BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » I can’t believe what Moffat says anymore

SusiGo · January 4, 2015 10:19 pm

Thanks for the interesting link, nakahara.

tonnaree · January 4, 2015 10:33 pm

I'm just going to keep sitting here eating biscuits and enjoying the show.

SolarSystem · January 4, 2015 10:36 pm

And I hope you'll interpret the show in the only correct and valid way.

silverblaze · January 4, 2015 10:39 pm

nakahara wrote:
silverblaze wrote:
If the writer claims that it's about feminism, I would probably see it as a failed attempt at feminism. If the writer claims it as a joke, I might see it as a good or a bad joke. If the writer claims it's about anarchy, I'll look whether I can discover any anarchy. I would also say that it's a rubbish Joan of Arc, cigarettes didn't even exist in her time. What I won't do is, when the author says it's about feminism, I won't say, 'no, actually it's about pandas on sticks'.
And that´s what I was trying to point out. Thank you.

Also, if you thought that the movie was about pointlessness of life, you probably wouldn´t "correct" your reading of the movie so that it matches my claim that the movie was about feminism? Or would you?

If the author then says it's about feminism and I thought it was about pointlessness of life, I'd change my opinion and consider it a failed attempt at feminism rather than a film about pointlessness of life. It would probably affect my appreciation of the piece and its author as well.

Same for the A and B thing. If I try to write an A and my handwriting is so terrible that it looks more like a B, then if you want to make sense of my message, it'd probably be wiser for you to see it as an A, especially if I tell you that it was supposed to be an A. If you keep insisting that it's a B, then you'd never be able to read what I wrote.

Edit: I'm not being snarky. I genuely don't understand this philosophy.

Last edited by silverblaze (January 4, 2015 10:41 pm)

nakahara · January 4, 2015 10:47 pm

I´ll rather go and cook me some curry. (sigh)

Of course, it wouldn´t be "one true curry", but it would be edible for me, nonetheless.

tonnaree · January 4, 2015 10:48 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
And I hope you'll interpret the show in the only correct and valid way.

I was actually refering to the show here in this thread. *giggle*

silverblaze · January 4, 2015 10:57 pm

Surely there must be a 'one true curry' out there somewhere.

But then Plato's archetypes really are annoying.

besleybean · January 4, 2015 10:58 pm

Me too dear, trouble is I'm just getting fatter!

Schmiezi · January 5, 2015 6:48 am

nakahara wrote:
I´ll rather go and cook me some curry. (sigh)

Of course, it wouldn´t be "one true curry", but it would be edible for me, nonetheless.

I think I made the one true breakfast this morning, but Hubby disagrees. But the cook is always right. Right?

Geez, natural sciences do hold some kind of apeal some times.

Harriet · January 5, 2015 9:27 am

Schmiezi wrote:
Geez, natural sciences do hold some kind of apeal some times.

Aka Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

Schmiezi · January 5, 2015 9:34 am

Harriet wrote:
Schmiezi wrote:
Geez, natural sciences do hold some kind of apeal some times.
Aka Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

No one would go "We know the position of the particle. And my idea of its momentum is right, too." "No, it isn't. You only say that because you hate that kind of particle."

Harriet · January 5, 2015 9:38 am

No one, are you sure?

Last edited by Harriet (January 5, 2015 9:38 am)

SolarSystem · January 5, 2015 9:48 am

tonnaree wrote:
SolarSystem wrote:
And I hope you'll interpret the show in the only correct and valid way.
I was actually refering to the show here in this thread. *giggle*

Me, too. There's also a lot of room for interpretation, if you ask me...

SolarSystem · January 5, 2015 9:50 am

Schmiezi wrote:
Harriet wrote:
Schmiezi wrote:
Geez, natural sciences do hold some kind of apeal some times.
Aka Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

No one would go "We know the position of the particle. And my idea of its momentum is right, too." "No, it isn't. You only say that because you hate that kind of particle."

What about Schrödinger's cat..?

Schmiezi · January 5, 2015 9:50 am

So much hate for down quarks.

besleybean · January 5, 2015 10:24 am

My husband loves Quark.

Schmiezi · January 5, 2015 10:31 am

I understand why. His bar was cool, and his brother is the Grand Nagus.

BTW, there was something about being off topic, but what?

besleybean · January 5, 2015 10:47 am

It wasn't me!

silverblaze · January 5, 2015 12:29 pm

Nothing beats the event horizon.

tonnaree · January 5, 2015 1:15 pm

*runs through thread in her knickers singing Hooked on a Feeling*