So – I’ve meant this for a longer meta but simply will never have the time. I googled Rose of the World because it seemed to be called out. Molly mentioning it in English – very deliberately. Rose of the World – It’s a cult. A Russian cult. A Russian cult that reprogrammed people using Mary-style gaslighting- type techniques and browbeating. A Russian cult wherein two semi-famous Russian models commit suicide by jumping off buildings – and it was alleged that neither was particularly suicidal prior to the jump off. I’ll leave you to your deductions.
*Edit: Also the Russian Model was nicknamed “Russian Rapunzel”
Another “Rose of the World” was a1918 film – here’s the synopsis (emphasis mine):
As described in a film magazine,[4] Captain Harry English (Standing) is reported to have been killed during a battle between factions in India and his wife Rosamond (Ferguson) remarries. As time passes Rosamond finds that her love for her deceased husband is greater than her love for the older man that she has married, Sir Arthur Gerardine (Handyside). She goes to live at Harry’s old house and there breaks down and tells her husband the truth. She becomes ill and in her ravings asks for Harry. Harry (the Husband), who was not killed, learns that his wife has remarried and, disguised as an Indian, becomes secretary to Rosamond’s husband. He comes to her at a peak psychological moment and, after the shock wears off, they are reunited.
reblogging for another interesting “Rose of the World” reference.
“becomes a secretary to Rosamond’s husband”…well, secretaries know everything – don’t they?
There are several threads that I’ve been pulling recently, but they all seem to want to snag on the same knot. I’m not certain that once they’ve unravelled we won’t just find more gaping holes instead of a finely woven tapestry, but since, we’ve nothing but time on our hands for the forseeable future, I thought, what the hell? So let’s see where this all goes and if any of it makes sense- or even matters once it’s all said and done. 🙂
*Full disclosure (though I don’t know how anyone in fandom can’t know this at this point because I’m pretty vocal about it): I’m an EMPer. I believe Mary shot Sherlock and that he hasn’t regained consciousness since and that S4 is merely the continuation of TAB- the Victorian personas in the modern age, since Sherlock clearly isn’t awake yet at the end of TAB.
Not sure how much of this will be EMP-based, but just wanted to give a head’s up, in case that isn’t your jam and you can just skip this post altogether.
Okay. Here we go!
Lady Carmichael
Did not kill Sir Edwin.
This is my first bone of contention that I see in fandom a lot. I see so many posts that take it as gospel that Lady Carmichael did, in fact, kill her husband. But, that just can’t be the case, because as Moriarty says-
The argument can be made that Sir Eustace and Lady Carmichael are the stand-ins for a whole list of different people within the show. At any given moment they can represent:
John and Sherlock
John and Mary
Lord and Lady Smallwood
Mrs Hudson and Frank Hudson
Talk about confusing, I know. It makes my head hurt, tbh.
There is one fact that is a certainty- Sir Eustace was killed. But, that it was at the hands of a group of women- which we are wrongly lead to believe was headed by Lady Carmichael- treated badly by the men in their lives, is more than I can accept. Yeah. there’s a few dudes I wouldn’t mind getting rid of, but I’m not going to join some group of conspirators in order to do it.
Sherlock had it right when he spoke to Lestrade-
Of course I solved it. It’s perfectly simple. The incident of the mysterious Mrs Ricoletti, the killer from beyond the grave has been widely reported int he popular press. Now people are disguising their own dull little murders as the work of a ghost to confuse the impossibly imbecilic Scotland Yard.
First instincts are usually correct, and Sherlock knows that.
The murder of Sir Eustace did not follow the usual MO of the ‘bride’, (the league of furies)–
Murdered in their own homes, rice on the floor, like at a wedding, and the word YOU written in blood on the wall
There was none of that when they found Sir Eustace-
Sir Eustace’s stab wound was a mirror image of Sherlock’s gun shot wound. Imagine that.
And, it wasn’t Lady Carmichael. Not only because Moriarty told us it wasn’t her, that it was ridiculous that it would be her (this is Sherlock’s mind telling him, so he knows he got it wrong) but also because, why would she go to Sherlock to prevent a murder she was going to commit?
(Just as Mary didn’t go to Sherlock for a murder she did plan to commit, hm.)
The Bride killed Sir Edwin (and Sherlock), it’s true. But she was not a member of a ‘league of furies’. There was nothing ‘honorable’ about what she did. Each time we see the Bride that isn’t Emilia Ricoletti, two very peculiar things happen-
We get the villain head tilt a la Mary, and their voice is disguised.
In the case of the Bride that warns Sir Eustace in the maze, if that were Janine or Molly, why disguise the voice? At this point, it’s almost certain that Emilia was dead and we are supposed to believe this is one of the women conspirator’s come to threaten (which was never mentioned as part of the other Bride murders, fyi) So, the voice didn’t matter because Sir Eustace wouldn’t have recognised it, but- we would have? And then, in the hallway, as Watson waits and is scared by the ghost bride*, the voice is once more disguised. Again, why? Watson certainly wouldn’t have recognised Molly or Janine’s voice. But, guess who’s voice he would have. Mary.
(*coming back to Watson here, later)
The bride stabbed Sir Eustace, just as Mary shot Sherlock.
Sherlock got it wrong. Moriarty told him, it’s his downfall, always. He wants everything to be clever. And that’s what he tried to do with this scenario. When he ‘found’ the “Miss me?” note attached to Sir Eustace’s dead body, that’s when his mind made the connection between Mary and Moriarty. What do we say about coincidence? But, his mind revolts and is tearing itself apart because he cannot accept this truth-
Thank you for this @monikakrasnorada – I was just thinking about Magnussen yesterday again, too… which always give me the creeps. Ewwww.
Anyway.
There’s some yucky mirroring happening between Magnussen/Janine and Sherlock/John – both Magnussen and Sherlock are in the business of knowing things that others don’t (probably the reason for the duel-mp), while Janine and John are both the P.A. and likely provided “cover stories” at some point. But Janine, in a way, replaced John in HLV, as her “cover stories” in the papers for Sherlock would seem to imply a call-back to those of TRF.
Magnussen to Sherlock, I believe, is similar to Culverton-Smith-Jeff-Hope to John. “A deal with the devil,” Sherlock said of Magnussen in HLV. I’m still wondering what he meant precisely because canon-Holmes said this in The Six Napoleons:
“The Press, Watson, is a most valuable institution, if you only know how to use it.”
A story where Holmes smashed the Napoleon bust to retrieve the Black Pearl of the Borgias, while Sherlock shot Magnussen in the head to prevent Mary Watson’s secrets becoming public. John, Mycroft, and a SWAT team watched while Sherlock’s crime was caught on surveillance cameras; but when John shot Jeff Hope, no one saw it saved for Sherlock’s deduction (while Sherlock sort of helped with speeding up the process with a foot on Hope’s wound). In a twisted way, Hope and Magnussen are both… metaphorical suicides, and Mycroft Holmes happened to be present at both scenes of the crime as well. Which makes Culverton Smith a very interesting villain – his own confession killed his role as the “serial killer”; the more he talked to people, the more he killed “himself.” H. H. Holmes – I don’t think the name-drop and parallel is a coincidence – Sherlock Holmes, Mycroft Holmes, and John H. Watson somehow make one serial killer from the America? Is it simply paying homage to ACD’s pre-Sherlock Holmes story: The American’s Tale? Or, are we back to the original story of Jefferson Hope in A Study in Scarlet – a missing wedding ring and love forever lost?
Regardless, Mary sticks out like a sore thumb in the middle of it all; her identity seemed to solely dependant upon who she’s being associated with – we know plenty about the different roles she played, but we still have no idea who she is exactly. However, the fact that “the myth of Mary Watson” was killed by a bullet from Norbury’s gun is canon compliant, based on the subtext of The Adventure of the Yellow Face. But that’s only two facades down (Morstan and Watson)… I hate to say it, but we probably haven’t seen the last of the woman we know as Mary Watson just yet. Her Gabrielle Ashdown identity… I wonder if it’s to do with the Archangel Gabriel statue at the cemetery in TAB, because, Lady Carmichael.
Lady Carmichael, I think, is partially based on Lady Brackenstall in ACD’s The Adventure of the Abbey Grange (Lady Brackenstall, Lady Bracknell… I mean……), and in Sherlock, she’s being connected with Irene Adler, Moriarty, a modern day (gay) pilot, and later in TLD, as Sherlock himself in the morgue (Lady Brakenstall bears marks of physical abuse from her husband Sir Eustace Brakenstall). Carmichael – friend of Saint Michael the Archangel – depends on the role religion plays in one’s life, it could mean salvation or prosecution, which has been an underlying theme in Sherlock (many stories in ACD canon did as well, even though not overtly). Could that be the reason Mary narrates the end of TFP? As Archangel Gabriel, a messenger of God?
But! Since “Big G” is not limited to the organized religion variety…… how does that affect Janine/Mary combination? Janine was literally dancing with the elephant in the room during TSoT 👀 👀 👀
Sorry I rambled on and on (again)!! And as you know, I don’t usually dwell on the topic of mind palace/bungalow much (or brain-attic, as canon-Holmes calls it); because cinema is such a different medium from literature and with its omniscient camera pov, you can get away with a lot of ambiguity – hence, anything is possible. But whatever the differences I don’t think they prevent us from trying to unravel the same puzzle together? I hope you don’t mind that my comments usually fall outside of the emp framework!! 😉
I really don’t think that Sherlock “woke up” the first time we see the modern scene in TAB. Imho, he goes a level down, not up. Like, I know that this stuff is nearly two years old, but let me sum it up, for posterity. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am making it too complicated but anyway, this is how I see those scenes.
What happens here in this scene? Holmes takes cocaine. This is Holmes inside the 21st century!Sherlock’s mind, and in this scene and do forgive me for saying this…
He goes deeper into himself. He has a conversation with Moriarty….
Then the MP begins to fall apart. The Elephant falls (does not shatter though)
Sherlock eventually falls into his chair
Aaaand wakes up. Or does he? Yeah… no, I don’t think.
And why? Because:
First of all, why does he, completely randomly start speaking in Watson’s voice? I think it’s because this scene is a part of the fantasy Holmes has after he takes cocaine. The scene with Moriarty and the first plane scene are Holmes’ cocaine-induced fantasy.
And proof? Holmes talking about a jet in the scene where Watson finds him on the floor. Interestingly enough, he only mentions that John and Mycroft were there with him, not Mary. But that’s just a side note. If I have to make it complicated, the first plane scene is, basically, Sherlock inside Holmes’ mind inside Sherlock’s mind. Though it really isn’t THAT complicated, it’s similar to Inception, they have their own rules though.
And, I already talked about this bit yesterday, so…
He’s drugged in this scene and momentarily, he has lost control again. He doesn’t know if he is awake or not, not anymore. Modern world?
Must be the reality, except… it isn’t. And again, why would it be? This is exactly the same thing that happened the first time before we switched to the modern world. Moriarty appears out of nowhere and Holmes all of a sudden starts losing it and “waking up” and the victorian world becomes the modern world, but, as demonstrated in the graveyard scene, being in a modern world does NOT mean that it is the reality.
The skeleton attacks Sherlock and poof, scene cut. The Waterfall. But this scene has nothing to do with any other scene in TAB. One would think that because Watson and Holmes are acting like a cross between the victorian and modern versions of themselves, that we’re on the edge of MP, ready to dive back into the reality. But, that is not quite true. I mean, alright, Watson kicks Moriarty off the cliff, Holmes jumps and…
…viola, the 21st century Sherlock awakes.
Or so we’re led to think. Remember what I said about the first plane scene? It’s a part of Holmes’ cocaine-induced fantasy. So, what does that mean? What about this scene? Well, I believe, that this scene and therefor all of these scenes as well
Are Holmes’ fantasies as well, and, like I said, it starts here, again, with Moriarty appearing out of nowhere:
And why do I think that? Because of the actual last scene of TAB. The ending is – Watson and Holmes sitting in their chairs. Talking about the case that, in their “world” happened, most probably, a couple of days prior to that. Hard to tell since Watson is wearing different clothes but Holmes isn’t. Also, they talk about the 7% solution and Holmes’ take on the modern world, things they, again talked about sooner which means that only a short time must have passed since it feels like they are continuing a conversation.
These are not the Holmes and Watson who have fought with Moriarty in the waterfall scene. These are the Holmes and Watson we last saw in this scene:
Holmes and Watson from the universe where this and everything after that did not happen:
This next part might sound like a stretch and I don’t really have any proof for that, it’s just an assumption. Holmes must have sort of “blacked out” for a moment during the scene in the catacombs, like, he was still drugged after all. So, he experiences a blizzard of bizarre fantasies, that end with this:
And that’s it. It’s where it ends, after the car drives off, he comes back to himself, they go back home, few days pass and he and Watson end in front of the fireplace. I mean, sitting. But, like I said I am not really sure about this part, if anything it’s just an assumption, might as well be just a headcanon of some sort.
You could argue that in this last modern scene of TAB Sherlock says “I know exactly what he’s going to do next” and since Lady Smallwood repeats the line in the beginning of TST then that means these scenes are definitely related and the last properly modern TAB scene must be real, except… first you must ask, why EVEN would Lady Smallwood know what Sherlock said there on the tarmac? And also, why did Mycroft stay behind in TAB? Why didn’t they go straight to Lady Smallwood to solve the problem immediately, since it was a matter of national importance? It’s clear, from the way everyone is dressed in TST, that it is a completely different day. Plus, Sherlock suddenly has a twitter. And also, like many other people pointed out too, since Sherlock tears apart The List from modern scene #1 in modern scene #3 then that can only mean, that neither scene #3 is real.
And, imho, it’s neither what precedes TST. TST is not the continuation of the last modern scene of TAB. Imho, it’s what follows after THIS happens in TAB.
It’s what happens after Holmes, once again, “goes deeper into himself”, this time, however, I am not sure if voluntarily or not. Either way, it explains all the TAB references in S4, Mary’s “my darling, John“, it, explains, pretty much everything. And like I once mentioned already, I think that S4 might as well be: Sherlock inside Holmes’ mind inside Sherlock’s mind.
One more thing. I am afraid that drugs have a lot to do with it. It seems, the more drugs Sherlock/Holmes takes the deeper he falls, or, maybe, he just has less control over the events. Maybe he isn’t even the one drugging himself? Who knows. All I know is what exactly made him start using drugs again…
Wow, amazing catch, @joebidenfanclub! It was actually one of my projects to check for (white) roses throughout the show! 🙂
The white rose is indeed a symbol of pure eternal love, as well as secret or silent love. The flower is associated with trust, reverence and admiration, and also displays a message of “I am worthy of you”, which seems important when we think of Sherlock and John.
Additionally, I think the bloom of the flowers might be important here – in the second series, it seems the roses tend to be more closed, whereas in TSOT and series 4, there are full bloom. The love and relationship between John and Sherlock is evolving, blooming. (Also, white rosebuds = pure, innocent love, young heart innocent of love – which is interesting when we think of the characters in the first series)
I believe we have to specifically track the evolution of the roses throughout the show to be sure. That sounds like a promising project!!!
Last remarks:
In Greek mythology, white roses were associated with Aphrodite: as she sprang forth into life from the foaming sea, white roses grew where the foam fell to the ground.
I believe Moffat and Gatiss (most likely the later in particular) know their Victorian language of flowers really well. In the Victorian era, bouquets of white roses were offered as a beginning of a courtship. Also, it was Queen Victoria herself that made white roses so popular at weddings – at her own wedding in 1840, white roses were everywhere.
I’m not entirely sure, but I think there are twelve roses in the vase in the two first shots? Twelve roses are offered as a declaration of love (completeness & perfect love) – and twelve white roses stand for “secrecy, innocence or purity”. Very Johnlock, methinks? But I’m not entirely sure ^^
There are so many things to say about the last shot?! John with what looks like a large bloodstain pooling at his feet, in a very white room with luminous nature outside, with white roses at his right (flowers that can be a symbol of remembrance and spiritual love for the departed)… To me, it screams “John trapped between life and death” (just like Sherlock in HLV). (Yes, I believe we’re trapped in John’s “mind creepy bungalow” in TFP). Beautiful shot!
Remember how The Six Thatcher entry from John’s blog appeared in ASIB – an actual episode, but no one seems to remember in s4 lmao…
Side note: This is the scene in which John puts on his coat on twice
But anyway… What I wanted is that Sherlock literally says that the counter is stuck at one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five, I don’t think that Moffat and Gatiss would choose 1895 by an accident, knowing WHAT happened in that year.
Also, what else I wanted to say, and… I probably should have started with this, cause it’s pretty weird… is that, Six Thatchers was published on 19th December but, John has written another entry after then and before the NY one
And, considering he wrote it right after it happened and the scene I am talking about happens AFTER the Christmas party, the question is, WHY is The Six Thatchers even on screen, it’s not the newest entry? Was Sherlock reading it? Was John staring at the pic of Sherlock wearing a hat? Who the hell knows… You know what would make MUCH MORE sense though? If Sherlock was looking at this
during the Christmas Party. At that time, TST would have been the latest entry, there is a photo of him wearing a hat, the counter on the blog is actually visible so it makes sense that he mentions it, long story short, it 100% FITS with all what he says during the Christmas party:
SHERLOCK: The counter on your blog: still says one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five. JOHN (pulling a mock-angry face): Ooh, no! Christmas is cancelled! (Sherlock points to the side bar which has one of the press pictures of him in his deerstalker.) SHERLOCK: And you’ve got a photograph of me wearing that hat! (x)
Except, instead of looking at a legit looking page that fits with what he’s saying, he is looking at this weirdly wonky page
A random photo of him wearing a hat covering up the hit counter and an unfinished entry that was supposed to be published months ago…? ?
I did a manip to demonstrate why the christmas party conversation fits much better if Sherlock was actually looking at the screen that we see a few scenes later, instead of that nonsense^^^^
This drives me bananas.
oh god. @monikakrasnorada remember that John’s blog timeline post I made as a joke a while back? It’s been in the back of my mind since, and it’s getting less funny each day……
One of the ways that Sherlock deduces that David still has romantic feelings for Mary is that in all his Facebook pictures of John and Mary, John is, ‘always partly or entirely excluded’. This shows that he wants John, ‘out of the picture’, so to speak.
Then we see director Colm McCarthy’s approach to framing his shots during the best man speech. During Sherlock’s speech, Mary is, ‘always partly or entirely excluded’, in any shot that also includes Sherlock. Janine, a character we’ve only just met, and of much less importance to the proceedings, seems to have plenty of room to fit in shots that exclude Mary.
If excluding half of a couple is a sign that someone wants them to not be a couple, then, here, the show is explicitly telling us that John and Mary are not the right couple. The compositions escalate from merely cutting Mary out to having Sherlock actually physically block her from the audience’s view. We are meant to not see John in relation to Mary but Sherlock. It’s always Sherlock.
My first instalment on dream symbolism was on the 4 ‘identities’ of Sherlock in s4. Here is another ‘view’ but this time a micro view of the scene in TLD when Mrs H delivers Sherlock to John in the Aston Martin. It’s packed full of good stuff. I am coming from the view of EMP/trance theory here.
The car:
Bond drives an Aston Martin, as does Mrs Hudson in Sherlock’s mind. Sherlock views Mrs H as a BAMF, he knows her back story, he knew her in Florida. He equates her with a lifestyle she no longer leads, or rather, was not depicted in BBC Sherlock previously. It’s a red sports car, which is a symbol of potency and agency, she has power, energy and sex appeal in Sherlock’s mind. She is dangerous and will do anything for those she loves. And Sherlock knows she loves him. He is projecting the need to be rescued, and Mrs H is the one to kick that rescue attempt into full gear…literally. In his MP Mrs H is speeding, pursued by police cars and helicopters, she is urgently saving him. He needs saving. Note that Sherlock hears Ode to Joy as all of this transpires; he is being delivered.
Positioned in the boot/trunk:
Sherlock feels contained, restrained, disoriented. He is enclosed in a small space and being taken to a destination for help. He’s almost in the fetal position INSIDE Mrs Hudson’s symbol of the red car. She’s his Mother. He views her as such. The red also acting as a womb reference; dark, safe, protective. He is carried, hauled, by Hudders. Sherlock is expressing the very basic need for love, concern and comfort; mother. Truth is spoken by Mrs H to John, Mycroft and Molly? They don’t matter, only John matters. All of this is about John.
John:
Sherlock is delivered to John. This version of John is the reluctant father. Sherlock knows John was not pleased with the news that Mary was pregnant. We see John as the disciplinarian figure, the fed up, annoyed, rejecting man who wants to put off dealing with ‘a child’ for as long as possible. We then see Sherlock relegate his own Elsa/Therapist persona to the shadows as his primary self deals with the situation. Mrs Hudson reverts back to housekeeper role once John takes over. She starts cleaning the kitchen. John shouts at Sherlock with the East Wind wallpaper as backdrop, he’s plucking the unworthy from the face of the earth, and that would be Sherlock.
The Vase:
Dreaming of a vase is common, it symbolises love, but drinking from the vase shifts the imagery into a different connotation. Sherlock is consuming his own emotions, he’s swallowing down his feelings. He thinks the water is ‘filthy’, the love is tainted, it’s killing him, he needs to start fresh. The drinking dirty flower water is part of the entire ‘water’ imagery in S4, which all boils down to fear and love, the two main emotions of humans out of which all other emotions stem. They could be the very core of BBC Sherlock. Sherlock has overcome his fear of love in TAB, but he has to see the way clear to helping John overcome his fear. Look at the above image: Sherlock is holding a nearly empty vessel, one most people would never drink from, yet Sherlock did: JOHN. He’s in the therapists inner sanctum with John, a blood like splatter beneath his feet and John asks the eternal question, not once but twice, WHY? It’s the question John needs answering: Not how Sherlock does things but WHY does Sherlock do things. John needs the answer to be ‘love’. “I do it because I love you”. But Sherlock never gives him that verbalisation.
Molly:
The John Mirror shows up, the substitute. John wants a second opinion, so Sherlock brings in another version of John which is Molly. Note the ironic and sarcastic exchange in this scene of the three of them at the door. Molly IS ready to go, on the romance that is. Plus that gay reference gets chucked in ‘just tell me when to cough’. The iconic prostate exam instruction. Sherlock gives a sardonic expression: ‘Yeah that’s likely to happen with Molly’ and walks away. Molly is flummoxed as usual.
There are a few foreshadowing links to TFP in this scene, the well and vase images and John eventually drowning in his emotions/not able to keep above the water/chained to rules he’s constructed/fear of trusting Sherlock with his heart. Then the Molly as John’s substitute; the coffin/confession/I love you saving John from dying. Lets not forgot that this sequence in TLD also includes the Henry V monologue and the ballet of the cup and gun. It is all truly remarkable and Emmy/BAFTA worthy for Benedict for this sequence alone.
I heard Rhianna’s “We Found Love” on the radio today, and it
made me flash back on all the great meta written on song use in BBC Sherlock.
Remember all that, when things MEANT something on the show? I do, it was cool. If you don’t remember, THAT song shows up
during the Stag Night sequence. Drunk!Sherlock is (bless his little swishy
heart) flailing in the cutest way possible at some bloke in a bar after arguing
about tobacco ash(?) as John is gripping him masterfully around the middle and dragging
him away. God, be still my beating heart. If anyone isn’t familiar with the lyrics to that song, it
includes stuff like:
We found love in a hopeless place
Shine a light through an open door/Love
and life I will divide
Turn away cause I need you more/Feel
the heartbeat in my mind
It’s the way I’m feeling I just can’t
deny/But I’ve gotta let it go
It’s an achingly
romantic song with a driving beat that builds up nicely during that “best mates
manhandling each other” moment. There were other pop songs that made
appearances during the date night/pub crawl. Gulang by M.I.A. is another fast,
pounding tune that included lyrics like
They say
Rivers gonna run though
Work is gonna save you
Pray and you will pull through
Suck a dick’ll help you
Remember when Sherlock showed up in
that restaurant and did that goofy French waiter act to tell John “Not Dead”
after Reichenbach? When John leaps on Sherlock and propels him to the ground in
his overflow of emotion, this song plays in the background “Donde Estas Yolanda” – another passionate,
romantic song with a Latin beat. The lyrics on this one are in Spanish but translate
to such gems as
The sparkle in your eye
the fire of your lips
conquered my heart and I fell in love
with you.
Where are you, where are you, Yolanda ?
What happened, What happened, Yolanda ?
I looked for you, I looked for you,
Yolanda
and you’re not there, you’re not there,
Yolanda
Soooo, not only was this another
over-the-top romantic song about love and loss, the showrunners chose to pick a
version featuring a woman singing, mourning the loss of another woman, a
CLEARLY gay spin on the song. Wow. Such emotion. Such foreshadowing.
Of course after S4, when it became
apparent that Johnlock was not endgame, and nothing in the show seemed to have
any particular meaning beyond sounding cool or looking cool for that particular
moment (plot arc, character development, foreshadowing … what’s that?) one COULD argue that those songs were never
picked for the meaning of their lyrics.
And yet. If we look at Sherlock being hounded by
Moriarty’s plans in The Reichenbach Fall, and the montage of them getting ready
for the trial, the song “Sinner Man” by Nina Simone slithers out in the background.
We get such lyrics as
Oh, sinnerman, where you gonna run to?
Sinnerman where you gonna run to?
Where you gonna run to?
All on that day
We got to run to the rock
Please hide me, I run to the rock
Please hide me, run to the rock
Please hide here
All on that day
But the rock cried out
I can’t hide you, the rock cried out
I can’t hide you, the rock cried out
I ain’t gonna hide you there
It seems pretty evident that the meaning of the song has some bearing on what’s
going in the show. It isn’t simply a cool sounding tune randomly picked to run
during a montage moment.
Also, let’s
not forget John and Mary’s wedding. Or rather the reception for their wedding.
We never actually get to see the ceremony for John’s BIGGEST day. There everyone
is belting out lyrics and dancing under purple light to “Oh, What a Night” as Sherlock
slinks away bereft and alone. We get such lines as these
Oh, what a night, you know I didn’t
even know her name
But I was never gonna be the same
What a lady, what a night
Oh, I, I got a funny feelin’ when she walked in the room
Oh my, as I recall it ended much too soon
Again,
one could argue that the showrunners just thought this classic rock song was something
one might play at a wedding reception like you do, but the words are so eerily
similar to what’s going on in the show, John marrying an ex-assassin with an
assumed name. It’s almost like the lyrics might have subtext for the plot of
the show. Hmmmm.
None of
my observations are new things. I’m absolutely just summing up what some very
talented people have said before me. I’m just feeling salty about the
showrunners maintaining that they never set Sherlock up to be a romantic tale
of pining love, with a subtext of aching unresolved sexual tension between their male leads.
All I have to say to this is please, pull
my other leg. Snort.
Sherlock Fandom Archive 