Untitled

[woman-of-the-sea]

Buck: I’m ready to start thinking about the future.

*Probie walks in...

Coincidence? I don’t think so😌

[pollaidh]

Yup, immediately thought the same. I’m a writer. That’s what I’d do, anyway. I’m wondering if they might set probie up as potential love interest for Buck (which may not ultimately work out, but would indicate something about where Buck’s interests lie)

[pollaidh]

It’s funny that Dean first met/heard Castiel in a deserted gas station, and (once Cas has died) Dean hears a high pitched whine at a deserted gas station and finds Miracle. A dog with a coat exactly the same colour as Castiel’s coat. The name ‘Miracle’ fits with the situation but also has biblical overtones, and the colour combo has been done before - with Cas’ pimpmobile.

Obviously Miracle then gets disappeared by God, but then he’s brought back, sleeping in Dean’s room, eating in Dean’s room, and riding in the back like Cas did.

A coincidence?

Sam was always the one who wanted a dog.

[pollaidh]

Healthcare in the UK

Americans, I hope you’re aware that your president’s comments on the NHS betray a complete misunderstanding of the situation. The NHS protests are to ask for more money for the NHS, not to disband it. None of us want to be in a country like the US where there has been no free, universal healthcare. We can’t imagine how awful that is, but we know how lucky we are.

I’ve got flu. Both my kids had their flu jabs for free, on the NHS. In the last few weeks I’ve seen a GP (general doctor), I’ve also phoned our free helpline, 111, and after a phone assessment I was given an urgent hospital appointment within 2 hours. I waited only 5 minutes at the hospital, and was treated by a lovely health care practitioner. All for free. It’s not perfect, but it’s bloody brilliant.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/04/nhs-budget-cuts-march-protest-jeremy-hunt-london-funding#img-1

[pollaidh]

Guardsmen code in SoT

Haven’t posted in ages, but I’m reading Smith’s, ‘Masculinity, Class & Same-sex Desire’ and it mentions that up until the Wilde trial, at least, along with the ‘painted boys of Piccadilly’, the ‘accommodating guardsmen of Hyde Park’ were also a major part of the London gay scene. I’ve noticed before how the whole of SoT seems to be divided into female symbolism and male symbolism, but had missed this reference. The Guardsmen are of course the red-suited, black topped soldiers Sherlock takes a good hard look at.

[pollaidh]

“It’s okay.” “It’s not okay.” Scene similarities in “Man in an Orange Shirt.”

Spoilers for MiaOS

Anyone noticed a marked similarity between a famous Sherlock scene, and the new BBC two-parter “Man in an Orange Shirt”? I can’t help thinking it was on purpose, on the part of MiaOS, anyway...

In part II MisOS, there’s a gloomy scene in the cottage, where Adam is having to reconcile his internalised homophobia, he’s crying and trying to scrub himself clean, hating himself. Steve, his new gay friend, wearing a dressing gown, comes and comforts him.

Steve: “It’s okay.”

Adam: “It’s not okay.”

Go and look at the clip, see what you think. The lighting, strings, how Steve holds Adam after, are all a little reminiscent.

Man in an Orange Shirt is a two-parter: In Part I we see a gay/bi or gay couple thwarted by WWII time homophobia. One’s a closeted buttoned-up banker in a bowler hat, married, the other’s a bohemian artist.

Part II Man in an Orange Shirt is the modern version (sound familiar?), where Adam, the grandson of closeted guy in part I is a semi-closeted vet, with a previous girlfriend. This time the course of love runs more smoothly, though Adam has a bit of a dating app/sex addiction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cWtTNmsjCM

I’m not saying this is all part of a BBC conspiracy, more that the writer and someone on the crew were a little inspired... If you haven’t watched this series on iplayer already it’s pretty good.

[pollaidh]

Is John Buttercup?

Ranunculus platanifolius = large white buttercup

- We know that Moffat and Gatiss’ favourite SH adaption and ‘the film that changed (Gatiss’) life = The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes - a secret love story

- We know that Moffat’s favourite film = The Princess Bride - a love story about Princess Buttercup.

- There are plenty of other little subtextual clues that both films have strongly influenced BBC’s Sherlock. 

John’s flower (TLD) references both those favourite films at once: The flower behind the left ear references the dancing scene in TPLoSH where Watson starts dancing with women, and thanks to a rumour he is gay, ends up dancing with the men. He is sporting a red flower behind his left ear. But in TLD the flower behind John’s ear is yellow and white. What could it be? There have been a few suggestions, . But I’ve just discovered the existence of an unusual large white and yellow BUTTERCUP. Ranunculus platanifolius. Larger than a normal buttercup, five white leaves, yellow centre. The 2 flowers are not exactly the same, but certainly very similar.

Sound familiar?

P.S. Do we know for sure that the probably buttercup behind John’s ear is not a plastic/knitted one? As that would account for the stronger yellow centre.

[pollaidh]

The Holmes’ family pile...

I’ve written before about how TFP could well be from inside John’s brain as he lies bleeding out from a gunshot wound, with a mix of memories, fantasy, his favourite films etc.

The Gothic country house that appears as the Holmes ancestral home in TFP could well be John’s imagination: 

- We know he internally refers to Sherlock as ‘posh boy’ (from his ‘Mary-in-his-head in TLD). 

- Sherlock and Mycroft come over as upper middle class, rather than upper class (to English class-sensitive ears). The pink cottage we see in HLV was smaller than many expected, but still within keeping for a middle-middle to upper-middle family. Not sure how many upper class families have maths geniuses in them, and Sherlock’s father is really quite ordinary. There doesn’t have to be a family pile.

- We know that John was surprised by how ordinary Sherlock’s parents seemed, in TGG - he couldn’t believe it. Why? Because they seemed remarkably ‘normal’ to have produced oddities like Mycroft and Sherlock. Also, perhaps, they didn’t fit with his ultra-posh reading of Sherlock?

- There’s a weird social solecism I noticed back in series 3, which few outside England would notice: Sherlock calls the linen things you wipe your hands on at  the table ‘serviettes’, whilst John calls them ‘napkins’. Yet ‘napkins’ is higher class than ‘serviettes’ (anything French sounding is lower-middle). 

It grated on quite a few people at the time. John reads as more lower-middle middle class than Sherlock, but has perhaps learned to ‘fit in’ and use the terms of the upper middle class/upper class kids he’d have met as army officers and at med school. It’s very odd that Sherlock uses the lower class ‘serviette’, and knowing people who attended the same public school as Benedict, I can’t imagine him using ‘serviette’ himself. I was surprised back in season 3 that Benedict didn’t object to the term, knowing it was wrong for his character. I concluded that as an English person I was overly sensitive to class semiotics. Maybe it was a signal that Sherlock isn’t as ‘posh’ as John thinks. If it is a signal it’s a bloody subtle one.

- There’s also a long fan history of Sherlock & Mycroft Holmes having an older sibling who inherited the family estate, leaving the two younger Holmes boys to play at government and detection. This older sibling was even named Sherrinford by Baring-Gould. Yet there’s no evidence in the books themselves for the Holmeses having a family estate.

All this possibly suggests that John’s internal view of ‘posh boy’ Sherlock’s family was at a higher social class than they are in reality. This could tie in with a dying John imagining the Holmeses to have a stereotypical ancestral home - grey, gothic, and even with a mad woman setting fire to the attic. The man’s been reading too much Bronte.

[hellooteapots-deactivated201905]

the biggest deterrent to solid belief rn for me is why do things keep happening that make the heart contract if we’re supposed to, at some point, jump the rails and spread the word of mouth to a much large audience

[euphoriccalliope-blog]

@teapotsubtext My best guess is that it was innoculation against future trollish initiatives, & potentially also ways of testing the comm’s puzzle-solving skillz before pointing us to more obviously canon-connected pieces of the ARG. I posted earlier this morning the possibility that we may be meant to assemble evidence of Mary Morstan’s fingerprints on vivala.me and then publicly approach the contact_sh and contact_jw Twitter accounts via a “prospective client” and see what happens. That would do the trick, in terms of getting the word out. I’m just unclear on whether we need to do something else first, or whether this is an allowed next step within the ARG.

[hellooteapots-deactivated201905]

this is a really interesting perspective and fits so well with all the random clues and codes we’ve been sent, like, the other day it felt like they were testing our response times, which also fits with this, feeling us all out to find out who would be able to do what and how when the bigger things kick in to gear, and also how fast we would be if you were collecting data on what’s happened around here in the past few weeks, you would know who was fastest or most adept at solving codes, and which ones, you would know who refuses/is unable to solve them (hello, that’s me), and you would also be able to tell who’s more skilled at literary analysis instead, those of us who would balk at a cipher, but chase down a clue in a poem to the ends of the earth i theorized that the DYMM incident from Dec. 29 was a fact finding mission for potential players, so perhaps that’s what these past few days/weeks have been as well who will play, who’s best at what aspect, at what point will each player or type of player will get fed up or lose faith, who can be the sounding board/what blogs have a wide reach, who will go the hardest, which blogs are the best conduits for information etc. vivisection: experiencing science from the perspective of lab rats

[apmnwq]

I was thinking about how they could contact us, like this other ARG where people received jars of honey, and I realised that we sent complaints to the BBC so they have our emails, maybe they’ll use them idk

[studyingsubtext]

LOL we sent them our e-mails voluntarily…hahahahaha

clever. 

[hellooteapots-deactivated201905]

also like i’ve emailed the sherlock twitter’s email address, and the dont.u.forget@gmail from vivala.me jesus christ

[mrsashdown]

I’d like to think they collected data from that submit page in thelostspecial too..

[pollaidh]

I believe that to share/use in another manner the contact details submitted to the BBC whilst making complaints would be illegal under the Data Protection Act, and public bodies like the BBC are even more wary than a private company. Staff have refresher courses frequently, whatever their role. If you want to be able to share or use the contact details for another reason than you would need people to agree to this upfront, like with a tick box in the form.

[youngqueenwerewolf]

INTO BATTLE I´m giving you ammo to counterattack BBC ´s outreageous answer

Reviews that mention Sherlock & John relationship as more than being friends:

As reviewer Monique Jones @moniqueblognet  wrote in her review of The Final Problem for @COLORWebmag 

“the seemingly dismissal of the fans by the creators is little irritating. You can’t bait the audience and then get mad when they don’t get what they were expecting. There is a reason Sherlock Holmes books and this show are at the center of queer media critique, and there should be a level of respect for that type of decades-long scholarship.”

INDIEWIRE: “we get clichés, queerbaiting and a modern adaptation that manages to feel more staid than the original.“

http://felixonline.co.uk/tv/6667/a-series-of-final-problems–sherlock/

“The seeds of the idea that the Sherlock and John relationship could develop into a romantic one were steadily planted never to fully flourish. Subtextually the show referred heavily to The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, a film that both Gatiss and Moffat rate as one of their favourite adaptations of the original stories – Gatiss going so far as to say to The Guardian that the screenplay formed a template for BBC’s Sherlock. In Private Life, Sherlock Holmes is depicted as a closeted gay man desperately, silently in love with John Watson, medicating with cocaine to hide his pain and guilt. Years after the film’s release, director Billy Wilder spoke of his great regret of never making the relationship explicit “I wanted to make Holmes a homosexual …”

http://www.vox.com/2017/1/16/14279588/sherlock-finale-final-problem-review

(There’s also the issue of queerbaiting; Sherlock has done a tremendous amount of it, continually turning the issue of John and Sherlock’s friendship into a running, insulting gay joke. If that was never going to go anywhere, as both Moffat and Gatiss have repeatedly stated it would not, it’s hard to see it as anything but a homophobic running gag at the expense of actual queer identity — even though Gatiss, an openly gay man, has done his part to give us complicated queer characters before.)

http://www.ignitenews.ca/bbc-sherlocks-series-four-finale-was-not-the-final-problem/

What their relationship has turned into, instead, is an obnoxious and offensive joke throughout the series, with throwaway character quirks played for laughs. It is difficult for the audience to understand why Gatiss, an openly gay man, could write a perfectly complicated relationship that teases and hints at romantic entanglement, but is nothing more than an insulting running gag.

Here´s a link where you can find more examples about the queercoding of the series using typical romantic TV tropes (with pictures):

http://thecrosslocks.tumblr.com/post/156123338533/here-some-romantic-tropes-typical-of-romance-arcs

Moreover:

In Sherlock´s official Youtube account, the presenter uses the expression “the greatest love story never told” when talking in a video about Episode 2 The Lying Detective, at time code: 2 min 54 sec:

[ohgodjohnlock]

SPREAD LIKE WILDFIRE

[pollaidh]

Absobloodylutely. Whilst there is much subtext that is ambiguous, though leans towards a queer interpretation, there is text and creator comment that unambiguously indicates a queer version is on the cards. Even mainstream media has noticed. I think they’d struggle to defend this in a court. Too much evidence for the prosecution.

That’s why I’m still hoping for a romance ending to the arc, in series 5. But I have written to the BBC anyway to complain because I think they’ve taken the baiting too far now, even if all turns out well. They are playing with the emotions of some very vulnerable people.

[cleminism-deactivated20180325]

mofftiss be like “and now sherlock is gonna imagine mary in her wedding dress shooting him” #for the joke 

[thealogie]

my fave is when they added another layer to it and had sherlock be like “john i just pretended there’s something i’ve always wanted to say #for the joke” 

[pollaidh]

“Do you have an international reputation?” #for the joke

[pollaidh]

The dark night of the soul. Literary structure and Sherlock.

I know everyone is feeling very sore about the TFP, and I have to admit I was pretty upset myself, but the more I look and think, the more I reckon we were not wrong.

There are many literary theories about plot points and percentages. Most good stories and screenplays follow very similar structures, with certain plot points at the same % of the overall arc. There’s a plot point which usually comes at 75%-80% of the arc (which would include the over-arching arc, such as the 5 series). This is known as ‘when all hope is lost’, or ‘the dark night of the soul’. It is the moment where the main character, and the reader believe that all is lost.

If you have multiple plot strands, such as external plot, a romance arc, and sub-plots, structural theory says you need this dark moment for each of those sub-plots and arcs. Often the dark moment for a romance will coincide with the external dark moment, but that is not always the case.

In a 5 series (16 episode) series, that 75-80% is the end of TLD and TFP. The next plot point after this is basically finale and resolution to a new equilibrium.

If Sherlock was a 4 series show, the 75% would fall in the middle of TAB, up to possibly T6T. Yeah you could argue that in TAB Sherlock nearly dies (again) and he thinks Moriarty has come back, which is quite bad, but is it ‘dark night of the soul’ territory? Maybe it works as the dark moment for the external plot, but I am not convinced it works for the character/relationship arcs.

Until all the hype about TFP being the end of the series, and the leaks and ‘ground-breaking’ comments, I felt, as a writer, and as an analyst, that the Sherlock arc needed another series for resolution. Given Mary was still alive at the end of series 3 and TAB, I felt a romantic Johnlock resolution would only be possible if a great deal of fictional time had passed between series. But it hadn’t. Mary was heavily pregnant in TAB, and the baby was new at the start of series 4.

Mary only died at the end of 4.1, and John was in guilty mourning throughout 4.2. Though I loved TLD, especially the hug, that only felt like the start of honest communication between John and Sherlock. Again, between TLD and TFP I felt that a Johnlock resolution would only work in TFP if a lot of fictional time had passed between the episodes. Again, it hadn’t. Although I was massively swayed by the mounting evidence that JL would happen in TFP, I felt instinctively that it was too early, it would almost be a disappointment: The boys have not been ready for romance for the entire show (from series 1), for one reason and then another. By the end of TLD they were communicating honestly for the first time. I wanted an honest romantic relationship to develop, one based on the romantic feelings they’ve had for years, but without jumping into a kiss due to some kind of near-death experience. I’m not sure I’d have believed in a ‘happy ever after’ if they had gone straight into JL in TFP. The boys need more time.

As a writer sometimes you expect your characters to be ready, and as you are writing them, they refuse, you’ve forced the issue, you need to wait. Characters are people with emotions and baggage, and they have to get there in their own time. 

[loveismyrevolution]

I agree with it!! They weren’t ready yet!! I expected it earlier, before S4 aired that we wouldn’t get Johnlock yet! If anything then it would be a love confession to leave us desperate for S5! But back then I was immensely criticised! Everyone else was so convinced that we MUST get a kiss in S4, but imo they weren’t ready yet and neither was the common audience!! From the storyarc and from the character development they are just by now ready to go on and take the next step! I never understood why everyone claimed it to happen within this series!?!? Why was it okay in S1-S3 but now at once it’s queerbaiting? And that’s why I don’t judge it as queerbaiting, because I believe in that we WILL get a S5 and that there will be a kind of relationship!! They prepared everything in this story for it to happen now!! And with S4 the story feels unfinished, there will be more!! Thank you for writing this @pollaidh!!

[ebaeschnbliah]

Yes!  Unfinished - that’s what I felt too after watching it. Ending on a positive note but unfinished.

[tjlcisthenewsexy]

@pollaidh I agree with this, TFP ended with Sherlock ready for a relationship, but without the set-up to force it to happen in the last 4 minutes of the show. I think the subtext of TFP gave us Sherlock confronting his final inner demon which was blocking him from opening himself up to a relationship. Eurus represented the part of himself that had gone missing, that he had lost, that was stolen from him as a child. He wasn’t a whole person until he had found Eurus. Finding her “completed Sherlock as a human being”. 

@loveismyrevolution I think people were betting on S4 (including me quite vocally I think) because of various clues (Moffat’s “series 4 series 4″), the “groundbreaking” comment, the fucking rainbows in the promos. I personally would be okay with johnlock in S5 if series 4 hadn’t been a god forsaken mirrorverse of everything we were certain of. They dialled back the one on one screen time for Sherlock and John, they eliminated the sexy eye contact, they called each other “mate” and “boys”. If they were still intending to “go there” then they should have at least let the sexual tension have free reign, give us tons of normal and relationship-building crimey situations to put the leads in, let Mary become Moriarty like she was destined to, then let us figure out on our own during the hiatus that the narrative was absolutely ready for S5 johnlock. As it stands, with them no-homoing S4, I don’t see them doing it explicitly at all. And most of us won’t hang around to find out. As it’s been said before; the time was right. 

Their characters might have been ready sooner if Moftiss hadn’t made certain bizarre decisions like Mary’s redemption and the real John disappearing without a trace. Maybe one day we will figure this all out but unfortunately there’s no simple explanation yet. 

[pollaidh]

@tjlcisthenewsexy @loveismyrevolution and others I can see where you’re all coming from. I think everyone got really excited about Johnlock in Series 4 because of the publicity and comments from the creators, which certainly seemed designed to make us think something would happen. If they never follow through, then it is indeed an awful case of queer-baiting.

I still have some hope however. My interpretation of TFP is that it is in John’s head (as he lies bleeding out after a real Eurus bullet), and is the counterpart to the Sherlock TAB in-his-head episode. But, I like your interpretation too - that it is the lost part of Sherlock. Maybe it’s both - John realising that Sherlock has purposefully shut himself off to love, due to childhood trauma; and that this gives John hope for Sherlock to find fulfilment in romantic love.

I don’t think TLD was subtext-free, it was just less of a joke, and more subtle than usual. The entire episode was about confessions, how confessing certain things about oneself can make people hate you; that once you’ve taken that step you can’t go back. Sherlock’s ‘drugs open doors in my brain’ (referring also to TAB and potentially closet doors). Anyone queer must be familiar with that choking feeling where you have the opportunity to come out, but someone cuts across you, or you lose your nerve, because you’re so afraid you will be rejected. 

And there was an interrupted confession, just like the John on bench in TSoT and Sherlock on the tarmac... When Sherlock and John talk honestly at the end of TLD, Sherlock is about to tell John that he, John, is the person who makes Sherlock be the man he always wanted to be etc... i.e. he’s about to confess that he feels for John what John assumes to be romantic. John’s confession of cheating interrupted that.

[pollaidh]

The latest Tweets from Tunde Ogungbesan (@TundeO). Arsenal supporter

Mr Tunde Ogungbesan is the diversity and inclusion lead at the BBC. If you are complaining to the BBC about poor LGBT+ representation in Sherlock (lots of LGBT criminals, no obvious heroes), or the queer-baiting, it might be worth contacting Mr Ogungbesan via Twitter (he posts work-related comments, so not entirely personal) or his Linked In account too. It is clearly his job to care about representation.

[garkgatiss]

@zadiest replied to your post

“i haven’t written this up at all yet but i’m pretty sure Mary is…”

Yeah, I thought this was established as fact along the way? At least in my brain it is.

yeah, no, you’re right, i guess i mean that it’s starting to take on actual predictive meaning now wrt the role Americans play in cases that’ve been referenced, like

Three Garridebs: John shot by an American murderer who escaped from jail who is presently lying about his past and going by a different name

Dancing Men: American criminal who stalks/menaces their ex-fiancee (and the ex-fiancee shoots herself in the story??? but is initially under suspicion for the murder of their present husband??? but the present husband was actually killed by the murderous ex???)

(and tbh, Dancing Men pairs well with the Elephant in the Room, all of which we know about that is “there were two bodies in a room” plus an elephant, where in Dancing Men Holmes has to deduce the presence of a third person at the crime scene, the actual murderer, to clear the ex-fiancee)

the Death by Twitter case where the woman is stalked/menaced by an ex and kills herself by stepping in front of a bus

TAB and all the references to Sir Eustace and Emilia knowing each other “in the States,” when he promised her everything and then threw her over, leading her to stalk/menace him and ultimately kill him (we think?)

Thor Bridge: the American Senator whose wife kills herself and frames his mistress, their governess, for the crime. bonus points for everyone’s guns ending up in the river, plus an incriminating note

i feel like there’s two things to tease out here: Mary being stalked/menaced by someone from her past, causing her to fake her death vs. John being stalked/menaced by Mary after she frames him for her death, idk, idk, idk

[pollaidh]

http://pollaidh.tumblr.com/post/156276894681/what-if-they-killed-mary-to-save-her-in

[gabbymcauliffe-deactivated20171]

The fourth Holmes brother/sister. Sounds a bit crazy, yeah?

First of all, I want to say that I was inspirated by this post.

So, today I’m gonna talk about some interesting things in TFP that you might have missed. Or just didn’t pay your attention on them. 

Let’s start with something we already know:

Mommy and Daddy Holmes liked silly names or greek names, as we’ve been told by Eurus. 

Eurus is a secret Sherlock sister, who’s name is greek.

The last, and the most important, according to this twitter post: “Red letters intersperced in the credits at the end of the Sherlock episode “The Final Problem” spelled out Anemoi.” Did you see it? If not, then have a look:

Interesting, right? Let’s figure out what Anemoi means. 

In ancient Greek religion and myth, the Anemoi (Greek: Ἄνεμοι, “Winds”) were wind gods who were each ascribed a cardinal direction from which their respective winds came, and were each associated with various seasons and weather conditions.

Of the four chief Anemoi, Boreas (Aquilo in Latin) was the north wind and bringer of cold winter air, Zephyrus (Favonius in Latin) was the west wind and bringer of light spring and early summer breezes, and Notos (Auster in Latin) was the south wind and bringer of the storms of late summer and autumn; Eurus, the southeast (or according to some, the east) wind, was not associated with any of the three Greek seasons, and is the only one of these four Anemoi not mentioned in Hesiod’s Theogony or in the Orphic Hymns.

Okay, we have four Winds. And the last one, Eurus, was sort of ‘alone’. This wind wasn’t associated with the others, it’s not mentioned anywhere. The same thing we have in Sherlock. 

Let’s read about three others. 

Boreas was the Greek god of the cold north wind and the bringer of winter. Boreas is depicted as being very strong, with a violent temper to match. He was frequently shown as a winged old man with shaggy hair and beard, holding a conch shell and wearing a billowing cloak.  

Not sure about a conch shell, but the others seem familiar to me…

Yeah, I’ve definitely heard about flying… and beard… and cloak… strong and violent temper… Can’t remember where… 

The next Winds are Zephyrus and Notos, but I’m not sure which one is Mycroft. Here is some stuff if you wanna try to determine who is who:

Zephyrus, sometimes known in English as just Zephyr (Ζέφυρος, Zéphyros), in Latin Favonius, is the Greek god of the west wind. The gentlest of the winds, Zephyrus is known as the fructifying wind, the messenger of spring. He was reported as having several wives in different stories. In the story of Cupid and Psyche, Zephyrus served Eros (or Cupid) by transporting Psyche to his abode.

Notos (Νότος, Nótos) was the Greek god of the south wind. He was associated with the desiccating hot wind of the rise of Sirius after midsummer, was thought to bring the storms of late summer and autumn, and was feared as a destroyer of crops.

This is all I wanted to say. I’m not sure in anything anymore, so I can’t say if there definitely is the fourth Holmes sibling. But Anemoi wouldn’t have been placed in the credits if it was just a word. 

Thanks again, @pollaidh, for inspiration. What do you think, @monikakrasnorada, @joolabee, @just-sort-of-happened, @teapotsubtext ?

P.s. I’m sorry if I’ve made some mistakes, I’m not a native speaker.

[pollaidh]

Hi, thanks for citing me. I wrote an earlier post which covers the same - http://pollaidh.tumblr.com/post/155732049971/4-brothers I looked a bit at the Roman God equivalents (they also had 4 winds) to the Greek Gods.

But I came up with Boreas - Mycroft; Zephyrus as Sherlock - fell in love with a boy and accidentally killed him; Notos as possibly Moriarty :-) Didn’t see the cloak thing, so well spotted. 

[garkgatiss]

Someone literally wrote a ficlet where people in Sherlock's mind palace were telling him to get together with John based on lines from Being Alive

ok, hear me out: the macbeth references in s4 are about the fic where they star in macbeth together and john sings Being Alive to sherlock and they fall in love

[pollaidh]

I've often wondered if the Mrs Hudson torturing an owl comment in HLV refers to the wonderful Thermodynamics fanfic series where Sherlock ends up having to borrow John's bed due to an unfortunate incident with an owl.

[pollaidh]

What if they 'killed’ Mary, to save her, in Morocco?

Starting to bat around the edges of an idea and thinking out loud here for any feedback/ideas. The Six Thatchers is a lot about deception and people being thought to be dead.. Even Ajay when injured escapes into an abattoir/butchers full of dead animals to hide his trail. Charlie (the son in the Thatchers case) was hidden in death. We hear the phrase “give the people what they want”.

Death, or maybe ‘death’ protects us and those we love - as seen with Sherlock’s sacrifice in TRF. Even Moriarty’s apparent (and probably real) death meant people stopped looking for him. Ajay was thought to be dead for 6 years. Irene Adler faked her death to avoid retribution.

Why exactly does Mary flee across the world? “All I ever wanted was to keep you and Rosie safe”, and yet there’s been no textual hint that John and Rosie are in danger (though logic tells us they probably are - revenge, using them as hostages, etc all a risk). John and Sherlock are trying to persuade Mary she needs to return to London, she is reluctant. John is even looking like he’s at the end of the line with her, he’s realised his so-called marriage (which legally, if she used a false name, isn’t even a real marriage) is founded on lies - hers and his own text affair. Then Ajay arrives and all hell breaks loose.

Mycroft repeatedly tells Sherlock he can’t keep Mary safe, that her enemies will ‘forcibly retire’ her sooner rather than later. But we’ve already seen how Mary’s connection to Sherlock brought her into harm’s way. Personal connections are dangerous when you’re trying to hide. The only way she can keep safe is to disappear permanently.

What if, after this, they (Sherlock, John AND Mary) decide that the best way to keep Mary safe, and Rosie and John out of harm’s way, is for Mary to ‘die’. Just like Sherlock ‘died’, to throw her enemies off the scent. This fits also with Mary Rose being (1) a ship that was resurrected - she has already been re-born once as Mary; and (2) Mary Rose the JM Barrie play a woman who vanishes TWICE, the second time for decades, and her child grows up without her.

The best disguise is death.

They somehow make up a story back in the UK, get Mycroft’s help with fake footage, Mary gets to ‘die’ saving Sherlock, and hence be a heroine for baby Rosie as she grows up. John and Sherlock’s really shocking row is either on purpose for verisimilitude, or even John hating Sherlock for persuading him to do it. Maybe she does get killed, later (meeting death in a slightly different place - like Samara), and he blames Sherlock.

When John keeps seeing Mary, it’s Mary in his head, representing part of his psyche, but when Mary says something like “I’m dead remember” in TLD, maybe that’s because John knows she’s alive, and has to remind himself that she’s dead. That part of TLD could work on 2 levels - John coming to terms with himself, and a not-dead Mary haunting his brain.

All thought welcome. It’s only an idea. Argue with me.

[marcespot]

John’s hallucinating while bleeding out. This is how I read the events taking place in The Final Problem; it’s all a product of John’s imagination, which explains the theme, the odd characterization, and plot holes. That’s why they dangled three Garridebs before us, because the whole episode is happening during Garridebs. Therefore, John mixes real words Sherlock might be telling him, with his unconscious dream.

This one goes to the lovely Jacky, who @waitedforgarridebs and thought she’d lot it, but she proposed the dream theory and we started to talk about it in THIS POST. A spark which blew into a flame. I am absolutely sure of this reading, because imo, as Sherlock would say, it is the only explanation of all the facts.

You can consider this a trailer (or more of a spoiler) for “The Surprise Episode” I’m sure we’re gonna get. ;)

Enjoy!

Keep reading

[pollaidh]

This is so cool, it’s @marcespot beautifully edited video showing what I wrote in my scene by scene meta http://pollaidh.tumblr.com/post/156097900846/meta-final-problem-is-johns-dying-brain - independently too. It’s the only interpretation that makes sense.