Zatoichi wrote:

Mattlocked wrote:

I don't think he lost track and I do think that the "bad" beginning of the speech was indeed prepared. Because before he changes in tone he kind of tells the guests that he wanted to show them what an asshole he is and therefore he has no explanation why he earns Johns deep friendship.

That´s possible, but why do you think it´s so important to him to stress how underserving he is? Still solely directed at John, to show how aware he is of his own shortcomings and how sorry about everything he has done to him? And how grateful for his friendship and how much he doesn´t take him for granted and values him?.. To get that message across, even if it means belittling himself, no matter what people will think of him?
..
..
Excuse me while I go sob in a corner. 

This is part of why I consider TSOT sadder than Reichenbach.

Liberty wrote:

I wonder ... at the beginning, Mrs Hudson says something about his mother having a lot to answer for, implying that his mother looked after him to the extent that he just took it for granted and didn't notice it, and has carried that attitude forward into adulthood.  He just expects to be cared for, and doesn't pay much attention to who's doing it, or why?

That is not even remotely how I understood that line and now I can't even remember how I understood it because this makes so much sense! It totally fits in with the bit that we see of Mrs. Holmes, that she's been very indulgent towards her boys.

Mary

Last edited by maryagrawatson (August 12, 2014 6:23 pm)

This is strange. For me this interpretation would completely destroy the episode. 

SusiGo wrote:

This is strange. For me this interpretation would completely destroy the episode. 

Same here. It would mean that nothing in this episode - at least as far as all those wedding scenes are concerned - is real. It would mean that Sherlock manipulates John, too. And I actually don't see the point.
 

Schmiezi wrote:

Besides, if it is purely manipulation, please explain the sad, sad look on Sherlock's face, when he is  on the dancefloor, just before leaving the wedding.

 
That way he fools all of them one last time before leaving. All. Of. Them. 

Zatoichi wrote:

maryagrawatson wrote:

Liberty wrote:

I wonder ... at the beginning, Mrs Hudson says something about his mother having a lot to answer for, implying that his mother looked after him to the extent that he just took it for granted and didn't notice it, and has carried that attitude forward into adulthood.  He just expects to be cared for, and doesn't pay much attention to who's doing it, or why?

That is not even remotely how I understood that line and now I can't even remember how I understood it because this makes so much sense!

Same!

I re-watched TSoT today and found it a bit less confusing this time. Your theory that Sherlock knows very well what he is doing and what reactions he is evoking works very fine with me @Liberty, and it kind of saves this episode for me. I even like it a bit as long as I keep thinking "Here´s Sherlock manipulating/ playing the sociopath again". (Even though I´m not sure that´s really what they intended, but as they kind of made a point about how there are no final truths in this show and all the interpretations are equally valid I´ll just go on with this one which suits me best ).
 

Yes, I know there is often a gap between what was intended and what I see.    I think there is a real mixture throughout of genuine emotion and manipulation - and I don't mean manipulation as a negative.  It's made quite clear that he didn't just stand up and say what he thought and felt at the wedding.  He says that the "murder" (which he compares to marriage at one point!) was "planned and rehearsed" - very much like that speech.  They even seem to labour the point that Sherlock is obsessively planning. And of course, he has a history of always knowing and understanding more than everybody else, including us (e.g. it took me a while after watching ASiB to realise that he knew all along that Irene wasn't dead - he'd deliberately misidentified her body). 

I love Sherlock being emotional - I think he is an emotional character, whatever he might tell people.  Even in the books, I think it's clear that his distaste for love is a choice - it's something he makes an effort to avoid rather than something he isn't capable of.  At the end of the The Sign of Four, he's left alone with his cocaine, which is a litle similar to Sherlock being alone at the end of TSOT (the twist is that our Sherlock condones the wedding instead of disapproving)  (Oh, incidentally, I read that the ending is based on the end of the Dr Who story "The Green Death", and I can see the similarities).   I think it's in character for him to feel deep, strong emotions (but usually try to suppress them). 

It's some of the other stuff that doesn't ring true - Sherlock with low self-esteem, Sherlock thinking he can't be John's best friend, incredibly self-deprecating Sherlock, Sherlock who suddenly doesn't understand people, etc.  Now, I'm not saying that isn't what we're being shown - it could well be what the writers want us to see.  But it makes him ... less Sherlock.  I'm not sure why I found it so easy to accept a changed Sherlock in TEH, but am finding this one more difficult - I think it's that TEH made sense to me and parts of this don't. 

Anyway:
- what he feels for John = genuine
- sadness/emotion = genuine
- stories about John asking him to be best man, wondering why his speech is moving = planned and rehearsed?

That's the way I've got to see it.  For now, anyway!

Liberty wrote:

And of course, he has a history of always knowing and understanding more than everybody else, including us (e.g. it took me a while after watching ASiB to realise that he knew all along that Irene wasn't dead - he'd deliberately misidentified her body).

Um, excuse me, but WHAT?

How did you get that idea???

There's no way I can look at Sherlock's behavior in TSoT and see manipulation.  For the most part his speech is Sherlock at his most human, his most vulnerable.  Everything he does and says is aimed at John's happiness.  He wants to be worthy of the love and admiration John has expressed for him.

Well, it doesn't make sense.  I think a lot the scene is "true" (John's part of it in particular) and I can believe Sherlock being confused at first, but John has already called Sherlock "best man" at least twice, and Sherlock has heard it (unlike in the book).  For him not to register that makes John's speeches at the grave and in the underground car meaningless (to Sherlock) and I'm not happy with that.  He knows he's John's best friend.  Of course he does. (Don't get me wrong, I think he's very moved by what John says. I just don't think he can be quite as shocked as he claimed to be). 

The speech in general is for an audience, and although I think he uses it to tell John things that would otherwise be a bit awkward to say, it's also planned to be a public speech.   It's not at all off the cuff. 

As I've said, I'm really talking about how I want to see it, rather than how I think it is.  I'm not saying that I think the rest of you are wrong! But something really bothers me about Sherlock putting himself down.  

As for Irene, the short the answer is that he's seen her naked so couldn't have misidentified the body.  That wouldn't have made any sense.  So he's covering for her.  Maybe he only knew she was faking her death when he saw the body, although I suspect he knew when he went into his room and thought about it after getting the phone.   Anyway, if Sherlock identifies the body, there will be no doubt, and that's what he does.  He becomes her "protection", right up until the end, in fact.   Yes, he's keeping the secret from John, Mycroft and Mrs Hudson. (Even if you don't believe he deliberately misidentified the body, he's still being secretive throughout).  That's very much Season 2 Sherlock, I think. Look at how often he withholds information (for a purpose) from people in TRF and even THOB.   I maybe shouldn't extend it to Season 3.  But I really liked that aspect of Sherlock and will be really sorry if it goes. 

Last edited by Liberty (August 13, 2014 3:19 pm)

John talked about "best man" (btw: did you notice the list of names Sherlock gives John after he asked him for a "best man"? All clever or honourable guys, nothing to do with best "friend".)
He also said Sherlock was the best and most human human being, that he ows him so much etc. etc.
Talking to Moriarty on the roof, he calls John, Mrs. Hudson and Lestrade his friends.
So yes, Sherlock must have noticed that he is Johns friend. Which still is a difference to BEST friend. He indeed believes it could be Mike or Greg, but not him.
And we DO get two versions in the speech. The version Sherlock is telling (while John is wondering and frowining) and the version we see. Which is corrected by Sherlock later on ("well, maybe I didn't say all those things") and John finally nods. Because what we could see is true.

For Irene: Yes, it seems wrong that our observant Sherlock didn't see that it wasn't Irenes body in the morgue. But then again he admired Irene for being so clever and I am sure she was cleverer than him this time.
And remember how shocked he was when he followed John and listened to their conversation. He didn't even talk to her, he went away and looked still very, very irritated in front of 221B. The camera made us feel that he was almost dizzy.

Last edited by Mattlocked (August 13, 2014 3:41 pm)