BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



January 30, 2016 3:15 pm  #5281


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

besleybean wrote:

We have seen: John marry a woman, date women, show attraction to women and respond to a woman in a hot blooded way. Oh and we know he has naked women on his lap top.
We have seen no evidence of him ever being interested in men, let alone date them.

I agree with this. So far, we have been shown clearly, and in different ways, that John is romantically and sexually attracted to women. Of course, that doesn't rule out that he can also be attracted to men, but that has never been shown in the show.


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"We'll live on starlight and crime scenes" - wordstrings


Team Hudders!
 
 

January 30, 2016 3:28 pm  #5282


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Would Johns sexuality matter at all if Sherlock decided to seduce him though ?
Who on this planet would turn down BCs Sherlock Holmes 


"Man may not be degraded  to being a machine by being denied to be a ghost in the machine."
It's just transport. The virus in the hard drive . However impossible .Must be the truth.
 

January 30, 2016 3:30 pm  #5283


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

No, John clearly being attracted to women doesn't rule out that he might also be attracted to men. It just means that so far they haven't shown us that he is. 

And, indeed, who would. 


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"We'll live on starlight and crime scenes" - wordstrings


Team Hudders!
 
 

January 30, 2016 3:30 pm  #5284


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

John seems a bit traditional, though...
I mean he's a modern man, but he seems to definitely know what he likes and wants.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 30, 2016 3:30 pm  #5285


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Mothonthemantel wrote:

Would Johns sexuality matter at all if Sherlock decided to seduce him though ?
Who on this planet would turn down BCs Sherlock Holmes 

 
Me?


---------------
It's not really a ship, it's more like a life raft.



 
 

January 30, 2016 3:31 pm  #5286


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Sacrilege!
Tee Hee,,,


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 30, 2016 7:35 pm  #5287


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

John hasn't been shown as bisexual.  Sherlock is more mysterious, but actually the only attractions we've seen (if you don't see Johnlock) are to women.  Of course, either or both of them could also be attracted to men, but I do think it's telling that the writers have chosen not to show us that, through the whole of the Sherlock series.  It seems that they don't want us to think of the characters as gay or bi (at the moment, anyway).

I agree with your post earlier, Vhanja.  What if Moftiss wanted to write about Sherlock sacrificing himself for his dear friend John.  Should they try to avoid that for fear that they'd then have to make it a romantic relationship (or be accused of queerbaiting)?  Or should they go ahead anyway and show the sort of friendship they want to show? 

 

January 30, 2016 9:55 pm  #5288


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

To be fair, it's not too big of a stretch to interpret Sherlock's "Women? Not my area." to mean that he is gay.


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"We'll live on starlight and crime scenes" - wordstrings


Team Hudders!
 
 

January 30, 2016 9:58 pm  #5289


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Mothonthemantel wrote:

Yes. People see what they want to see . That is also true for the people that want to see friendship only .

I'm not sure that's entirely it.  As I said earlier, I think people have to make sense of it.   You have to fit the pieces together, so there's a natural instinct to skew what you see to whatever your overall picture is.  So because I'm seeing a friendship, that intense look (or whatever) is going to be intepreted by me in the light of that, whereas somebody else might interpret in the light of them seeing it as a romance.  It's going to look slightly different, even though we're seeing the same thing.   It's difficult to see it from both angles at once, and even if you do, I think there's a tendency to lean towards a particular conclusion that fits with what you've already "decided".

I didn't want to see a friendship when I started watching.  I'd have been more than happy for them to be lovers! 
 

 

January 30, 2016 10:00 pm  #5290


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

@Vhanja.
Except he didn't say that, at least not quite!
I always say that scene has to be seen in conjunction with the staircase scene in TBB.
John speaking in a blokesy way with Sherlock about getting off with Sarah.
Sherlock not in the least interested.
I feel he means: relationships are not my area.
After all, not only have we never seen him with a (real) girlfriend, we've never seen him with anybody.
Anyhow, that response could just as easily mean: I'm asexual/celibate.

Last edited by besleybean (January 30, 2016 10:02 pm)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 30, 2016 10:07 pm  #5291


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Vhanja wrote:

To be fair, it's not too big of a stretch to interpret Sherlock's "Women? Not my area." to mean that he is gay.

It could be if we didn't have the context, but then he goes on to say that he's "married to his work" and excludes both sexes - at that stage, he doesn't seem to be looking for relationships with either sex ... and in fact, that's what we see.   We never see interest in any man, but we do see interest in a couple of women, even though he still avoids relationships.   Now, I've never claimed that this proves he's straight, but again, this is what the writers are showing us - this is how they want us to see him.  Deliberately misleading?  Possibly ... we'll see! 
 

Last edited by Liberty (January 30, 2016 10:16 pm)

 

January 30, 2016 10:19 pm  #5292


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

I agree with you both. When I first saw that scene, I interpreted that line to mean "relationships are not my area" as well. But I can also easily see how that line can be interpreted to Sherlock saying he's gay.

Interestingly enough, both Irene and Moriarty use sexualised language towards Sherlock (although Irene is quite a bit more out there, of course), and in my personal and subjective view, I see more sexual tension between Irene and Sherlock than I see between Moriarty and Sherlock. I see a difference. 

But, then again, there is of course as mentioned also a difference in how strong the two of them "attack" Sherlock, sexually. 


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"We'll live on starlight and crime scenes" - wordstrings


Team Hudders!
 
 

January 30, 2016 10:23 pm  #5293


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

I think you've hit the nail right on the head there.
This is how they attack Sherlock, because they both know it's his weakness...he doesn't do relationships.
Even Mycroft teases him a bit, which is a bit rich- coming from him.

Last edited by besleybean (January 30, 2016 10:23 pm)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 30, 2016 10:33 pm  #5294


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

I think that for both of them, it's part of their MO too.  We know Irene uses it to get what she wants, and we see Moriarty using it with the guard when in custody.   If you count the deleted scene with Magnussen too, there's another instance of it too, again with Magnussen using it as part of his MO (as we see with Lady Smallwood).  Possibly Kitty counts as well (we don't see her doing it with anyone else, but we know she's doing it for a purpose).   It all adds up to Sherlock being shown as sexual prey too, which is more often a female role.   (Perhaps with the Magnussen scene being deleted this doesn't come across as strongly, and perhaps that was the reason they deleted it.  Unfortunately, I can't quite get it out of my head now that I've seen it). 

Sorry, digressing a bit!

 

January 30, 2016 10:35 pm  #5295


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Yes, I was going to mention the deleted scene...still the best TV I have ever seen.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 31, 2016 12:39 am  #5296


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

From my pov , when Sherlock said " women ? Not my area ." He told me / us he was gay.
1895 things since then have reinforced that pov. I find it very hard to see povs where Sherlock is straight.

Last edited by Mothonthemantel (January 31, 2016 2:25 am)


"Man may not be degraded  to being a machine by being denied to be a ghost in the machine."
It's just transport. The virus in the hard drive . However impossible .Must be the truth.
 

January 31, 2016 6:47 am  #5297


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Liberty wrote:

I think that for both of them, it's part of their MO too.  We know Irene uses it to get what she wants, and we see Moriarty using it with the guard when in custody.   If you count the deleted scene with Magnussen too, there's another instance of it too, again with Magnussen using it as part of his MO (as we see with Lady Smallwood).  Possibly Kitty counts as well (we don't see her doing it with anyone else, but we know she's doing it for a purpose).   It all adds up to Sherlock being shown as sexual prey too, which is more often a female role.   (Perhaps with the Magnussen scene being deleted this doesn't come across as strongly, and perhaps that was the reason they deleted it.  Unfortunately, I can't quite get it out of my head now that I've seen it). 

Sorry, digressing a bit!

Just for a non-native speaker: What does MO mean?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I still believe that love conquers all!

     

"Quick, man, if you love me."
 

January 31, 2016 7:21 am  #5298


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Sorry, Schmiezi it's me being lazy in my writing - I meant modus operandi.   It's usually used when talking about criminals' particular way of working, and I was using it more generally to mean those people's approach to their "targets".  They use it with other people too, so it says more about them than it does about Sherlock.  But still interesting that the writers see Sherlock as a target in that way.

 

January 31, 2016 7:26 am  #5299


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Ah, thanks!

Interesting, indeed. The way Sherlock reacts to their approaches is very telling too, I think. I need to watch TAB again to observe how MP Sherlock reacts to the sexual taunts and compare it to RL Sherlock.

For science.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I still believe that love conquers all!

     

"Quick, man, if you love me."
 

January 31, 2016 7:54 am  #5300


Re: Johnlock: The Official Debate

Mothonthemantel wrote:

From my pov , when Sherlock said " women ? Not my area ." He told me / us he was gay.
1895 things since then have reinforced that pov. I find it very hard to see povs where Sherlock is straight.

Yes, that's just what I mean about fitting things to the picture we have!  If you believe the writers were telling us outright that Sherlock was gay, then everything you see after has to fit around that  So when you watch the greenhouse scene and see John mentioning two women that Sherlock is supposedly attracted to, you know that John must have got it wrong, and that Sherlock is trying to hide the fact that he's gay (or the fact that he's attracted to John).  I understand that. 

Whereas for me, seeing the scene as leaving Sherlock's sexuality mysterious, but saying that he avoids relationships, I pretty much can take what John says in the greenhouse at face value, and wonder why anybody would see it differently (seriously, after watching TAB I thought the whole thing had been put to rest!).  While I do think Sherlock's orientation is a bit mysterious, and his attraction to Irene could have been a one off (she's gay too), adding the attraction to Lady Carmichael makes it much more difficult to see him as gay, when we don't see any attractions to men.  (And again, I can see that from your point of view, if you think we've been told that he's gay, and you see him being attracted to John, then the women are red herrings).

My point is really that it's not so much seeing what we want to see, as fitting what we see to what we "know". 

Apart from showing that Sherlock avoids relationships (whilst not giving away Sherlock's orientation), I think the scene establishes that both of them are "fine" with being gay: this is not going to be a rerun of TPLOSH.

(I know not everybody likes or believes the writers' opinions, so I've put this in brackets for people to ignore if wanted!  In one interview Steven Moffat said that the scene "dismisses" the gay thing - interesting, because I don't think it quite does - Sherlock's orientation is still undefined - except that it does dismiss the idea of gay Sherlock pining for John - as far as Sherlock is concerned in that scene, John was asking him out, so he believes that if he did want a relationship with John, he could have one.    And I read in a later interview that they hadn't decided on Sherlock's sexuality in the first series.  Anyway, I wonder if showing Sherlock's attraction to women in TAB was partly because it's clear that Sherlock's emotions are now clearly not so well repressed as he'd like them to be - if he was gay, then there might be a good chance that he would fall for John - or we'd have to be told why he didn't fall for John!   Making the objects of his desire female kind of removes that, and allows it to remain a friendship.   But that's more a thought for the non-Johnlockers!). 
 

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum