#enola johnlock

[kajaono]

Remeber Kids, this makes Enola the only current Sherlock Holmes adaptation where Johnlock could theoretically become canon… that’s so hysterical. I never thought we would end up here!

No possibility for johnlock:

Sherlock & daughter

CBS Watson

Young Sherlock

Uncertain:

True Sherlock

[sorrel-scribbles]

So since Sherlock Holmes is apparently in the public domain today (tumblr trending told me), I've got to make a post about it, and by that I mean I'm going to ramble about Enola Holmes for a hot second.

(500+ words of analysis below the break)

I am not a big Sherlock Holmes person. I don't keep up with every single adaptation. I've read a couple of the books and watched Enola Holmes, and before Enola Holmes 2, I was never a Johnlock person. Aroace Sherlock is something that's very important to me, so I don't seek out adaptations where he and Watson are implied to or do feel something for each other. It's just wasn't my cup of tea, but I didn't care if it was other people's. I just wanted a Sherlock who didn't need romance (and I still do tbh, but that's not what this post is about). That's part of the reason I watched Enola Holmes (1) and loved it. Besides Enola herself and the story (both of which I absolutely adore), we get a Sherlock who's got only his two siblings and is doing just fine (yes he needs friends, but you get the point-).

Then I watched Enola Holmes 2.

A big part of the lesson Enola learns in this movie is that she can be independent and hold her own, but it's also ok to ask for help when you need it, and to let other people in (both literally and emotionally). Some of this involves Sherlock and Edith, but mainly, it's about Tewkesbury. It's about the fact that having a person to lean on and a man who you love doesn't take away your agency or your sense of self. Enola learns this, and everything is all sparkles and sunshine for her post-case...and then they introduce Watson. The whole time I was watching the movie, I interpreted the hints being dropped about Watson to be teasers for the next movie that will hopefully be made, but then he shows up at the end of this one.

Intentionally or not, they've created a narrative parallel. There are little hints dropped throughout the movie about Enola's feelings for Tewkesbury. She's suppressing them, hard, but you can still tell. The movie also focuses on Enola and Sherlock's relationship, and how similar they actually are, to the point where Sherlock invites her to be his case-solving partner. They also tease the introduction of Watson, who anybody who knows anything about Sherlock Holmes should know is his closest ally. The movie also clearly establishes that Sherlock hasn't learned Enola's lessons yet. He still needs to find his person, and unlike the first movie, this is a role his family can't fulfill for him. Enola herself recognizes this and sets him up with Watson as a new roommate. And where does she go while all this is happening? On a date with Tewkesbury!

Call me crazy, but they're basically saying "Tewkesbury is to Enola what Watson is to Sherlock."

That sure looks to me like something romantic is being implied.

And no, this isn't me saying "Enola Holmes 3 WILL have canon Johnlock," (because, to be honest, I doubt it, and I don't want to start discourse) I'm just pointing out the narrative parallel they've established lends itself well, and that I'm not biased in pointing it out because I'm not a Johnlock shipper. I would actually like to see an "our platonic connection is just as important as your romantic one" storyline, because that's the type of Sherlock Holmes media I connect with, but they have set themselves up for a Johnlock storyline here, and I would love to see that come to pass as well.

(Enola herself should, of course, remain the main focus of the movies. Ultimately, it's about her and about women and about the Holmes family and I wouldn't want it any other way.)

[kajaono]

Will I ever not scream when Watson appears at the end of Enola Holmes 2? Probably not

[kajaono]

Himesh Patel being part of a queer Netflix project means he is at least open to film queer content

Idk why that suddenly felt relevant to me??

[kajaono]

This is actually a really interesting moment character wise. Because there is so much subtext but also foreshadowing. Sure, it is about Lady Cecily/Sweet Williams and Enola/Tewkesbury once (Both romantic btw, keep that in mind). But those are only the obvious once. “What it does to people”. Love was the reason lady Cecily was able to change the path of worker rights, Love was the reason Enola came out of her shell. But isn’t there more?

Sherlock “scoofs” at the concept of love. So obviously he will get the payback for that. He partially already did when he started to change for and because of Enola towards the end of the movie. Aka = Sherlock showing emotions, sue him! Love to his sister was the reason why he let John Watson into 221B. His sanctum. But I would go even further (Enola Holmes 3 speculations + book facts incoming)

We know that John gets kidnapped in book 3 and Sherlock has a complete breakdown. Isn’t it funny “what love does to people”? So definitly foreshadowing how the love he feels for John Watson will further change him in movie 3. (Brotherly, romantic, soulmate, doesn’t matter here)

I could go even further saying this is about the romantic love he feels for John in movie 3, but maybe that is too far fetched... or is it?

[kajaono]

Can they finally reveal the script author for enola 3 so I can start my „let John and Sherlock kiss“ campaign?!

[kajaono]

Yeah Enola can have a boyfriend but Sherlock can not even have Watson?!

[kajaono]

Holmes & Watson

Actually it should be common knowledge that Sherlock Holmes stories can not work without John Watson. Because without John Watson Sherlock Holmes would just be a weird nerdy crow solving cases. It is John Watson who makes him famous, who tells his story, who gets him away from drugs eventually.

Nevertheless we still get adaptations where John Watson is erased because he is... boring? I don’t really know to be honest. One of the most recent adaptations who also erases John Watson is ENOLA. In the Enola movies Sherlocks cases are always discussed in the press, he is a superstar... even though he has no partner who writers down his cases for him. Weird plot hole, but thats not my point today

But - even though the movies erase John Watson - they still drop a really interesting line why a Sherlock Holmes story without John Watson can never work. Sherlock offers to work together with Enola and says:

Enola rejects the offer and responds with:

But why does she rejects the offer, even though she also admits that it would be her dream to work alongside Sherlock? Yes she says “I would be always in your shadow”. But thats only half of the truth. For Enola a Holmes&Holmes relationship wouldn’t be good because she would always be in Sherlocks shadow. But what about Sherlock? Why would a Holmes&Holmes relationship bad for him? Would he really be lonley if he would work together with his sister? Sadly the show never really gives an answer to that and “only” uses this scene as a set up to introduce Watson.

Good for us CBS Elementary my beloved also had an episode with the same topic and digged a lot deeper into the question why Holmes on his own (aka Holmes&Holmes) is super hurtful for Sherlock. The episode is season 3x19 and has the glorious title “One Holmes, One Watson”

Short summary: To cope with a trauma Joan tries to turn herself into a second Holmes, to get rid of friends and emotions that can potential hurt her again: Holmes&Holmes. Sherlock realizes that this isn’t a good idea and give a beautiful and very on point summary why a Sherlock Holmes story can never work without a Watson:

But why doesn’t it work? Whats so problematic about Holmes on his own aka Holmes&Holmes? Enola sadly didn’t gave us an answer to that. But Elementary did a few scenes later:

This is why every Sherlock Holmes story needs a John Watson. Because Sherlock Holmes on his own is not complete. Sure, he is a brilliant problem solver, a lover of dogs, a chemist. But he is also anti-social, has a drug problem, has a little EQ and a fucked up night&day rythm.

John on the other hand is emphatic, nice, friendly, makes friends easily, enjoys his sleep. But he is also traumatized from the war, struggles to get back on his feets and to face his trauma.

You know the theory in greek mytholgy about the spherical humans? The spherical humans contains of two humans, fitting together perfectly, forming a round body. The gods were jealous at the humans because together the spherical humans had a really strong power. So the gods cut the spherical humans in two parts and placed the parts all over the world so they would have problems finding their fitting part again. And now every human is searching for their missing part, so they can eventually form the spherical human again and become stronger together.

John and Sherlock are a spherical human. Sure, one half can work without the other, but they are weak like this. And so is the story: weak.

You always need both of them.

This is not something I made up. It was also already written down in the ACD canon:

“It is both, or none," said he. "You may say before this gentleman anything which you may say to me." - A SCANDAL IN BOHEMIA

Of course I do not expected the Enola Holmes writers to be familar with ALL Sherlock Holmes stories (of course I do but if I say that out loud I sound like a purist again), because it is about Enola but you should at least be familar with some basic concepts/rules for the original ACD canon characters. That includes the scene above... and of course The Three Garridebs and the CAM case. Hand holding behind closed curtains!

And I honestly fear that the writers of the Enola movies have not understood yet that it is always “both or none” and only introduced John Watson because he necessary for the next storyline to come. I fear that they only know what to do with John Watson as a character when he is relevant for the story, and do not know what else to do with him... On the other hand: Sherlocks lonliness is mentioned around three times in Enola 2, so the writers do seem to be aware that Sherlock needs his Watson? But why wait until the end of Enola 2 to introduce him? Didn’t they knew where he fits into the storyline of the second movies?

Anyways: I hope that when writing the script for the third movie they slowly will become familiar with Watson as a character and slowly find out where his place is in the Enola movies. (At least I hope so, movies where they are just cold distant friends, is the most unpleasant thing to watch imo... IF we get Enola 3).

TL:DR: Don’t seperate Sherlock Holmes from John Watson