Thanks for your post. It was very interesting to read! :-)

So it is not impossible that Eurus only made up Victor the boy. Why would she do that? Just because she can? It makes her look even more cruel.

Schmiezi wrote:

Thanks for your post. It was very interesting to read! :-)

So it is not impossible that Eurus only made up Victor the boy. Why would she do that? Just because she can? It makes her look even more cruel.

To me it is more believable that Sherlock made up Eurus, i.e. that she is part of himself. 

As for Victor being Canon - well, he is but there is no similarity whatsoever between Canon Victor and TFP Victor apart from him being Sherlock's friend. From Moran in TEH we know that Mofftiss sometimes use names for a completely different character. And I think that even for Mofftiss it would be unusual (if not bad taste) to have a child murdered without any further reference to this fact. We do not get anything, not even after John found the skull in the well. 

SusiGo wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

Thanks for your post. It was very interesting to read! :-)

So it is not impossible that Eurus only made up Victor the boy. Why would she do that? Just because she can? It makes her look even more cruel.

To me it is more believable that Sherlock made up Eurus, i.e. that she is part of himself. 

As for Victor being Canon - well, he is but there is no similarity whatsoever between Canon Victor and TFP Victor apart from him being Sherlock's friend. From Moran in TEH we know that Mofftiss sometimes use names for a completely different character. And I think that even for Mofftiss it would be unusual (if not bad taste) to have a child murdered without any further reference to this fact. We do not get anything, not even after John found the skull in the well. 

I like that idea too. He would basically save himself at the end of TFP.

By saving Eurus who would be a part of himself Sherlock would save himself from loneliness.

SusiGo wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

Thanks for your post. It was very interesting to read! :-)

So it is not impossible that Eurus only made up Victor the boy. Why would she do that? Just because she can? It makes her look even more cruel.

To me it is more believable that Sherlock made up Eurus, i.e. that she is part of himself. 

Let´s not forget that Sherrinford, the facility containing Eurus together with her deadly games, was in Canon the original name for Sherlock himself. The man is that building, so to say.

besleybean wrote:

I don't see any sense of that.

It means that he is Sherrinford and everything taking place there plays itself only in his mind.

besleybean wrote:

For me the story has to be all real for it to make sense.

Does that mean you did not enjoy TAB (a prolonged Sherlock´s hallucination?
 

besleybean wrote:

Sherlock does save Eurus and thereby saves himself, in a fashion.
But he also saves John and Eurus is the key to that, which fits with her being the key to the disappearance of Victor...both Sherlock's only friends.
This is how it all ties up so neatly.

I agree with besleybean on both points--what she said directly above, and what she said in this quote.

Losing a beloved dog, while quite painful for a child, would not have so traumatized Sherlock that he became the so-called sociopathic person we meet in Season One.  Losing his best friend, on the other hand, would have been--and was--a very different story.  If his father really was allergic to dogs, and there is no indication on that episode that Eurus was mistaken about that, then Sherlock would have never been allowed to have one, while growing up.
 

Last edited by kgreen20 (July 4, 2017 11:33 pm)

How's this for an idea. Victor owned the dog we know as Redbeard, the red Irish Setter of Sherlock's memory. But it's name wasn't Redbeard, that was the name of the pirate Victor liked to pretend to be in their games. The dog would have been named something boring and forgettable. Wherever Victor went, the dog went too (when the kids played outdoors). They were inseparable. Sherlock was envious and wished he had a dog like that, but he wasn't allowed because his dad was allergic to dogs. Maybe something happened to the dog (maybe Eurus did something nasty to it, but nobody knew it was her) and it had to be put down. Then came the tragedy of Victor disappearing... and somehow in Sherlock's mind the two were merged into Redbeard the dog. That's why we see and hear a dog in both Sherlock's and Mycroft's memories/flashbacks. That's why there was a dog bowl (Eurus got hold of it at some point, perhaps as a trophy). Imagine how confusing it all would have been for little Sherlock. Maybe his parents and brother tried to explain, but it was too traumatic and in the end they just let him believe what he thought he remembered.

Anyway, that's one possible explanation. I don't think Moffat and Gatiss are the sorts of writer's who worry about explaining all the details, and getting into discussions in the aftermath of TFP about the police searching for Victor etc. would have seemed unnecessary to them. Perhaps they didn't have this particular scenario in mind, but it works for me
 

Last edited by Meretricious (July 5, 2017 4:18 am)

Yep, that was Eurus just messing with him.