BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » The game is on again (OFFICIAL NEWS ONLY PLEASE)

tobeornot221b · April 23, 2013 8:56 pm

Mattlocked wrote:
Sherlock and John are not real???

No. Only Moriarty was real.

besleybean · April 23, 2013 8:58 pm

I Believe In Sherlock!

Mattlocked · April 23, 2013 9:00 pm

LOL
You make me laugh so much again tonight!
Thank you!!

Sherlock Holmes · April 23, 2013 9:25 pm

The 'my secret dreams' thread would basically just consist of "oh, I dreamt of John and Sherlock again last night."

:-)

miriel68 · April 23, 2013 9:28 pm

Dear SH: the answer is YES! And he is just... dashing!

besleybean · April 24, 2013 5:47 am

Hey, it's a bit more complictaed than yes and anyway, I hate them!

besleybean · April 24, 2013 6:15 am

I have tried and failed.
If anybody can post Ian Hallard's wpnderful Twitter ' Johnlock' piece. I would be pleased.

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 10:09 am

besleybean wrote:
I have tried and failed.
If anybody can post Ian Hallard's wpnderful Twitter ' Johnlock' piece. I would be pleased.

Pleasure (and Amanda Abbington´s response, too):

<22 Apr
OK, I get that some people like to fantasise about Sherlock & John as a couple but no one seriously thinks it will actually happen,do they?!

Öffnen
[A. Abbington] A. Abbington ‏@CHIMPSINSOCKS 16h

@IanHallard I do think it's funny how worked up people get about it.

Öffnen
[Ian Hallard] Ian Hallard ‏@IanHallard 14h@CHIMPSINSOCKS It certainly provoked a lot of (very varied) responses. It's an interesting phenomenon. You had a gorgeous day for it today.x

Last edited by anjaH_alias (April 24, 2013 10:29 am)

Sherlock Holmes · April 24, 2013 10:20 am

"Yes, I find I learn more and more about the subculture as time goes on! To be fair, I didn't say anyone’s fantasies were wrong. People are very welcome to fantasise about whatever they like. No one is judging that - well not me anyway. I was querying the extent to which that fantasy, for some at least, seems to have developed into a belief, or in certain cases insistent demands, that it should become reality and appear in the show itself.
“Sherlock” itself plays with the idea that society is so unused to any kind of male friendship or intimacy that those around Sherlock and John often assume their relationship can only be motivated by sexual attraction. As Amanda says, why can’t their love for each other be friendship? Why impose a gay dynamic on two characters who, as clearly as we can tell, identify respectively as heterosexual and asexual?
Personally speaking, I’d love to see more well-rounded gay characters and well-written gay relationships depicted in drama, but that’s another story – and not this one, I’m afraid.
As you say, it's an interesting phenomenon."

- Ian Hallard

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 10:22 am

anjaH_alias wrote:
besleybean wrote:
I have tried and failed.
If anybody can post Ian Hallard's wpnderful Twitter ' Johnlock' piece. I would be pleased.

Pleasure (and Amanda Abbington´s response, too):

<22 Apr
OK, I get that some people like to fantasise about Sherlock & John as a couple but no one seriously thinks it will actually happen,do they?!

Öffnen
[A. Abbington] A. Abbington ‏@CHIMPSINSOCKS 16h

@IanHallard I do think it's funny how worked up people get about it.

Öffnen
[Ian Hallard] Ian Hallard ‏@IanHallard 14h@CHIMPSINSOCKS It certainly provoked a lot of (very varied) responses. It's an interesting phenomenon. You had a gorgeous day for it today.x

Why can´t I embed a tweed properly? I followed all the instructions....

Last edited by anjaH_alias (April 24, 2013 10:26 am)

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 10:25 am

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
"Yes, I find I learn more and more about the subculture as time goes on! To be fair, I didn't say anyone’s fantasies were wrong. People are very welcome to fantasise about whatever they like. No one is judging that - well not me anyway. I was querying the extent to which that fantasy, for some at least, seems to have developed into a belief, or in certain cases insistent demands, that it should become reality and appear in the show itself.
“Sherlock” itself plays with the idea that society is so unused to any kind of male friendship or intimacy that those around Sherlock and John often assume their relationship can only be motivated by sexual attraction. As Amanda says, why can’t their love for each other be friendship? Why impose a gay dynamic on two characters who, as clearly as we can tell, identify respectively as heterosexual and asexual?
Personally speaking, I’d love to see more well-rounded gay characters and well-written gay relationships depicted in drama, but that’s another story – and not this one, I’m afraid.
As you say, it's an interesting phenomenon."

- Ian Hallard

That´s quite interesting - where did he say that? I thought before it´s about his tweed...

Sherlock Holmes · April 24, 2013 10:57 am

He said that on Twitter too, but you had to click on a link and follow it to a different page.

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 11:15 am

Ahh, thanks. And can you explain why I can´t embed tweets here? I followed the instructions.....

Last edited by anjaH_alias (April 24, 2013 11:16 am)

erunyauve · April 24, 2013 11:26 am

Mrs.Wenceslas wrote:
ohoh, now I´m between "search" or "Don´t!"..but trying to stay on the side of the angels

I know...I'm having fun trying to read between the lines. Happily, I still don't know anything.

Sherlock Holmes · April 24, 2013 11:58 am

anjaH_alias wrote:
Ahh, thanks. And can you explain why I can´t embed tweets here? I followed the instructions.....

What instructions did you follow?

besleybean · April 24, 2013 3:35 pm

Thank you, dear.
And I really hope people get the message.

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 4:01 pm

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
anjaH_alias wrote:
Ahh, thanks. And can you explain why I can´t embed tweets here? I followed the instructions.....
What instructions did you follow?

On Twitter, when you press the "more"-button, there is "embed tweet" and a short explanation. I did it like this, but only chaos appeared.

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 4:16 pm

besleybean wrote:
Thank you, dear.
And I really hope people get the message.

Me, too. On tumblr I saw a big discussion about these statements of Haillard and Abbington and I have to say, I really feel disgusted about a lot of the statements of so-called fans. What do people think: that they possess that show? That they have the right of influence on it, the right to a say in Sherlock (thank God they don´t have!)? Having the right of getting what they want in general? I really don´t understand that, this is absolutely no fandom anymore, this is a weird understanding of being a part of the process. It´s going much too far. I mean, not that Moffat or Gatiss would care, but some persons have obviously left reality in my eyes.
And, quickly, this is definetely NOT against Johnlockers in general (although I never shared that point of view), it´s just against these, who are resentful now after discovering some spoilers, who think, it´s not going to be "their" series anymore, who start to insult artists of that show etc. Bahh!
And - WARNING - if you want to avoid spoilers don´t look for Haillard and Abbington on tumblr, sorry. Unfortunately their statements are connected with some major spoilers. On Twitter it´s safe right now if you don´t use the setlock tag.

Last edited by anjaH_alias (April 24, 2013 4:17 pm)

besleybean · April 24, 2013 4:25 pm

For me the most pertinent part of Ian's wonderful piece, was the implication that if you actually fall for the Johnlock thing(as potential for the show) you are missing the whole point of Sherlock.
The Holmes/Watson friendship is the major part of The Canon and should be for any adaptation.
Anyhow, I won't go on.
My final point for now is: if Ian felt moved to post this about Johnlock...what the feck would he make of the multiple photoshop pix of Benedict and Martin(which I constantly complain about), making them look closer than they are?

anjaH_alias · April 24, 2013 4:40 pm

But any interpretation is allowed, whether I share that point or not. I obviously share Ian Haillards point of view, but can imagine the existence of others. Bad behaviour though and overestimation of one´s own capabilities is quite another thing.
My opinion to the photoshop pix: The gentleman remains silent .