@Mycroft (also my fave )
In  ASIB it's also mentioned that Mycroft should be mother ( pour the tea ) and Sherlock comments..theres a whole childhood in a nutshell.... This does imply Mycroft in a sort of mentor position when Sherlock was young and it easily follows that Sherlock would look up to and seek to be judged as clever and not an idiot from his older brother and look for his approval.
However just before series 1 started something clearly happened to cause a problem between them..and upset mummy...maybe it was the drugs or maybe it was something to do with the other one... or maybe Sherlocks dissaproval of Mycrofts SIS work....either way... the Moriarty problem does seem to reconcile them some by S03..
Meanwhile the distance led to Sherlock more and more turning to John for the approval of his actions and trusting Johns views..perhaps more than Mycrofts..and I wonder how Mycroft feels about that.
Was the ..lonely commentary...along with the ..it'll be like old times again. from Mycroft in TSOT..a hint that Mycroft had missed Sherlocks company...?
It has crossed my mind , that maybe Mycroft has used the Moriarty issue and perhaps even the Mary one to cause a rift between Sherlock and John..because he had some idea of what..this percieved weakness of Sherlocks ( caring for John ) could , and indeed did lead to.
Perhaps Mycroft underestimated Johns forgiveness , and Marys danger ?
It seems to me Mycrofts compliance with Sherlocks xmas Magnussen plan was some kind of making ammends for Sherlocks shooting. @ his silence over Mary.
I don't see them killing Mycroft off though..not at all ..I definitely think they have plans for him long term.I really hope he will learn that caring can sometimes be an advantage...maybe we will see Sherlock save him from something at some point...and for once Mycroft will be wrong.
The Holmes relationship and interactions are for sure some of the best and most interesting parts of the show.

Last edited by lil (April 16, 2015 10:31 am)

Well , the way I see it Mycroft is a great and not necessarily good man , and John is good but not necessarily great.
Sherlock has to find the way to balance both because atm John has been more an albatross to Sherlock than an asset , which makes Mycroft right...
The caring is not an advantage adage...has sadly so far been true .
I think thats kinda awful when you carry the metaphor...to government @ wars @ life etc as intended...the greater good is all very well...but the individuals have to matter too.
Do we really want the world ran by psychopathic machines....etc
But I do agree we don't want sweet and trite and falling into each others arms.

tonnaree wrote:

Sherlock wants to be a better person not only because of John but for John.  He wants to be able to stand beside John as a partner and be able to give of his emotions as well as his intellect.

Where do you see that? Isn't that over romanticizing the characters? (OT)  I never really saw Holmes trying to "deserve" Watson , nor Watson trying to "deserve" Holmes.

Last edited by NatureNoHumansNo (April 16, 2015 3:09 pm)

tonnaree wrote:

 I see it in the fact that in any given situation his first thought seems to be "where is John."   I see it in the words "I am a ridiculous man ... redeemed only by the warmth and constancy of your friendship."

If it only "seems", that's interpretation, hence romanticizing
I agree that the best man speech is a declaration to Watson ( and clearly romanticizing too, as Moffat admitted he "indulged himself" writing it) but it's not showing Holmes wants  to stand beside John as a partner and be able to give of his emotions as well as his intellect.

Coming back to the topic, I think there's a rivalry between Mycroft and Sherlock Holmes, an intellectual competition, wich is certainly part of game to (as we see it in the "deduction game") thats started during childhood, and mutual caring, too. But I don't think Mycroft is Sherlock's ideal as a mentor would be.
I don't think Watson is either, but thre's more complementarity than rivalry in their relationship.

Last edited by NatureNoHumansNo (April 16, 2015 6:38 pm)

Bit quiet in here. So I will make a start. Some random thoughts about Mycroft and things that do not seem to fit. 

What always strikes me is this dialogue:

MYCROFT: Magnussen is not your business.
SHERLOCK: Oh, you mean he’s yours.
MYCROFT: You may consider him under my protection.
SHERLOCK: I consider you under his thumb.
MYCROFT: If you go against Magnussen, then you will find yourself going against me. 

The last sentence sounds strangely personal. This comes from the man who drew Sherlock into the Bruce-Partington case and the Irene Adler scandal. Mycroft allegedly protects Magnussen because he is useful but we never see him being of any use. Quite the contrary, we see Magnussen using pressure to get to Mycroft. 
And another thing - Mycroft know how contrary his brother is. So he should know that warning Sherlock off someone would only result in him going at Magnussen all the more. 

edit: Too late, discussion already started, but if it is ok,I will leave this here anyway

So, with regard to M theory. I have to admit I have not yet read it, but from what I understood in the discussions and metas that mention it it seems to conclude that Mycroft is and has been under the control of Moriarty since TGG.
While I can see some sense in that (it would, for example, explain Mycroft’s strange non-involvement with Mary), I truly and with all my heart hope it is not true. I love the fact that everyone who wants to get to Mycroft has to go via Sherlock. It is the only crack in that perfectly smooth Iceman façade. It is the one reason why it is so important for Mycroft to keep sentiment out of his life (much more important than it is for Sherlock). But if M theory is true, than the façade is all that is left, the building behind it has fallen to ashes long ago. If Mycroft has lost the ability to protect Sherlock and all his power as the British government in TGG, why is he not removing that great risk (himself) for everything he cares about from the equation?

Last edited by Lola Red (June 23, 2015 9:23 am)

Basically yes, but as it is of book-length, I cannot sum it up in here. There are certainly ideas in there I do not share but it has some interesting ideas, e.g. about the use of music and the connection between the show and John's blog. For anyone who is interested, I recommend reading it on AO3. 

But you do not need to have read it to discuss Mycroft's role in the show, far from it. 

Knowing the writing of Steven, Mark and Steve, I think they would not shrink from presenting us with a somehow compromised Mycroft one day. Because all the characters are developing, so why should Mycroft remain static as the omniscient, all-powerful grey eminence with only one weakness in form of his little brother? I like him like that but I think there are other possibilities as well. 

I don't think Mycroft wanted Sherlock to take the Magnusson case. When he says "unwise", it sounds like he really means it. The whole interaction between Mycroft and Sherlock seems very honest to me there. As if Mycroft is not only worried, but pissed off at the idea that Sherlock will try to get to Magnusson. Also we don't know if at that moment, they're talking of taking Magnusson down all and for once, or if it's just the case of Lady Smallwood. Because Sherlock speaks of "the case" as if it's a whole lot bigger than just a matter of obtaining letters and negotiating.

oh, cross-posted.
I agree that Mycroft is in on the christmas punch "accident" and the helicopter and Appledore visit. I just don't think it was initially his idea to go after Magnusson. But usually, if he sees Sherlock is on a case and is serious about it, he will provide help. If only to save Sherlock from his own, maybe more desastrous means to achieve his goals.
 

Last edited by Whisky (June 23, 2015 10:00 am)

SusiGo wrote:

Knowing the writing of Steven, Mark and Steve, I think they would not shrink from presenting us with a somehow compromised Mycroft one day. Because all the characters are developing, so why should Mycroft remain static as the omniscient, all-powerful grey eminence with only one weakness in form of his little brother? I like him like that but I think there are other possibilities as well. 

I agree, especially after S3. I don't need everyone to have a dark past or a hidden secret, but in terms of Mycroft it would make a lot of sense after S3. Just think about his remark about "the other one" which opens up so many possibilities... I really hope that this hasn't just been a red herring to give us something so speculate about during hiatus. 
 

It's a real probability IMO, that S4 revolves around a dark secret from Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes 's past.
But given that I don't like the idea of Sherlock Holmes being his brother's puppet, I think I'll stay away from M theory ( moreover, I don't wish the show turning to a complicated thriller scenario).
I can imagine some ways Moriarty is still alive, but Mycroft knowing it and agreeing that his brother is away, miserable and tortured for two years while the center of the network he wants to dismantle is still in activity, is too vicious for me.