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

Harriet · January 25, 2015 2:13 pm

There is indeed so much to talk about, always ...

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 2:22 pm

As a basically rational adult (stop laughting) I can accept the fact that johnlock may not happen on the show and I will be fine.

However.

If it does happen, I assure you there will be fireworks, confetti and naked revalry on my part.

lil · January 25, 2015 2:23 pm

I think there are vast amounts of people that watch and enjoy Sherlock and don't see Johnlock at all...and take every word said on the show the way it is presented to them..@see it all as entertainment and then pretty much forget it until the next round.
Thats great...and the shows purpose. 'Twitter is not the audience'
But I also think if it did actually happen in some kind of way on the show...they would react the very same way...and not be overly surprised or shocked at all because as shown by people who have looked deeper there are foundations and evidence to see when looking back that would support such a storyline on the actual show.
John can be as straight as you like ( Cupids arrow ) but that does not ( and maybe has not ) precluded him from falling for ( or checking out several times ) the brilliant fantastic amazing ! Sherlock.
Of course the writers say no....of course they say Moriarty died..of course they say maybe Mary didn't die in canon..does anyone seriously think the would say different.
Aren't the best twists the ones most people don't see coming....and then go....oh yeah....

Liberty · January 25, 2015 2:33 pm

tonnaree wrote:
If it does happen, I assure you there will be fireworks, confetti and naked revalry on my part.

I hope your part doesn't feel too exhausted after all that ;).

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 2:49 pm

Liberty wrote:
tonnaree wrote:
If it does happen, I assure you there will be fireworks, confetti and naked revalry on my part.
I hope your part doesn't feel too exhausted after all that ;).

Exhausted but extremely satisfied and emotionally fullfilled.

SolarSystem · January 25, 2015 2:51 pm

tonnaree wrote:
If it does happen, I assure you there will be fireworks, confetti and naked revalry on my part.

We all will want to see pics of all that... well, maybe not the fireworks and confetti, we all know how those look like, but... you know... the naked revelry...

SolarSystem · January 25, 2015 2:53 pm

lil wrote:
John can be as straight as you like ( Cupids arrow ) but that does not ( and maybe has not ) precluded him from falling for ( or checking out several times ) the brilliant fantastic amazing ! Sherlock.

Right. It's not about men, it's about this one man.

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 2:57 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
tonnaree wrote:
If it does happen, I assure you there will be fireworks, confetti and naked revalry on my part.
We all will want to see pics of all that... well, maybe not the fireworks and confetti, we all know how those look like, but... you know... the naked revelry...

I have nothing to hide!

besleybean · January 25, 2015 3:18 pm

Lucky you!
I would join you in the naked revelry, but I wouldn't want to make anyone physically sick!
Mind you, that may be counter balanced by being able to throw rotten fruit and veg at me!

nakahara · January 25, 2015 9:30 pm

Across the ocean of roofs I can see a middle-aged woman, her face already lined, who is forever bending over something and who never goes out. Out of her face, her dress, and her gestures, our of practically nothing at all, I have made up this woman's story, or rather legend, and sometimes I tell it to myself and weep.

If it had been and old man I could have made up his just as well.

And I go to bed proud to have lived and to have suffered in some one besides myself.

Perhaps you will say "Are you sure that your story is the really one?" But what does it matter what reality is outside myself, so long as it has helped me to live, to feel that I am, and what I am?

(Charles Baudelaire, "Windows")

There´s something that astonishes me. If people do not see Johnlock in the show, that´s all right. But why are those same people so annoyed that some of us believe there is Johnlock in the show? Like, we could amuse ourself with it, we could just play with it or we could be seriously persuaded that Johnlock is an endgame but... what it is to non-Johnlockers if we do? Does it somehow diminishes their viewing of the show that we have this "silly" ideas?

To paraphrase Baudelaire cited above - what does it matter what is the true Moftiss´ idea behind the show, if it´s the idea of Johnlock that helped me live and amused me in some dark moments? It gave me enjoyment - what does it matter if it´s or isn´t true for some other people?

It´s as if the child who doesn´t like to play with wooden cubes comes and kicks down a castle build by other children from those cubes, so that they won´t be able to enjoy the game too.

Pointless. And a bit mean-spirited, IMHO.

Last edited by nakahara (January 25, 2015 9:30 pm)

SolarSystem · January 25, 2015 9:56 pm

nakahara, what a beautiful post.
And I agree... when I read things like this on this forum...

I love the sense that the Johnlockers eventually had to concede they were flogging a dead horse with the John is gay thing and so grasped at the straws of bisexuality,.
I still think somebody should write a paper on the desperation of female fans to see two hot male leads getting it on.

...I can't help but feel that some people feel nothing but discontent for Johnlockers and can't wait for Johnlock not to happen on the show so they can indulge in malicious joy and go "See, told you so, why did you even care to play?".
It also shows of course that things get projected onto Johnlockers (and let's not forget that Johnlockers are different people with different ideas about Johnlock) that aren't necessarily applicable.

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 10:05 pm

Stepping in as a MOD for just a moment.

I appreciate the way everyone feels but maybe it's time to bring this thread back around to actually debating the exsistance of johnlock instead of debating the character of johnlockers or non-johnlockers.

Thanks.

Harriet · January 25, 2015 10:08 pm

Well, words like these seem more telling about the mind of those who wrote them than about anything else.

Edit: oops, crossposted, tonnaree, sorry

Last edited by Harriet (January 25, 2015 10:09 pm)

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 10:11 pm

No problem.

SusiGo · January 25, 2015 10:28 pm

Beautiful post, nakahara.

And thanks for your reasonable words, tonnaree. Back to topic.

tonnaree · January 25, 2015 10:34 pm

TOPIC!

Some people think John and Sherlock are in love and will eventually do it like bunnies, some people don't.

Discuss the evidance for either scenerio.

Harriet · January 25, 2015 10:39 pm

As we learnt recently, bunnies are not necessarily doing it like Catholics.
(Sorry sorry sorry, back to topic ... )

Liberty · January 26, 2015 8:40 am

nakahara wrote:
To paraphrase Baudelaire cited above - what does it matter what is the true Moftiss´ idea behind the show, if it´s the idea of Johnlock that helped me live and amused me in some dark moments? It gave me enjoyment - what does it matter if it´s or isn´t true for some other people?

It´s as if the child who doesn´t like to play with wooden cubes comes and kicks down a castle build by other children from those cubes, so that they won´t be able to enjoy the game too.

Pointless. And a bit mean-spirited, IMHO.

I've got to answer this, because it's not true! I have never had any objection to people having their own interpretations of the story. I think we all do that to some extent, and we probably all get something personal from it that's unique to us. I'm all for that!

But there's another point of view, here and elsewhere, that Johnlock IS intended, and that anybody who can't see it is either not clever enough, or refusing to see it. I do disagree with that idea. It's as if, to take your lovely Baudelaire story about the old woman, I had a version of her story, but kept being told mine was ridiculous.   And even if the woman herself said it was true, I'd be told she was lying.

I accept that people genuinely do see Johnlock there, and I obviously don't have any problem with that - why would I?   To be clear - I'm not debating whether people should see Johnlock (I'm all for people seeing it), but whether that's what's we think is being shown.

Anyway, maybe The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes is less controversial - what do people see there? I think Holmes comes across as probably gay, but Watson seems to be straight - he seems to be genuinely interested in the female ballet dancers. I've wondered if he's in denial (also possible), or closeted (also possible - particularly considering the way he rants about the consequences of being thought gay).   But there's something about his apparent sureness about his own sexuality, and his assumption that Holmes is the same that makes me think he's genuinely thought they were both straight.   I think if he had fallen for Holmes in that way, he'd be bound to have questioned their sexuality before, and it looks like he hasn't.

On the other hand, this issue doesn't seem to be unfamiliar to Holmes, which makes me think that he has thought about their sexuality, and that he's probably gay. It's also a pretty camp portrayal of Sherlock, and although camp does not equal gay, I think it kind of leads the audience that way.

What's interesting is that Holmes does kind of fall for a woman in the film too, and there are some parallels with ASIB, but I don't see the loaded interaction that I see between Sherlock and Irene (which may have been Benedict more than the writing, but still - it's there). And he doesn't save her in the end (I do wonder if Moftiss found that very sad, and "corrected" it in ASIB?).

Anyway, I think the "desparately unspoken" part is about Holmes - it's clear that he can't tell Watson what he feels.

Last edited by Liberty (January 26, 2015 8:52 am)

SolarSystem · January 26, 2015 8:51 am

Liberty wrote:
What's interesting is that Holmes does kind of fall for a woman in the film too, and there are some parallels with ASIB, but I don't see the loaded interaction that I see between Sherlock and Irene (which may have been Benedict more than the writing, but still - it's there).

And here we are again. "It's there" ...? Well, you see it, I don't.

Liberty · January 26, 2015 8:55 am

Well, there is the writing too - Mycroft sees that it was Sherlock's feelings for Irene that led him to that fatal mistake. But I wasn't really talking about that, but Private Life. How do you think it compares? What do you think of the Holmes/Watson relationship there?