#study in subtext

[221beemine]

@skulls-and-tea you are stripping cinema down to its elements faster than I can read it halp

[jokersrevenge]

ok, so looking back at ASIB, when they are at the palace and Watson is all “fighting an impulse to steal an ashtray”  And then Sherlock acts on that impulse and steals the ashtray.  For John, he follows an impulse instigated by John.  Fast foward to the green house scene.  “surely you must have impulses”

[henoda4]

"Johnlock isn't really canon."

"Johnlock?"

"Yes, Johnlock. Definitely not canon, didn't you hear me?"

"I always hear Johnlock when they're speaking, but it's usually subtext."

[tiger-in-the-flightdeck]

I was wondering: will you someday continue your Study in Subtext?

Once I stop being a completely lazy little shit, yes. My big problem is deciding the order to write them in. Half of me wants to go in publication order, the other half wants to eat a cheeseburger and listen to Jeremy Brett giggle excitedly.

[tiger-in-the-flightdeck]

benadrylcumberslut answered your question: I’m in the mood to work on another essay for my...

The problem of thor bridge, or perhaps The adventure of the yellow face, any way, i’ll read anything you write with joy (:

Fssshhhhkks. The Problem of Thor Bridge is one of my favourite pieces, when it comes to citing johnlock subtext. It's hardly even subtext. It's up there on level with Charles Augustus Milverton, and Three Garridebs. 

[tiger-in-the-flightdeck]

I'm in the mood to work on another essay for my Study In Subtext series. The problem is, I want to do all of them at the same time. So, if you are interested in reading them, please send me a Sherlock Holmes Canon story that you would like me to analyse. 

My current pieces so far:

A Scandal In Bohemia

Response To An Anti-Johnlock Hate Sender (Not really an essay, but I worked hard on it!)

It's my hope to get to all of the stories, I just need someone to push me into doing it! So, which story are you interested in me working on?

[tiger-in-the-flightdeck]

Hi. Part one of my message: I just wanted to bring up something that's kind of been bothering me ever since I saw your reply to that anon who rejected the notion of John and Sherlock as a homosexual couple. Whilst I heartily applaud you for standing up to his/her bigotry (I really do want to make it clear now that I have absolutely no problem with people shipping John and Sherlock – in fact, I sometimes do myself), I do think there's a danger to what you were saying.

I have no idea when you sent these, and I’m only going to reply to the first one, so I’m sorry to anyone else who reads them and is incredibly confused by my response.

Okay. Here’s the thing. 

I personally believe that Sherlock Holmes and John Watson were in a long term (*coughfortyplusyearscough*) loving, stable (mostly…) relationship with one another. I believe that Sherlock Holmes was homosexual- he showed no interest in women, and often showed interest in men. I believe that John Watson was bisexual- he showed equal interest in men and women. Yes, I am fully aware that there are many other sexualities that have those same characteristics. There are days when I think that Holmes was possibly asexual while being homoromantic. Or even homosensual. The reason I have trouble completely believing that Holmes was asexual is the fact that he was such a sensual person, particularly with Watson.  

If you ever want a practically ideal example of Sherlock Holmes, and an actor who seems to represent his sexuality perfectly, watch Jeremy Brett. You will never find a better Holmes. Like some Whovians have ‘their Doctor’ Brett will always be ‘my Holmes.’

Anyway, I’m digressing a bit. I tailored my ‘argument’ towards that person with those thoughts in mind. I completely agree that men (and women. Why do people always forget about them in these arguments?) can be physically close and intimate with one another, without being in a romantic or sexual relationship. Just as a man and woman can. I used to hold hands, cuddle, and run my fingers through the hair of my close friends, without there being sex or romance, and they did the same. 

However. That was not my point of view, when discussing that. I began with a starting point: My personal theory that Holmes and Watson were a sexual and romantic couple. From there I brought out my analysis. 

Allow me to put forth an example:

When I joined up in January, 1901–just two years ago–young Godfrey Emsworth had joined the same squadron. He was Colonel Emsworth’s only son– Emsworth, the Crimean V. C.–and he had the fighting blood in him, so it is no wonder he volunteered. There was not a finer lad in the regiment. We formed a friendship–the sort of friendship which can only be made when one lives the same life and shares the same joys and sorrows. He was my mate–and that means a good deal in the Army. We took the rough and the smooth together for a year of hard fighting.

The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier

This is one of my favourite stories, and it is one of the many ones that has a very strong homoromantic subtext running through the story. Despite the fact that Watson doesn’t make an appearance, I find this to be one of the strongest ‘hints’ of their relationship. Read the story, to understand, because I could be here for hours talking about it. 

This passage above can be interpreted in several different ways. And that is one of the joys of stories. Two people can read it in two entirely opposed voices. One person- such as myself- can read it as a not so subtle confession of a relationship. Others can read it as one man just missing his pal. 

And you know what? That’s great! I don’t care that people have different views than me. The world would be disgustingly boring, if everyone felt the same way. There would be nothing to talk about. I personally have people on my dash, even my “I will follow them to the ends of forever” that like or ship things that fill me with a seething passionate rage. It’s just when people go about attacking people for literally no reason that I get upset. Not once in my time here on this site, have I complained vocally about the things I don’t like. I’ve never said someone was (insert slur here) for shipping, or not shipping something. So when people do it to me, I lose my cool. It takes me a long time, but as I said with that response, that was the most polite example of shipping/johnlock hate that I have received.

One final point. I was not talking about John and Sherlock in my argument. At all. I ship BBC johnlock, but I see them in a completely different light from Watson and Holmes. I see John as being heterosexual, but in love with Sherlock for the very simple reason that he is Sherlock. I think he would be in love with him, whether he was a man, or woman, or neutral. I think that Sherlock is asexual(I also think that he is a Sub, but that’s another argument for another day.) At the point we are in the series, I don’t think he realises that he is in love with John. I actually don’t think either of them realise exactly how they feel.

I am interested to see how it works in the next season. In the stories, Watson spends the Great Hiatus sharing Holmes with the world through his writing, which kept him deeply in love. Then after he returned, he had ten years of getting to keep Holmes all to himself. I wonder how those feelings will survive on the show, where John hasn’t had those same options (as far as we know). 

[tiger-in-the-flightdeck]

I finally dug my Baring-Gould out of their boxes. Which means I am doing a re-read of the Sherlock Holmes Canon. Which also means that I am opening up for requests for which story I will focus on for my next Study In Subtext essay. 

So, weight in, my lovelies! Which Sherlock Holmes story do you want me to examine for subtextual clues and evidence of the relationship between Watson and Holmes?