Btw, this is BBC Worldwide's header on LinkedIn:

I like your explanation, Gimmecat, and it makes much more sense to me than the idea ot a "conspiracy".  The trouble is that if that's the way it has been going, I don't think it has worked ... people I talk to offline, do not see what you're seeing.   So in the sense of storytelling, they are not on board, there's no tension or anticipation, no buildup.  That story is not being told to the general audience. 

Here's the quote from Mark Gatiss about romance ... I'm having to type it out from my book rather than copy and paste so there may be mistakes.

"In this book, you'll find lots of details about the process which led us to devise Sherlock and take the Baker Street boys into the twenty-first century.   Of how exciting and punishing and wonderful it's been to make a series which has inspired the attention, loyalty and love of a vast worldside audience and made superstars of its leads.  It is a tale of risk, of loyalty, of danger, of hair dye, big coats and romance.   It's a tale of cheekiness and fun, of cold Welsh winters and warm Welsh welcomes, of Aunt Sallys and big dogs and falling off buildings.  But most of all, it's the story of a team of dedicated professionals all of whom have come to love Sherlock and John as much as Steven and I ever did."

It's all very broad and vague.  For instance Aunt Sally is a character that Una Stubbs played years ago (mentioned in the book).  Clearly the show itself is not about that, or about hair dye, or Wales.   This seems to be about the process - Mark's writing a foreword introducing people to what they'll find in the book.   Of course "romance" could refer to Johnlock, but there's no indication of that (and in fact Moftiss refer to them as friends in the book). 

Last edited by Liberty (June 3, 2016 7:48 pm)

The Casebook...essential for BBC Sherlock fans!
Surely the romance is John and Mary?!

If of interest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_novel

Last edited by besleybean (June 3, 2016 5:12 pm)

Yup. If ever, it'll be strictly endgame. Frustrating thought, isn't it? Can't be helped, though. It really is the best way to end the story.

besleybean wrote:

The Casebook...essential for BBC Sherlock fans!
Surely the romance is John and Mary?!

The Casebook was published in 2012.  Wasn't that before Mary was introduced into the narrative?
http://www.amazon.com/Sherlock-Casebook-Adams-Guy-Hardcover/dp/B00NPNQHHO/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1464974917&sr=1-3&keywords=sherlock+casebook
 

besleybean wrote:

The best way to end the story could be just to follow Canon and have the boys slowly drift apart until Watson hears of Holmes' death.

We are absolutely going to have to agree to disagree on that one.  Regardless of johnlock I would never wish such a sad ending to this tale of our boys.

I think they've already squashed the beekeeping canon as well. Janine got that Sussex Downs cottage and she got rid of the beehives. xP

I agree, Vhanja, and that's my problem - it does seem at odds with what Mark has said about same sex relationships.  Believe me, I'm not at all against same sex romances!   I've been reading/watching (and even writing, badly) since my teens and have actively sought them out!  I'm just not convinced that this is one.

The book is the Sherlock Chronicles (I know that's what you meant, Besleybean!) and the bit I quoted was the part from Susi's signature, just to give it a bit more context (i.e. it's not Mark telling us that the show is about Johnlock - although I agree with the broad definition of romance).  Romance could mean John/Mary, or even Sherlock/Irene (both are talked about in the book) - we just don't know.

The line just before that one as well ... "It was a desire to get closer to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original thinking, to restore the idea of two radically different young men becoming unlikely friends in even more unlikely adventures that inspired us both".   Oh, and at the beginning, Mark almost describes the picture of Holmes and Watson on the train, but is talking about himself and Steven - I like that!   Maybe I'll post some more quotes here that might be relevant ... bear with me!

Last edited by Liberty (June 3, 2016 5:44 pm)

Mothonthemantel wrote:

Often people comment that were J@S to have been a couple - they would have just done it from the beginning. But the problem with that is it would have been a huge thing and probably the most talked about aspect of the show . The very thing MG said he wanted to avoid . With the world being what it is , it would not have been as successful as it is now at all , in fact very many countries would have refused to even show it. An article written just a few years ago in one of the uk papers entitled fans want Sherlock and John to be gay.. recieved a whole slew of very telling and outright homophobic comments.
Putting Johnlock in the subtext and making it so very unspoken and then having it happen towards the end makes perfect sense to me. It also fixes the very depressing canon end . Subtextual taboos in books poetry tv films etc has a very long and interesting and fun history , the era we are in perhaps may,and hopefully, be the last ever opportunity a writer gets to do it as one hopes in the future it will be as MG once wished - a normal boring ish aside to the main storyline.
My thoughts are that that is what the writers are aiming for , that when Johnlock actually happens it will have become so blatantly obvious and cliched people just shrug and move on to whatever other evil plan the writers have going.

THANK YOU!

I have never understood the "from the beginning" argument because the Slow Burn is a standard heterosexual romantic trope!  It's used over and over and over again in television and film.  For example, the X-Files was always full of unresolved tension and flirting, friendship and loyalty, and as the series progressed there were hints that it might be so much more.  The creators didn't actually acknowledge that yes, Mulder and Scully are a couple now until like the last 2 seasons!

Why can't this work for Sherlock too?