Bettzy

Art acc: https://www.tumblr.com/bettz2?source=share

[the-sweaty-toothed-mad-woman]

I love how in the books it’s never “Holmes woke me up” it’s always “I woke up and Holmes was just there”

[oooo-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii]

This is what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle put to stoke the fire of Johnlock for almost 140 years

[siephilde42]

This is not ACD, however.

Everyone, that's his partner.

[bettzwgfan]

Uhh idk I just made another blog lol if u guys want to check it out

Eiko yapping to the digital wall

[konnichihawa]

[siephilde42]

Peak married bickering here

[sherlockknolmes]

[reidididier]

Watson may have forgiven, but Lestrade hasn't

Of course, this is nothing more than my headcanon(!)

But I think that Lestrade was damn angry with Holmes when he returned. He couldn't understand how he'd made Watson literally mourn him for three years. And then return as if nothing had happened. And how could Watson allow himself to be treated like that?

And I'm afraid his anger is showing through when they argue.

He saw Watson's pain at losing Holmes, saw how he blamed himself, how he grieved. And now Watson simply came back to him?

I think Lestrade came to Watson's every weekend, when Holmes was "dead" to have a whiskey and soda with him and just keep an eye on him.

He saw how hard and painful it was for him. And when he learned that Holmes had been alive all this time and hadn't deigned to say a word, he must have been furious.

But he restrained himself, so as not to spoil their happiness.

"Who am I to interfere in their relationship?"

As he always restrained himself.

Silly sketch under the cut, with one of those moments

Holmes: You are saving your skin, inspector.

Lestrade: And who are you to tell me about lies in the name of saving my skin?

[harbingerofsoup]

i fear that the longer im a fan of sherlock holmes the less of a fuck i give about moriarty just by virtue of how many adaptations really give a fuck about him

[estrella-creek]

YES.

Absolutely.

Also what's said in the tags. You can actually test how good an adaptation will be by how they make Watson.

People would believe Sherlock Holmes is the most difficult/interesting character to put in the screen, but a bad or good Watson can kill or make the show.

Bad Watson = Non-existent Watson applies here.

I love Watson, and he happens to be Sherlock Holmes's favorite person. How can you even try to understand these characters if you don't understand what they love?

Also, a very important issue that helps me understand why these bad adaptations are so common; to portray true male friendship you need to understand male intimacy, more specifically Victorian's male intimacy, and it's a very, VERY difficult concept for men to understand if they never had it. They can understand and apply the trope "friends to enemies" more easily because for them violence and conflict it's intrinsic to the very idea of what "Being a Man" represents.

To portray men being kind, supportive and loving with each other, holding hands in the dark when they are scared (it's literally in the books, don't blame me, look it up), listening adoringly, to pledge one's honor and loyalty to one another, to "being there to be used"... requires a profound understanding of what intimacy, friendship, manliness and love means.

And I don't think this has nothing to do with them being in love with each other (which I think is true).

First and foremost, they were friends.

Love of the romantic nature it's only an extra in this story (a very important one from my perspective nonetheless).

So, to ask a man (because the author of these adaptations is a man 99.99% of the time) to understand all of this... It will take more time.

[pina-repsi]

impersonator

[bettzwgfan]

OMG HAHSHDHAH 😭

[pina-repsi]

impersonator

[its-always-sunny-in-city17]

how do you do fellow millenials

[its-always-sunny-in-city17]

[cluepoke]

Little gay people running through fields and solving murders and such

[autie-j]

I liked this moment. Holmes profusely apologizing for putting Watson's life in danger. "Upon my word Watson. I owe you both my thanks and apology. It was an unjustifiable experiment even for one's self and double so for a friend. I am really very sorry." Followed by Watson being touched by Holmes care and saying, "that it is my greatest joy and privilege to help you."

[jules-ln]

Anyway, I find very funny that while Watson didn't wrote a lot about Holmes' addiction, he wrote it in a way that would call attention to it. And we can ask, why did he do that? And I think the answer is "because he wanted the readers to agree with him"

Which is funny because he never talks like that about his own gambling addiction

The only two times I can remember when he barely mentions it, it's when he says he has spent half of his pension in horse races and that time Holmes says that he keeps Watson's money under lock and key. And while this last one doesn't directly says that it's because of Watson's gambling addiction, we can assume thanks to his other comment about spending half his pension

THEN

It's very clear that Watson has a problem, and it got so bad that Holmes thought best to keep Watson's money away from him, since he can't be trusted with it. Maybe Watson was spending the rent money on horse races

But, why did he never brought it up like he did with Holmes' addiction? Easy peasy lemon squeeze, because Watson is not stupid; he knows that admitting that he has a problem will make him look bad. He knows that putting Holmes' addiction on display will make him look bad, and put pressure on Holmes to stop

Then we must also ask, what other things is he omitting or changing? Because he doesn't make an effort to make himself look smart, but he does make an effort to make Holmes look smart, even if it is at Watson's expense.

So he doesn't care to look smart, but he does care to look good? What other things is Watson hiding? Because the gambling thing wasn't so much brought up as it was a slip

Maybe Mary wasn't ok with her husband abandoning her to go away with another man, or perhaps his comment about enjoying committing crimes more than defending the law had something more to it than what it seemed at first glance? What else is Watson not saying?

We don't know, we can't know, but maybe good stupid Watson isn't as good or as stupid as everyone seem to think

[konnichihawa]