Okay. Ugh. I’m going to respond very carefully to this video here, and also post my response in the comments section, and then try to say no more about this subject.
First thing to make clear: Moffat does not only run Sherlock. His comments were about the importance of LGBT representation, particularly for kids, where they can see they have a place in the future. That’s vital, and he does provide it. In Doctor Who, a show seen far more by kids. River Song, Vastra, Jenny, Canton, Clara… hell, his very first televised Doctor Who story had a visible-as-it-gets pansexual man and proclaimed that his sexuality was the norm for the future. He cares about and does provide representation. Sherlock is absolutely lacking in it, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t provide LGBT representation at all. Hell, River Song made me comfortable with my own bisexuality. He’s delivering and making a difference. I will always ask for more, but it’s ludicrous to claim he’s not doing anything.
Secondly, Johnlock was never going to happen. Both Moffat and Mark Gatiss have been very clear about that from the start. People leaping on his comments about the importance of representation and reducing it all just to Johnlock is trivializing, absolutely and completely. There’s far more to representing LGBT people than a single slash ship. Hell, I’ve seen plenty of people say the ship will happen just because Gatiss is gay. There’s a fundamental disconnect between having representation and advocating for LGBT people and having two specific characters be in a relationship. That needs to be understood.
For that matter, Sherlock Holmes can still not be heterosexual without Johnlock. I’ve always found great pleasure in reading him as aro/ace, but he could be gay, bi, pan, demi, anything, and still not be in love with John Watson. Again, there’s a difference between LGBT representation and a specific slash ship.
That comment about how sexuality doesn’t come up is indeed upheld by the scene in question in The Abominable Bride, actually. The whole joke of it is that Sherlock has no interest in discussing sexuality and just wants to get on with investigating the case. In essence, it’s the same thing Moffat was saying in a slightly meta way, that there’s no point discussing it when there’s far more interesting things to do.
Again, begging for representation is not equal to Johnlock. It is trivializing to insist otherwise. LGBT people are far more than just one couple. Gatiss, a gay man, came up with the jokes about people thinking John and Sherlock are a couple, not Moffat. I imagine it strikes him as awesome that he lives in a time where gay relationships are so encouraged and embraced that people assume John and Sherlock are a couple and want to support them as such, even though they are, as both he and Moffat have stated, just very close friends in this adaptation. As Gatiss explained in the very interview this discusses:
“It’s worth saying – because we never get the opportunity to actually say it. The whole notion, the idea of them possibly being a couple is inspired by the joke in the Billy Wilder film The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, our favorite version. And we thought that was a good idea to run with that. In the 21st century it wouldn’t be an issue. People would just assume. Maybe we’ve done it too many times I don’t know. That’s all it is. He explicitly says he is not interested. Doesn’t mean he couldn’t be. Doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with it. I’m a gay man. This is not an issue. But we’ve explicitly said this is not going to happen – there is no game plan – no matter how much we lie about other things, that this show is going to culminate in Martin and Benedict going off into the sunset together. They are not going to do it. And if people want to write whatever they like and have a great time extrapolating that’s absolutely fine. But there is no hidden or exposed agenda. We’re not trying to fuck with people’s heads. Not trying to insult anybody or make any kind of issue out of it, there’s nothing there. It’s just our show and that’s what these characters are like. If people want to do that on websites absolutely fine. But there’s nothing there.”
Frankly, the oversight on this detail leads me to question if the maker of this video even fully read the article. So if you’re gonna make the queerbaiting accusation, it’s Gatiss to aim it at, though frankly, it’s not an accusation I would side with in this case. They’ve never claimed this is a love story. They’ve never promised Johnlock.
As for Bryan Fuller, he clearly has no issues with Moffat, seeing as in that exact panel he said he’d love to have Moffat write for his Star Trek adaptation.
I’ve also gotta question the way this video totally ignores the existence of Mary. You know, John Watson’s wife, dating back to the original books and playing a tremendously large role in this show.
theartofmadeline
romaincrisis
kianamaiart
andulkaphoto
gummygunk
