This is really interesting. I have read a lot of Redbeard theories and I think there may have been a real dog AND a traumatic incident other than the dog's death. Some trauma Sherlock has "rationalised" into the death of his childhood dog. 
 

Indeed. And HoB is a sort of turning point as well - the first time that we see Sherlock acknowledging feelings when drugged. We do not know if he did so while being drugged by Irene but here it is very clear. And let us not forget the scene at the end when again under the influence of the drugs he sees Moriarty's distorted face.
So I think that the drug in connection with the Hound might case have started to trigger suppressed memories. These are the first hints of Redbeard and the fact that he is mentioned in TAB lets me believe that this part of the story is far from over. 
 

Last edited by SusiGo (April 15, 2016 7:08 am)

Well, I think the dog was only second choice when looking for something to calm him down. I think he was looking for John and Mary the shooting barred his way. Only then did he try the dog. The sad conclusion being that apart from John there is actually nothing to calm him down. 

I think Redbeard can be both things. He was a beloved pet. He died. Sherlock was sad. And his grief somehow became tied up with another even greater trauma. I can see this happen. 

Another interesting thing about this, though, is that towards the end of HoB, Sherlock doesn't seem to understand that someone can struggle with the "sentiment" of putting down their dog. That doesn't fit at all with the death of his childhood dog being a traumatic incident in his life. 

Vhanja: That could show how much he repressed what he had felt then, a sign of how big the trauma was actually.

Last edited by Harriet (April 15, 2016 9:35 am)

Vhanja wrote:

Another interesting thing about this, though, is that towards the end of HoB, Sherlock doesn't seem to understand that someone can struggle with the "sentiment" of putting down their dog. That doesn't fit at all with the death of his childhood dog being a traumatic incident in his life. 

I think this could indicate that Sherlock isn't a real sociopath. In my opionion all the scenes which showed the young Sherlock did not fit to that what the older Sherlock seems to be.
 

He was not allowed / did not allow himself to struggle too much with what happened back then.

Susi pointed out how Sherlock's character developed between the two scenes. The fortress had begun to wobble, he tried to keep it stable, it doesn't work.

Yes, right before John's wedding.

But are we sure that Redbeard is really a dog?
I can´t find the original source, but it seems Mofftiss suggested after TAB that Redbeard could be another thing (human maybe, or something else...)

nakahara wrote:

But are we sure that Redbeard is really a dog?
I can´t find the original source, but it seems Mofftiss suggested after TAB that Redbeard could be another thing (human maybe, or something else...)

Yes, there was a dog called Redbeard if we assume that HLV mind palace is based on real events. Young Sherlock says: "Hello, Redbeard. Here, boy. Come on!"Hello, Redbeard. Here, boy. Come on! Come to me. It’s okay. It’s all right. Come on! It’s me! It’s me, come on! Come on! Good boy! Clever boy! Hello, Redbeard. They’re putting me down too, now. It’s no fun, is it?

I think this plus the fact that we see him patting a dog does not leave any doubt. But this does not mean that Sherlock might not associate the lost dog with another trauma. As long as he can consciously suppress both memories - dog and other trauma - like in the HoB dialogue about sentiment, all is fine. But the moment drugs (TAB) or emotional upheaval (TSoT) or physical pain (HLV) come into play, the walls break down.