can stop the show after series 3 because Mary obviously provides everything John craves - danger, heterosexual sex, a child. He could even start blogging about her and call the show "Mary".

mrshouse · September 30, 2014 7:44 pm

Do you want to make me sick

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 7:44 pm

Sorry.

SolarSystem · September 30, 2014 7:47 pm

mrshouse wrote:
Aaaaand the trouble I have with arguing" Sherlock provides danger, Mary sex and normal life" is the following: We're shown at the end of HLV that Mary is a "good" girl providing both. So where will Sherlocks place be?

True. Mary now provides a bit of everything... domestic bliss, sexuality, a child, danger... oh John, what a lucky man you are!

mrshouse · September 30, 2014 7:48 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
mrshouse wrote:
Aaaaand the trouble I have with arguing" Sherlock provides danger, Mary sex and normal life" is the following: We're shown at the end of HLV that Mary is a "good" girl providing both. So where will Sherlocks place be?
True. Mary now provides a bit of everything... domestic bliss, sexuality, a child, danger... oh John, what a lucky man you are!

You nailed it. The end.

Liberty · September 30, 2014 7:56 pm

@ Susi Of course they're missing each other! They aren't together at the beginning of HLV, so obviously they can't get what they need from each other. That's why I don't understand the article (or the quote I posted).   Or are you and the writer saying that they're avoiding each other because it's sexual? I can't quite get the meaning.

I agree that we're shown more clearly what John needs from Sherlock than what Sherlock needs from John, but I think we are shown Sherlock's need - it's just more difficult to articulate!   There's clearly something missing for him around the time John comes into his life.   He's looking for something. Part of it is somebody to show off to, but I think it's a lot more than that - he needs the "two of us against the world" feeling too, with his brave and devoted companion. They have a special bond, which they're not going to get with other people.

I don't think they'd have managed to stay apart long whatever happened ... John jumps at the chance to get involved with Sherlock again, and Sherlock says just the right things to recruit him .   We know they love each other, and that they're always going to be a "couple" - I think both of those things are quite clear. It's just the pesky sexual attraction bit .... .

Last edited by Liberty (September 30, 2014 7:57 pm)

SolarSystem · September 30, 2014 8:01 pm

"pesky sexual attraction bit" - wonderfully put.
And let's not forget the pesky it's just a special friendship bit.

Last edited by SolarSystem (September 30, 2014 8:02 pm)

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 8:02 pm

Liberty: So if I would say they love each other and should live as a couple in all other regards but sex you would agree with me?

Last edited by SusiGo (September 30, 2014 8:02 pm)

Liberty · September 30, 2014 8:05 pm

SusiGo wrote:
Count me in. I really do not get this idealisation of non-sexual relationships but we have been over this more than once. Is it not a wonderful thing to find a person who can give you everything, who can provide physical and emotional love?

So basically they can stop the show after series 3 because Mary obviously provides everything John craves - danger, heterosexual sex, a child. He could even start blogging about her and call the show "Mary".

I've got to ask - if you didn't see John's love for Sherlock as sexual - would you see Mary as being the right person for him? Would you see them happy together? Because I can't (not judging by what we've seen so far).

Just a little point about the danger - that's John's connection to Sherlock, not Mary, isn't it? I know Sherlock makes that speech about John being drawn to dangerous people, but remember that he includes Mrs Hudson . John has not had any satisfaction from the "danger" aspect of Mary at all, and it wasn't what he was looking for in her (while he openly seeks it with Sherlock). (And it's not all he sees in Sherlock obviously. There are lots of things that draw John to Sherlock, but the danger thing is a repeated theme.)

SolarSystem wrote:
Liberty wrote:
And of course, this isn't the way all friends dream about each other, because is this is no ordinary friendship. Various people involved with the programme have talked about how important the friendship is, and that it's central to the story - we're being shown something special. But I don't think any of them have said that it's sexual. The way I see it, they have a need to be together and they "complete" each other in a way that others can't ... but the need they fulfil for each other isn't sexual. They genuinely don't need that, or even feel it.
Yes, yes, yes, and as soon as it's sexual it's not special anymore. Their friendship can only be special as long as there is no sexuality involved.
Sorry, but I have no idea how often we've already been over this, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. In my opinion what I would call a 'total package' is possible, even with Sherlock and John. They can have a very special friendship, they can complete each other and yes, at the very same time their friendship can be sexual.

Of course a friendship can become sexual, and it could still be special, of course, but the nature of the relationship would change if there was a load of sexual tension, and unfulfilled lust and longing. I suppose that's one of the differences - I think there are points when they are fulfilled when they're together. I don't think there's something missing (at the moment, anyway). But all I'm really saying is that I don't see the sex on the show - I see it alluded to, of course, but I don't see us being shown sexual attraction.

Last edited by Liberty (September 30, 2014 8:08 pm)

SusiGo · September 30, 2014 8:11 pm

No, I would not see her as the right person because John is moral and upright with strong principles. Mary is not.

I wanted to say that after the revelation she could provide him with danger, not before. Because I think Sherlock is acting in that scene and that John truly wanted Mary to be different. He did not look for a woman who was similar to Sherlock. I really do not believe this.

This is quite a negative view of a sexual relationship. Why would it have to be unfulfilled?

Liberty · September 30, 2014 8:34 pm

I'd see it as unfulfilled because there is so little sexual contact between them - well, none. Some people might feel fulfilled at that level, particularly if they maybe had an agreement (for religious reasons, or whatever), but it's unusual ... I think that for most people there would be an element of unfulfillment (and frustration) if they were mutually sexually attracted to somebody they loved for such a long time, without so much as a kiss. There would be something missing. (In my mind, it would be even more than that - it would build up to the point of being almost unbearable at times). And yet, in the dream scene, for instance, there is no sense of that.

SusiGo wrote:
Liberty: So if I would say they love each other and should live as a couple in all other regards but sex you would agree with me?

Yes, I agree with most things you say! I could see them living together as a non-sexual couple into old age, even. I think that they get something from the relationship that they don't get from sexual partners.

I'm not saying that they couldn't ever fall for each other sexually, but that would add something different to the relationship, something I don't see there just now. It would be different if there was a lot of unresolved sexual tension, and then different again if they resolved it .