In the process of trying to determine Sherlock and Johnâs ages, I stumbled across the possibility that they may have a very large age gap between them
According to the Baker Street Wiki (which cites The Lying Detective for the source), Sherlockâs birthday is January 6th, 1983.
As we know, thanks to Johnâs birth certificate in The Sign of Three, John was born April 23rd, 1971.
So, in conclusion (and if this is all accurate), then Sherlock and John have an age difference of 12 years.
If this has already been talked about and I just missed it, whoops. But, having assumed they were like a few years apart canonically, Iâm still shook.
Oh interesting! I've always sort of pictured something like three to six years of difference or something so this is... new. Which also means that when they met Sherlock was getting into his thirties and John into his forties, interesting, againnnn
On the other hand, a newspaper article in ASIB lists Johnâs age. as 37, which would make his birth year 1975. Â Where in TLD is Sherlockâs birth year listed?
@bluebellofbakerstreetâ thatâs the part Iâm confused on, cos I donât recall how TLD tells us Sherlockâs birth year. I see that the birth certificate for John reflects Freemanâs birth year, so it seems odd they didnât use Benedictâs birth year, which would make them like 5 years apart (Benedict is 1976, Martin is 1971). No idea what the article in ASIB is referencing. I feel like this is just a clusterfuck of not paying attention to their dates in the show
Shoutout to @khorazirâ for observing where I did not:
khorazir
On Sherlockâs tombstone, his date of birth is 6th January 1977, which seems far more probable than him being born in the 1980s, given his odd remark towards Irene concerning the decade of her birth.
Which, thinking of his tombstone, makes me wonder how John didnât know when his birthday was for so long when he stared at that thing for TWO YEARS.
So, in conclusion, canon is faulty and @khorazirâ just Sherlockâd us all
also we do have to be mindful of how reliable is any particular source. a fan made wiki, could be highly variable, would need to cite its sources to have any trust. john's birth certificate (or his CV in TBB?) used in the show, higher probability of being accurate. a newspaper in the show, a bit less reliable (think about rl newspapers, especially if you ever read an article about something you have extensive personal knowledge of, and the reporter didn't) ACD was wonky with dates, and mofftiss are huge acd nerds, so even in show data is not 100% trustworthy. are they being Unreliable Narrators? is the scene a representation of what is "actually" happening, or a character's memory or imagination?
Hi! Once I read this omegaverse fic where both Holmes boys were Omega and John was arranged to be married to Mycroft but he falls for Sherlock instead...(poor Mycroft) but I don't remember its title ._. all I remember is that it was also part of a series. Can ya help me find it? Ty. Sorry for any inconveniences
Hey Nonny!
Oooooooh this is bugging me because I'm SURE I had a very similar ask recently asking for this fic, but cannot for the life of me find it.
swissmissing said: There's this one, but it's neither omegaverse nor part of a series: The Pull of One Magnet to Another by ellie_hell https://archiveofourown.org/works/256520
The Pull of One Magnet to Another by ellie_hell (M, 46,641 w., 12 Ch. || Alternate Universe || Arranged Marriage, Friendship, Matchmaking, Angst, Fluff, Friends to Lovers, Case Fics) â Mummy has arranged Mycroftâs marriage with an ex-army doctor. However, John meets Sherlock first, and sparks fly.
Hey Steph ! , Iâm here because after about 4 hours of searching I canât find a list or any fics related to want Iâm looking for ( I will say I do know there is some I just canât find any ) where Sherlock and John go undercover as dom! John/ sub! Sherlock or it starts off as dom!Sherlock/sub!john and john makes him switch . It just I really wanna read more of the trope where they go undercover as an dom,sub coupleďżź
If you have any that be great but if not that okay to , thank you Steph as you are truly an god ! And donât forget not to overwork your self :)
For your troubles enjoy the cute animal emojicons ďź(⧠x âŚ)ｪ(=^ ⥠^=)
Hey Lovely!
Ah, sadly I don't know which fic this is, but I'm sure the community does! If anyone knows, please let us know!
This sounds like one of my fics, although itâs ACD era. They go undercover as dom!John/sub!Sherlock, but switch halfway through at Johnâs insistence.
The Inferno Club by SwissMiss (20K, E, ACD Johnlock)
The real story behind The Adventure of the Illustrious Client.
The Inferno Club by SwissMiss (E, 20,841 w., 1 Ch. || BDSM Omegaverse AU || Alpha / Alpha, Victorian Kinks, Case Fic, Public Sex, Wax Play, Pain Play, Collars) â "I'm easy to find," said the young woman. "Hell, London, gets me every time." The real story behind The Adventure of the Illustrious Client.
Remember the I love you coffin and Mycroft saying it wasnât a name.
What if it was parts of a name?
There is a name containing the I love you letters in the Mofftiss-verse:
Captain Sokolov Yuri.
I, Sokolov Yuri.
For this captain (unnamed in Stokerâs Dracula iirc), this ghost driver (found dead with his arms tied to the wheel) they came up with a name that says I love you.
Hi there! Iâm not sure if what Iâm asking is a Johnlock fic, but if Iâm to have any hope in finding it, I thought itâd be here! I remember a fic where Sherlock gets raped in a lab at Barts by either someone visiting John (an ex-army mate) or by a police officer who has been called to help on a case. If you could help, thatâd be great, thank you! :)
Hey Nonny!
I feel like Iâve been asked about this one before but Iâm not finding it :/ Anyone able to help us out?
I´ve definitely read that but I can´t fnd it in my read fics. It was definitely a police officer who had tried to get off with Sherlock and was rejected. He took his revenge in the deserted lab at Bart´s, tying Sherlock to a lab table and assaulting him. I´ll look again, maybe I´ll find the link.
We only ever see 2 of them, they are rectangular, steel gray, with information about a person written on it, they are identical except one of them has a ball chain, the person on a mission is not supposed to take it off. Despite what we are told and shown, these arenât memory sticks, they have to be identification tags, dog tags. Rectangular so not British, more likely American (but not necessarily, most countries have rectangular ones).
Only Ajay is seen wearing it around his neck, in âTbilisiâ (or ever).
Mary looks at these two guys, one looking conveniently very much like Ajay, the other more or less her height, and decides: âwe dieâ, which probably means exchanging their IDs with these people, or only one of them, since Ajay and Mary seem to be using only one set of tags.
Ajay has the one with the chain, the one that remains with the soldierâs body for identification.
âI got out for a while. Long enough to hide my memory stick.â
Ajay never speaks of a plaster bust, only Sherlock does. He might have placed it on someone else, dead or alive.
Mary, apparently, kept the one that gets collected from the soldierâs body for notification, the one with a smaller or no chain.
If she and Ajay are actually family, she didnât even have to be inside the embassy, she could have recoverd it later.
When he finds the rectangular AGRA, Sherlock is surprised, as he expected it to be circular: âexpected a pearlâ, ie a British identification tag.
It means that the black pearl of the Borgias could be code for a British ID disk.Â
On the plane, despite her American accent, Maryâs wearing a big disk, meaning a British ID disk and asking her neighbour about âthe sunâ, code for another ID disk:Â âDid somebody hide the sun? Did you lose it in the war?â
We can only see one, is the other missing or hidden because they donât match?
After the landing though, her substitute has the complete set of ID disks
Thoughts:
I donât know why the A.G.RA tags donât have a full name on them. Maybe only the capital letters are legible for some reason, maybe in some special units the tags only indicate the initials.
A.G. can be short for Gabriel Ashdown or Garrideb Alex, both non gendered names.
Maryâs AGRA tag couldnât be destroyed in the fire in His Last Vow, a very high temperature would be required.
Sherlock is working on the impossible case of a person being in two places at the same time. This is an example of how Sherlock makes his deductions by creating a whole story to go through a chain of events, making it complicated to explain his theories before the conclusion of a case.
Series 5Â will present a realistic version of these events.
Hello!! Iâm really sorry to bother you, but I wanted to ask if you know of a fic that is in more of a list format? Like, a Johnlock character study that centers around snippets of their life together? I believe the title is kind of like â100 things I learnedâ or something? Iâm sorry if this isnât understandable, Iâm just terrible with words like that. Thank you so much! I love you and your blog and I hope youâre doing well! â¤ď¸â¤ď¸â¤ď¸
HEY NONNY!!
Iâm so sorry I missed this one!
Ahhh, Hmmm, I donât know 100% which fic youâre looking for, or if Iâve even go it for you. Hereâre the closest fics I know of to that title:
100 ways to say 'I love you' by Teatrolley (NR, 2,143 w., 1 Ch. || Slow Burn, Fluff, Domestics) â Sherlock sleeps with Johnâs body next to him, and wakes up to find him making them both toast in the kitchen with sleep still sitting in the corner of his eye, and he holds on tight to every little intimacy that John gives him; every little small moment, every little fond smile. It could be enough. Still, heâd like more. But Sherlock Holmes doesnât know how to ask for things. Luckily, John does. In which there are a hundred phrases and none of them are âI love you.â Until they are.
A Hundred Thousand Ways to Say the Name John by Jberry (E, 16,825 w., 1 Ch. || Fake Relationship, Fake Marriage, POV John, Pining John, Cruise Ship, Angst & Fluff, Case Fic) â Â John Watson and Sherlock Holmes must solve a case on a cruise ship. To get close to the crew and passengers, they must get married for the case on the Baetica. However, their relationship hits rocky seas both due to the case and internal conflicts. Part 1 of Baetica
------
Not sure if thatâs what youâre looking for though :P <3
Hi there, friendly lurker here, overcoming my shyness to thank you for your meta series. I'm really loving it. It's been a while since we've had new, meaty meta in the Sherlock fandom. It's an especially nice to have something to chew on while much stuff in the real world is (literally/figuratively) on fire. (1/2)
(2/3 - oops!) The particular contribution of this meta series that is staying with me is the idea that the meta-textuality of BBC Sherlock is overtly part of the plot - that Sherlock the character literally needs to recognize and transcend the baggage of the character's past. Other metas have recognized the metaphorical aspect in all the meta-text of the show. Your argument reminds me of the Sherlockian game original-welovethebeekeeper told us about years ago.
(3/3 - really!) The Sherlockian game makes me think something as audacious as our Sherlock character having to literally become aware of his literary past is a possibility for his character arc in this show. Doing that through EMP maybe allows the authors to thread that needle of directly addressing the longtime suppression of Holmes' queer identity (not just through symbols and metaphor) while also presenting a "real world" story that is satisfying as such. Anyway, thanks again!!!
Putting them all on one post for the sake of ease! Thank you friendly lurker - this is such an absolutely lovely message to receive. I absolutely agree with you about this - and I think that is genuinely why the show is so groundbreaking, because it addresses the elephant in the room (eyy) when it comes to Sherlock Holmes adaptations - that there is a gigantic history to contend with. Really interestingly, one of my irl friends actually talks about this a lot in relation to Doctor Who, and Steven Moffat doing a similar thing when he was showrunner in dealing with what it means to be the Doctor, and on a metatextual level to write a show that has gone on so long. Some of that I incorporated into the meta! But looking at Moffat and Gatissâs writing history, I think that kind of historicity is really interesting - but nowhere more powerful than in Sherlock Holmesâs queerness!
Anyway this was a really lovely message to receive! I hope youâre doing well and have a wonderful Christmas if you celebrate it!
@thewatsonbeekeepers I hope itâs okay to take this post to ask this, but has it been thoroughly discussed before wether BBC Sherlock needs to be more realistic at some point in a future season? Because thatâs the question I keep coming back to. As much as I love the idea of Sherlock recognizing his identity as a fictional character thatâs been trapped in âwrongâ adaptions, I keep asking myself wether we have to leave this âcagedâ narrative of mirrors and metaphors etc. eventually. I mean, Mofftiss can do whatever they want to, but itâs not just Sherlock that needs to embrace his true identity but the audience needs to recognize this as well. And I donât see that happening in a narrative that relies so heavily on sub- and metatext. So in my opinion the narrative has to create some kind of reality at some point. Because even before S3 or S4 the narration relied on subtext that wasnât available for the general audience, only for people who knew queer subtext or who invested time to learn it. So either you have to change the style of the show to be more realistic, create some kind of real identity for Sherlock and John, make them more relatable OR you keep up the style of the show but town down the sub- and metatext again (like S1 and S2) and risk not reaching the part of the audience you should reach with the kind of message you want to convey. But maybe there is a different approach possible that I donât know of that initiates a process of reflection within the audience without having to explain the sub- and metatext at some point.
Sorry, I wish I wouldâve started watching the show back when I was still a student, because now there is no one I can discuss this with and it just bothers me so much. And my âreal lifeâ friends donât get what Iâm talking about at all, so thatâs what I mean with the âgeneral audienceâ not recognizing the sub- and metatext.
@lukessenseâ I think for those of us who like s4 and are still in tjlc, this has to be a major sticking point, right? Because much as I do like s4 and think it does a lot of clever stuff, the fact remains that it was unpopular, difficult to parse, and drove away huge numbers of fans. Before s4 aired (and right up until the lost special tbh) people were rolling on this idea of âyou were told but you didnât listenâ that the writers kept saying, and which is a common theme in the whole series - when the answer to the mystery is revealed you go oh god that makes so much sense! And so we thought TAB was just a bit of fun thrown in for us and the rest would be realism - and of course we were wrong.
Much as I love the metatextual stuff, I think youâre absolutely right that the show isnât doing the job it needs to in that sense. My main concern here is that the show started out very realistically, and lured people into the very messy world we now have. I always refer back to David Lynch, who did this in his two most popular works, Mulholland Drive and Twin Peaks, which start out as a thriller and a soap respectively and turn into pure unadulterated weirdness by the end. People often cite these as great examples of shows/films that probe the subconscious etc. - but what they fail to mention is that TP in particular lost huge numbers of viewers the weirder it got. (It has since become a cult classic, which I guess we can dream of.) Thatâs fine if thatâs the kind of show youâre making, but Sherlock has a really important cultural message that needs to reach more people than that. So yeah - if we get a s5 (imagine!) I agree, it needs to go straight back into the real world whilst doing enough explaining of the weirdness so that people donât think itâs just a deus ex machina.Â
Incidentally, one of the ways people thought johnlock would happen was through a deduction scene - myself included, and I still stand by this as a brilliant execution, that Sherlock would do a big olâ deduction like the show is famous for but on Johnâs feelings for him, so the audience could experience the whole âyou were told but you didnât listen thingâ and realise theyâd missed the larger mystery of the show. I cannot think of a better johnlock realisation to be honest.
In the end theyâll have to deal with the characterâs queerness on a realistic level. Itâs the story of a detective: it will have to be done through a case.
A simple way would be through the adaptation of the Yellow Face which has already been foreshadowed with the smiley and the word Norbury and Johnâs line in TST which is a quote from the Yellow Face: âI am not a very good man, Effie, but I think that I am a better one than you have given me credit for being.â
Todayâs equivalent of the mixed race child kept a secret for fear of negative reactions would be a closeted LGBT+ couple raising a child, possibly someone trans keeping the secret from their partner.
Itâs canon that Watson loves to think of the conclusion of this case (the second husbandâs loving response) and that Holmes talked briefly about the case late that night (the Norbury request) when turning away for his bedroom. Wouldnât that be a perfect opportunity to show them as a couple, going into the bedroom together? Didnât Moffat or Gatiss say something like that in an early interview?
These are my expectations for series 5, episode 3: Garridebs and Yellow Face.
ooh, i remember this from when i was a lurker!! wonderful to see it again and get to rb it this time! <3
wow, that âhaloâ around sherlock in his intro shot, i never noticed before that itâs a SQUARE! as per @just-sort-of-happened âs metas about circles and squares, it makes sense that sherlock in the beginning before he has even met john, has the ultra-logical square halo of reason. wow.
Woould stand to reason that this means that CAM has access to Ellaâs notes, just like Mycroft (which furthers M-Theory claims imo @loudest-subtext-in-tvâ)
@gosherlockedââ (because I found a post by you about this bust)Â @sarahthecoatââ wdyt?
hmm! well, the first thing i would do, would be to review @sagestreet âs metas about the sculptures in sherlock. i am pretty sure the one in CAMâs mind palace is discussed, not sure about the one in ellaâs office, off the top of my head.
They are not the same busts, the one in Ellaâs office is la fille aux nattes (girl with braids) also known as la boudeuse (sulking girl), she kind of reminds me of young Eurus. The one in CAMâs vaults is known as the Dancer.
The archers from the Chinese Terracotta Army kneel with right leg and squat with left leg. Oddly, the one on the mantelpiece of 221B is reversed, kneeling on his left leg.
Could it be a sign of early extended mind palace?
Kneeling archer from a museum:
The escape room recently posted a picture of their kneeling archer and he is like the real ones, not like the one on the show.
Bonus: John doing the kneeling archer pose in ASIP, kneeling on the same knee as the one on their mantelpiece.
What if âMiss Meâ doesnât actually mean what we think it does, in the context of ânotice or feel the loss or absence of â, but is actually supposed to be the opposite - did you miss me, did you fail to notice me, to connect the dots about me.
Think about who asks that question throughout S3 and S4Â - Moriarty, Mary (in her posthumous video messages) and even Mycroft in TAB (âso, did you?â).
âMissingâ is a contranym, after all, one word with two opposite meanings.
Was this speculated about before?
tags under the cut, let me know if youâre not interested in being tagged:
Reblogging for the great additions. And here are two of mine:Â
Sherlock poses the question as well, in TAB when waking up in the plane: âMiss me?âÂ
And I also felt reminded of Mycroft and John in ASiP: âYouâre not haunted by the war, Doctor Watson ⌠you miss it.â Of course this only applies to meaning no. 1 but it feels important because John missing the war = missing Sherlock (who takes him to the battlefield).
Exactly, @gosherlocked And Mycroft also says thatâs âa war we must loseâ, doesnât he? How does the saying go? ⌠sex is a battle, love is war ⌠:)))
1. Did you miss me? As in: did you miss the mark when you shot me?
Moriarty said it, to noone in particular.
Sherlock said it in TAB, to John apparently but Mary wasnât far.
Mary wrote it on a dvd meant for Sherlock.
All three were shot. Is it a way of telling the shooter that he or she didnât hit the target and that they are in fact alive?
(Mycroft in TAB says âdo you miss himâ, not quite the same.)
2. Other possible meaning: MISS ME as an incomplete name on a tag:
Someoneâs initials: Miss Mary Elizabeth Morstan (as seen on the wedding invitation), Miss Mohindra Eshan (Ajayâs other name in TST but Eshan can be a girlâs name), or part of a name: Miss Meena (mentioned on Mollyâs blog), Miss Emelia Ricoletti.
jbbartram-illu
gummygunk
romaincrisis
stormborns
titsay
