How BBC Sherlock defines the antithesis of Sherlock Holmes
There are a lot of reasons why you might say that S4 is the antithesis of Sherlock Holmes. You might also say that none of those reasons inspire you to believe that grievous wrong was done just so that it might be righted in the next series.
You might say S4 felt less like an argument and more like a load of nonsense.
But, if we can find the pattern within the apparent nonsense of S4, and if we can decode the argument contained within that pattern, we can:
be far more confident in our assumption that they are following Yorke’s model, with all its implications for symmetry, fractal structure, and most crucially, how S5 will ‘synthesize’ and resolve the previous four, and
be equally confident in our interpretation of what the argument of the show is, because we have identified it on the deepest structural level possible.
In other words: successfully decrypting a code (the show) confirms both the cipher (Yorke’s book) and the message (TJLC).
So. Is the show really making an intelligible argument within this framework? What does the show say are the two opposites? What is the message?
What is the antithesis of Sherlock Holmes? How exactly has everyone been getting it wrong?
there I was, hoping and asking that the scripts would be released and emerge some day, and then suddenly they indeed appear. not all of them, but still. thank you, universe, or whoever released them.
On the one hand don’t give up after three. But on the other, much stronger hand with multiple callouses, I have a right to be fucking fuming at this queerbaiting and I will not simply forgive them for this if they happen to release another episode which makes a sense of this shitshow.
The heartbroken John theme actually does play, but only in the bit at the end when Sherlock goes to ask if he can help, and Molly tells him John would rather have anyone other than him. And it ends when Mary says Save John Watson, so there’s more evidence to the that being a threat.
Mary. She obviously knew she was going to die. So she died in a way that would make her death count. WE’VE SEEN THIS BEFORE.
And remember what Sherlock couldn’t figure out about the Carmichael murder? Why would Lady Carmichael involve Sherlock in a murder that she intended to commit?
And when Eustace died, do you remember what Lady Carmichael (the apparent murderer) said? “You promised to keep him safe, you promised!” Just like John said in the shark tunnel. But Lady Carmichael’s was an act.
THE ENTIRE CARMICHAEL CASE WAS FORESHADOWING FOR SERIES 4.
John is involved in this, somehow.
If we’re getting reichenbach parallels, it might just be that John is having to destroy Sherlock by going along with Mary/Moriarty’s plans in order to keep him safe in the long run.
THERE IS SO MUCH MORE TO THIS THAN MEETS THE EYE.
Exactly. It’s hugely important that we don’t always see things from John’s pov anymore. It means he can hide things from Sherlock and so also us the viewers. And we know John is pretty damn smart.
failed2be-chill 