Here’s what happened: 

Mike Stamford made friendly conversation with Sherlock in the lab, asking how he was getting on, etc. Sherlock mentioned he had moved to central London. 

“Oh really?” Mike said, “How’s the new place?” 

“It’s fine, nice enough rooms.”

“Rooms? You get a flatmate?”

“Ha. No. I would be a difficult man to find a flatmate for.”

So yesterday I was reading @silentauroriamthereal‘s Best of Three, again (it’s a really good story!). And I realised that the John in that story is pretty much a total dick. He’s incredibly patronising and self-congratulatory about being such a wonderful friend to Sherlock etc etc etc, all the while being actually unimaginably cruel to Sherlock.

And I left a comment to the effect that I loved the story but hated John, and she very kindly replied that she thought it was pretty in character and I had this absolute oh my god moment because she’s bloody right, isn’t she?

And somewhere between Season 4 and Best of Three and SilentAuror’s comment, I think the scales sort of fell from my eyes with regards to John and the show. It’s not that Season 4 ruined John. Season 4 was the logical continuation of where they had taken the character, arguably from the second episode. Go back and look at the way John talks about and treats Sherlock, all the way back to TBB. Try to reconcile the way John talks to and about Sherlock with the way Watson talks to and about Holmes.

Season 4 John is not out of character. Not for BBC John. It’s extreme, but it’s not actually out of character. We think it is, but I think that we have good reason for that. In my specific case, I knew and loved the canon long before BBC Sherlock came on the scene. I know Watson, and I know how he feels about Holmes. So when John acted the way he did in Season 4, I thought it was awful, and terrible, and it came as a shock to me. Before Season 4, when John acted in ways that Watson would not have, I was like “well, maybe he’s just having a bad day’, but Season 4 made me realise that Watson hasn’t been having bad days, Watson has never been here at all.

We think that John is better and wiser and kinder than he is because we spend more time with the wiser, kinder versions of John Watson that we see in the canon and in fanfiction. We’ve been blinded by those Watsons to the truth of John’s character in the show.

And that leads me to another conclusion. BBC’s John doesn’t love Sherlock. We think he does, because Watson loves Holmes, and whether you think that it’s platonic or romantic or sexual or whatever, you can’t deny that there is love there, but John? He doesn’t love Sherlock.

I think he wants Sherlock. I think he’s addicted to Sherlock. To the cases and the life they lead and the danger and all of it. And I think that, like any addict, he hates Sherlock and everything that comes with him, and hates that he needs him. And that’s why the morgue scene happens. Because John, unlike practically every other Watson in history, does not love Sherlock Holmes. Because John wishes that he had never met him and wishes that he could live without him, and knows that as long as Sherlock is alive, he will never, ever be able to leave him for good.

Which means that yes, they really did do TPLoSH all over again, with a gay Holmes desperately in love with Watson, who doesn’t love him back. Except they dialled it up to 11, because everything has to be bigger and louder and hurt more, and instead of a straight Watson who still loves his Holmes, they have given us a John Watson of ambiguous sexuality who not only does not love Sherlock, but actively despises him.

I have great respect for the BBC, commissioner of a large number of shows that I very much enjoy. I have great respect for Mark Gatiss and for Steven Moffat, both of them writers I admire who created something I love. 

But I do not care what they say about how I interpret the story they created and broadcast. And frankly I am aware that they don’t really care how I interpret it either, and they don’t mind that I share my interpretations with other fans. Steven Moffat on Sherlock fanfiction:

This, for me, is all the respect I require from the BBC, from Mark Gatiss, from Steven Moffat, from Sue Vertue, or from anyone else. I do not require any of them to endorse or confirm my perspective or my interpretation of their story. I do not require any of them to agree with me, tell me I’m right, or proceed to create and broadcast a story that would be most satisfying or in keeping with my interpretation. 

I only want the freedom to interpret the story as I see fit, to elaborate on it if I want to, and to be allowed to do so publicly and freely.

OK, one other thing because this is deadly serious.

We’re seeing various posts about young people calling suicide lines etc because tjlc didn’t happen.

If you are an adult and you encouraged teenagers to invest in this *barefaced drivel* you need to look at yourself a little. It only takes a basic understanding of the world to realise that powerful mainstream male British media creators were never going to shape their commercial project around the dreams of young, queer, mostly-American fans. However fair or unfair it is, it’s starkly obvious. And then they told us outright, time and again.

Investing yourself in fandom? AWESOME! Shipping? AWESOME. But encouraging dogmatic belief is almost never a cool thing to do. I’m not saying this to hurt people who are hurting. I am genuinely sorry for your pain. But it didn’t have to be this way – it didn’t have to hurt so many people so much.

IMO, what happened here was an impressive and spontaneous attempt to engage in academic-style textual analysis – but crucially it missed the checks and balances stage: the peer review. That’s the part where you ask for wide input on your reading, where you consider the critiques, and incorporate them into your revised argument in order to make it stronger and more valid. It is ESSENTIAL. It hurts and it’s hard, but it is necessary. Fandom is so instant and so insular that peer review is easy to avoid. “Don’t like it? Block me!” I’m as guilty of that as anyone. But wow, in this case it has been dangerous. That’s something for all of us to think about and reflect on.