Sherlock and John are friends

 (Sherlock Meta from before S3 
by thenorwoodbuilder, tookmyskull and consultingdragoness)

thenorwoodbuilder:



So, today I’m going to push my natural vocation to play Devil’s advocate to new and unprecedented extremes - so be warned!

Now, I have to make some preliminary remarks.

If you’re masochist enough to have been reading my ramblings for some time, you perfectly know what my opinion about Sherlock’s and John’s relationship is: I stick to the  Canon, and I am firmly persuaded that both canonical Homes and Watson, AND modern Sherlock and John, are the very epitome of what a true friendship is. This is one of the two main reasons that have glued me to Sherlock Holmes since I was a child - because I’m lucky enough to know this kind of friendship (and also to know what life without this kind of friendship is), and value it above anything else, and I’m always deeply moved when I see it so well portraied in cinema or literature.

No argument could ever (and, I presume, will ever be able to) persuade me that there is or could ever be any kind of “romantic” relationship between our two heroes - by which I don’t mean that they don’t love each other deeply: friendship IS love, and, according to me, in its more selfless and noble form.

Not even the alleged (I’ve read may opinions in this sense) “exclusive” nature of John’s and Sherlock’s relationship could persuade me differently: actually, I don’t see their relationship as being so terribly exclusive, considered that John has as many girlfriends as he wants (Sherlock being a hell of a best friend to introduce them to being irrelevant, considered that this is just part of Sherlock’s annoying attitude towards mankind in general… And John’s inability to keep a girlfriend for more than eight months - this is more or less the duration of his relationship with Sarah, as we might deduce from his blog - has more to do with his personal inability to concentrate his efforts on women who appear to be “right” for him, instead of throwing himself at any good-looking and breathing thing in a skirt he casts his eyes upon, than with any “interference” on Sherlock’s part…). John also goes out with his “friends” (I would use more correct expressions, such as “significant human interactions”, but I suppose they would sound quite strange, or even rude… maybe we might call them “buddies”, however) as he pleases (in A Scandal in Belgravia we are told that he spends the occasional evening with Mike Stamford, for example, and he and Lestrade are on first name terms, so presumably they frequent each other socially, every now and then…), and Sherlock not going with him, again, has more to do with Sherlock’s scornful attitude towards “ordinary people” and “ordinary life” and “ordinary fun” (because they are “BORING”…), than with any form of possessiveness towards John.

Even when, on Christmas Eve, in A Scandal in Belgravia, Sherlock - according to Molly - “complains” about John’s decision to spend Christmas Day with his sister, I’m under the impression that he is more annoyed by the fact that John is going to voluntarily place himself (again, we might presume) in a situation in which - according to Sherlock - he’ll end up being disappointed and hurt again by his sister’s inability to really quit drinking, than by the fact that John won’t be with him on Christmas Day per se.

More generally, as I’ve already observed in some private conversations, a certain “exclusiveness” we might find in Sherlock’s and John’s friendship is basically due to the extreme rarity of this kind of true friendship: the vast majority of people don’t know more than one or two friendships of this kind during their whole lives, and not always simultaneously (and there are many people who are not so lucky as to experience this kind of friendship at all…). Only the luckiest amongst the lucky are blessed with many true friendships.

Currently, neither Sherlock, NOR John, have any other friend of this kind. So it’s perfectly logical that the bond that links them is stronger than any other relationship with other “acquaintances” they might have. And it would remain as much strong even in case one of them were lucky enough to find another person whom he’ll be able to consider a “true friend” (which would be, of course, even harder than for many people, as both Sherlock AND John appear to be extremely private and selective persons), or even when John will get - as Canon prescribes - married with Mary Morstan (around Series 4, according to me).

This kind of friendship simply is different - and complementary - to any other kind of love bond a human being can experience in his/her life.

This is my unfaltering persuasion.

And yet… - AND YET!

As I’ve told at the beginning of this long rambling, I can’t resist the temptation to play Devil’s advocate, even against myself - no, better: PARTICULARLY against myself!

And so: were I looking for evidence to support a “Johnlock theory”, I wouldn’t use feeble arguments such as “Sherlock follows John everywere”, or “Sherlock boycotts John’s dates”, or the like…

No, I would draw your attention to a very little, and yet very suggestive, fact.

At the beginning of ASiB we see the unnamed client of Sherlock entering the flat and giving Mrs. Hudson a fright by fainting in Sherlock’s and John’s kitchen. And it is at this moment that Mrs. Hudon raises her head and, looking towards the second floor, where John’s room is, yells: “Boys! You’ve got anoter one!”

So, now the intriguing question is: what were John AND SHERLOCK doing together in JOHN’S room, considering that John always keeps his computer, his bills, his… everything but clothes and very personal objects, we might presume, in the living area of the flat? And considering also that John appears to spend all his spare time in the living room, and so does Sherlock…

Were they looking at John’s collection of stamps?

Well, I’d say that there is, at least, some ground for speculation, here…



[Now, returning to my usual self, some plausible alternative explanations of Mrs. Hudson’s gesture:

1. Mrs. Hudson just suffers from arthrosis.

2. On the second floor there is not only John’s room, but also the box room where all past cases - and related relics - are filed, and Sherlock and John where actually fighting their way through that mess, in order to retrieve some document or object of significance for a new case.

3. John and Sherlock were not on the second floor, but on the roof: Sherlock wanted to hide from an unespected call from Mycroft, and just dragged John with him to better annoy his brother, as he then found an empty flat to greet him.

…Or any other explanation to the same effect you might like.]



tookmyskull:

Because I’m also a lifelong, card-carrying Devil’s Advocate, my remarks come from observing the bigger picture outside of the actual Sherlock universe.

1. Fans who are into shipping will ship anything, whether it has any in-universe validity or not. Arthur is shipped with Merlin, Dean gets shipped with Castiel (and sometimes even his own brother!) in Supernatural, canes gets shipped with scarves. As a “non-shipper,” I rather see this is as a fun game for many, while others take it very, very seriously indeed. Either way, one can wink at it or engage in it as one sees fit.

2. The Sherlock writers have repeatedly said that the show is a “vanity project” for them. A lot of what they include are just tongue-in-cheek, inside jokes, leaving me to question to what extent one can take what happens very seriously from the point of view of the show’s actual plots. They based S2 not so much on the spirit of Doyle’s Canon, but on other adaptations and parodies they liked (Rathbone’s “A Woman in Green” and “The Spider Woman” and “The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes” for example). Some of these jokes/references were handled brilliantly - others I view as experiments that, at best, didn’t quite work and at worst, were totally illogical to the actual plot and required the characters to say/do things that seemed totally out of character for them.

3. Because Sherlock is rife with inside jokes, one has to consider how Mrs. Watson was handled not only by Doyle, but by the traditional Holmes fandom pre-Sherlock, and then consider how the Sherlock writers may be playing with all of that. The original Watson was married, yes, but was constantly neglecting his duties at home to run off on an adventure with Holmes. The modern John, while not married (at least, not yet!), does the same thing to his girlfriends. Meanwhile, traditional Holmes fans (including me), while they may have viewed Mrs. Watson (Mary Morstan) with affection, did, quite frankly, find her very much in the way and secretly wished she wasn’t around, so Holmes/Watson could be a full-time team once more. Doyle finally dealt with this after he brought Holmes back from the dead by killing off poor Mary Morstan, so Watson again could live with Holmes full-time. Watson did take a mysterious second wife much later on, an act for which Holmes states he never forgave him! And, of course, there is the iconic line: “Come if convenient; if inconvenient, come all the same.” And Watson always did come (and I don’t mean that in a shipping sort of way!). In the modern version, John does the same thing.

It could be that, taking all of the above into account, the Sherlock writers are just having fun playing with the long-standing idea that, girlfriends or not, John and Sherlock are attached by the hip and their collaboration will always take precedence over any other relationship one or the other may enter into.

As for the shipping, the writers themselves cannot blame the fandom for doing it, as they certainly have made every effort to plant the idea in viewers’ minds with all of the gay baiting John and Sherlock have endured. The writers have been very contradictory and vague themselves about why they have chosen to do this. While they may insist, on the one hand, that the pair are NOT gay in their version, they also seem perfectly willing to wink at all the shipping and leave plenty of doubt in fans’ minds.

This frankly irritates me a lot, simply because I really dislike being “twitted.” If they want to create a gay version of the saga, why not? The characters have been represented in every other possible way! But why be so confusing about it? Am I really supposed to believe, for example, that Irene Adler’s pulse would go up, even though she declares herself a lesbian? Only gays and lesbians can answer this question, not me!  

consultingdragoness:

*Rubs hands together in glee, because I too get off from playing Devil’s Advocate and if you don’t know I ship it like fedex by now, what are you even doing on my blog*

So I’m pretty sure the entire bit about ‘exclusivity’ is like 99% my fault. Quick re-hash: My main argument for why they’re in a relationship vs a friendship is that a relationship is exclusive: they’re emotionally dependent on each other to the extent that John cannot keep a girlfriend because he’s too invested in Sherlock:I don’t think the reason has to do with John skirt-chasing/being otherwise incapable of commitment, as we see that it’s never for anyone but Sherlock that he rushes off/leaves his girlfriend- Sherlock comes first, regardless of anything and that’s a bit much for just a friendship. Also note that while you could argue that he just doesn’t take the time to get to know his girlfriends enough to love them in the same way, he ‘fell’ almost instantly for Sherlock. So, yes, maybe John just needs to meet the right woman, but considering the likelihood of him being able to not put Sherlock first is very much nil and that Sherlock can’t seem to keep from tearing apart his girlfriends (and it’s not like John doesn’t let it happen. Also, when Sherlock tears into them, it’s a lot more deliberate than his off-hand cruelty in deductions: it’s a bit more, um, personal?!) Anyways, it seems a bit like John’s already taken, doesn’t it? Not to mention that Irene’s insinuation that they’re in a relationship goes largely unchecked and that John stops protesting after that: he accepts it and, except for a last-ditch effort with the psychologist, he seems to decide his dating life can also take a rest. John’s perfectly capable of making friends and girlfriends if he desires to (we already know he’s pretty damn charming when he wants to be), he just chooses not to. Because he prefers Sherlock. And really, only Sherlock.

As for Sherlock, well— I don’t think he really gets the difference between friendship, love and sexual attraction at all (note the “we go on dates line” in The Blind Banker and Irene and really just everything), but he clearly depends on John and he’s never allowed himself to do that with anyone, so yes, even if it were more than friendship, I don’t think Sherlock would be the one to notice that they’re way more co-dependent than even the best of friends normally are. The only thing I can say is: if Sherlock Holmes think you’re attracted to him on your first dinner out: I mean, you probably are. He can at least read the signs of attraction, even if love is not his area.

That being said, Tookmyskull is right: if they’re just baiting us, I will personally shoot a  few holes in the wall. I think they need to commit the characters one way or another and hopefully next season will do that. If Sherlock is gay/enamored a bit with John, it actually would be far from the first portrayal of Sherlock Holmes to lean in that direction (Remember “The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes”? That was the 1970's too, if I’m not mistaken.)

Also,  I”ve ‘shipped it’ since I read ACD canon. I”m actually not going to get into a prolonged analysis on that— cleverer people with more time and more writing space have put that particular argument forth many times. Suffice to say that Sir Arthur was fairly liberal for his time and also rather good friends with Oscar Wilde, so it’s not out of the realm of possibilities that there’s some real homoerotic subtext in canon— Again, though, I’m a Holmesian, not a Victorian era scholar, which is another reason why I’m not delving into that. (Google it if you’re interested!)

It’s probably also worth it to note that my entire assumption about Johnlock is simply that they’re in a relationship, that it’s more than a friendship and that they’re ‘soulmates’. I’m not implying that it’s sexual in any way, because, frankly, I couldn’t care less. I actually think, despite Moffat’s claims to the contrary, that Sherlock is largely asexual. ACD Sherlock struck me as more likely to not actually be asexual: the Victorian era meant he could have been a number of different sexualities and simply be keeping it under wraps.

As for the Irene pulse thing: sure, she could be attracted to him, though it doesn’t have to be physical.  She could also be turned on by the danger aspect. ‘Love’ was (I really, really hope) simply Holmes being very unfamiliar with the laws of attraction vs love. You know,  I felt like at times they were trying to put forth some sort of testament to the fluidity of sexuality, but it fell a bit flat to me. I guess the implication was that we’ve had a character who’s fallen in love with Holmes despite her sexuality and that the same character then implies that John’s the same way, so yes, it’s canon that Moffatiss care about 2 cents for whatever sexuality that characters think they are, for better or for worse!

I could go on, but I think we all already know we could each write a short novel on the topic.