Tumblrs! Sherlock’s very own Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, happening on right here at 11am EST on Monday, July 9th. We’re launching the #SummerofSherlock before the opening of The Game Is Now later this year.
I can’t wait to see if this new Sherlock initiative is something actually cool and worth caring about OR if it’s just another missed opportunity to add to the ever-growing list of colossal disappointments
A year ago, part of the Sherlock fandom suffered a collective trauma.
Now, I’ve heard and read many renditions of “It’s a bloody TV show, get over it” in the past, especially in the last twelve months.
However, presentation matters.
Media shapes our reality.
How children’s movies portray gender roles influences a child’s view and understanding of the world, and their place in it. If you only ever see white guys playing the superheroes, then being exposed to Black Panther will be a Big Thing.
If that’s all too theoretical, take the (alleged) CSI effect, or the fact that more and more universities have been offering degrees in forensic science in the wake of the success of such crime shows.
What I’m trying to say is: Television and movies are part of the system we’re raised in and live in. They form part of the environment that socialises us.
Media has power.
I never realised how much until January 15, 2017.
That day showed me in a very visceral way how much power the creators of media have nowadays. If successful, their writing can reach millions, if not billions, and how they present the world becomes part of a communal base of knowledge and reference.
I’m not saying that a single work of fiction or a documentary can change the world on its own, but no fragment of media or storytelling exists in a vacuum.
Everything has a past, and shapes the future.
And Sherlock definitely has a past – the detective has been around since 1887 and become a cultural icon with many, many faces and interpretations. Sherlock Holmes has shaped genres and science and the BBC’s adaption with Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman struck a chord with millions.
Yes, BBC’s Sherlock is powerful. As a TV show of international success, it had millions of fans across the globe, I amongst them. Some fans flocked to certain online spaces to communicate and share our love for the show.
Within fandom, everyone is united by a shared passion and while there are bullies everywhere, to me fandom has been a nurturing, welcoming environment. I have met many wonderful people within the realms of cyberspace, whom I still cherish and have met (and will meet) outside of the internet. Sherlock is shaping our lives in a very real way.
Since Sherlock is a detective show and the first two series, incredibly clever written and executed, culminate in a puzzle to solve, fandom answered the call. I’m not entirely certain the analyses or ‘meta’ as we call them started with “How did Sherlock survive?” at the end of The Reichenbach Fall (2×03), but it kicked off a subculture unlike any other.
You see, we became detectives ourselves. We dissected the show, we invested so much time and had a blast doing it, discussion this show with other fans from around the world. Series three and the special escalated this, and I still marvel at how big a part fandom played in all our lives then, how much LOVE there was for the source material.
As a writer, I participated, but at the same time I also dreamed of one day creating something that also stuck a deep chord with my audience. I dreamed of my stories inspiring such love and excitement, and took the creators of Sherlock as role models.
Then came series 4.
It was teased to be epic, it would make “television history” and have a “rug pull”.
You can imagine the excitement in fandom. After ten mostly brilliant episodes, we wanted more impeccable storytelling from the “show about a detective”.
What we got instead… was lacklustre.
The first episode of series 4 features inconsistencies with previous seasons, holes in the plot and set design, a disregard for physics as well as logical flaws. Also, a redemption arc for a female character who could have been a stellar villain.
I personally, as a filmmaker, loved the second episode for it’s technical aspects – it remains one of the best edited episodes of television I’ve ever seen and gave us sequences I could only describe as cinematography porn.
However, there were additional inconsistencies, set design decisions that confused a lot of us, and flaws in logic that made me and my niche in fandom wonder: Do the creators even CARE? Where is the attention to detail, or wait… is this on purpose? Are these inconsistencies and plot holes.. clues?
You see, we thought the creators respected their audience. For all their talk about not wanting to spoon-feed their viewers, we assumed they were giving us a puzzle to solve that extended beyond the beginning and end of the individual episodes.
We were wrong, unfortunately.
The Final Problem aired on January 15, 2017.
Prior to that, someone at Channel One in Russia had leaked the entire episode and several of us watched it to report back. They said it made no sense, that it was badly written.
Was it a fake episode? Was this the rug pull? Was this, and the second leak from Turkey on the same weekend, was this television history? Would we get a “real” episode at the official release?
No.
The same boys who had built up a fictional world whose characters inspired millions took these characters and abused them for… well, their own wish fulfilment fantasies that only seem clever on the surface.
As soon as you probe and ask, the plot of The Final Problem falls apart. The holes were so big that even people who didn’t make a habit of dissecting every second of a Sherlock episode (like our part of fandom is prone to) noticed and were disappointed. [x] [x] [x] [x] [x]
What grated me most was, for one, how out-of-character everyone was (John not reacting as Sherlock, for whom he has KILLED, puts a gun to his own head, or Sherlock ignoring their code word ‘Vatican Cameos’ to name but two instances).
The other was the treatment of Molly, whose entire character development was retroactively annihilated by this episode and who was robbed of any agency she ever possessed, in the service of throwing another obstacle at the male protagonist. But, well, she’ll get over it, won’t she, Mr. Moffat?
Also, Moriarty. The amazing villain of series 2. The Final Problem re-wrote his entire character, giving him information five years ago that he never, ever used back in series 2… which, if you accept that as canon, makes Moriarty seem a lot less clever than he was portrayed as by the show at the time.
This is merely catching the surface of why many long-term fans felt wronged by series 4 in terms of storytelling.
(Not to mention the queerbaiting. Yet while turning queer identity into a joke spanning three-seasons is horrifyingly hurtful to myself as a queer-identified person, this is a can of worms that requires an entire post of its own to do it justice – as does the representation of persons of colour on Sherlock, for that matter.)
You don’t need an introduction to Sherlock meta, or to see why many fans believed “television history” to be referring to the show featuring an explicitly queer happy ending to understand that series 4 had fundamental flaws on a storytelling level that have nothing to do with political ‘agendas’.
The inconsistencies, plot holes and out-of-character depictions, plus revisionist plot points that redefine characters retroactively… they felt like a slap in the face to those whose passion and love for the show had helped it become so popular and powerful in the first place.
As a writer… I simply don’t understand.
Did no one see the plot holes? Did no one read the script except the executive producers before shooting? Did no one dare to speak up?
Did they think this was television history? They best story they could tell?
“It’s their story,” I’ve heard people say. “You have no claim to it.”
No, I don’t. But I am entitled to respect.
Viewers have a claim to be respected by creators of the content they engage with, because without the audience… why create?
And for me, respecting the audience means making sure you’re telling the best story you possibly can within your means and fictional universe. It means being aware that your content doesn’t exist in a vacuum. For fuck’s sake, I don’t mean you need to cater to anyone, or allow fans to ‘dictate’ what you do, since they would never ever be able to agree.
I mean asking yourself questions along the way, such as:
Are all my villains persons of colour, but the ‘good guys’ white?
Are the antagonists coded as queer when the protagonists and their sidekicks are straight as arrows?
Do my female characters have agency, or a life of their own outside their engaging with a male character?
Does every character have motivations for their actions, and/or do my characters change in the course of the story?
Am I just reproducing what people have seen hundreds of times before, or am I adding something new, something creative, something fresh or unique to my chosen genres and tropes?
It’s 2018, folks.
Viewers like me, we’re tired of the same old stories being told over and over again, featuring the same stock characters. I love action movies, too, but I love them more if they surprise me. I also love clever stories, and I’m tired of being spoon-fed. What made me fall in love with Sherlock was how brilliant it was, that watching it is a challenge that requires me to think.
I expected the same cleverness from the show runners that they imbued their title character with.
So here comes the manifesto part of this long post.
Series 4 and The Final Problem in particular left a deep mark on me, not just as a viewer (I can’t trust a TV show anymore, I don’t dare get in too deep with anything new since I’ve been burned so hard a year ago) but on me as a writer.
“It’s not a game anymore”, the slogan used in promotional materials for series 4, used to make me choke on pained laughter.
A year later, it’s become a battle cry.
Because it’s truly not a game anymore.
Writers, content creators – we have power. Our stories affect the lives of others.
We owe it to them and to us to hold ourselves to a higher standard.
To ensure we’re telling a great story, in our own, innovative way. To ensure we don’t perpetuate racist tropes and stereotypes. To ensure we consider diversity and embed it within our work. To ask for feedback from points of view different to our own.
For me, Sherlock was a watershed moment. I’m never going to forget that my writing, if published in any form or translated into other media, affects people, and I will hold myself to a higher standard.
It’s not that difficult.
It’s not even much work.
Yet in times like this, we need it more than ever.
*
PS: A personal anecdote
In October 2017, I screened my second short film at a secondary school and held a Q&A with the students afterwards. The film is a thriller and the title character happens to be gay.
One of the students asked, “Why did you make the protagonist gay?”
Posts on my dash today about Moffat & Gatiss’s intentions vs. posts depicting scenes from the show with the actors in Sherlock, and the way they’ve played their parts made me think, at first – maybe there is something out of phase in how the writers think about these characters vs. how the actors do… but then I thought, no… that’s not likely.
As much as a it is difficult to place authorial intention at any one locus in a thing like a TV show, if they have always intended that this is a story about the best friends that ever lived, and that the story they’ve told is about how they got to be the men of legend that they are, then I think everyone involved must have known that. So, why is it that the whole story is so outrageously, undeniably romantic, and why is it that I am absolutely positive that Sherlock is in love with John, and that John, though he can’t perhaps embrace it, loves Sherlock, too, and that both of them loved Mary?
Then I thought: maybe the actors really were endeavoring to act friendship. Deep, self-sacrificing friendship, once in a lifetime friendship, and the way they show it on screen simply LOOKS like love. Maybe its that in the imaginations of those actors as expressed by their actorly instruments, those two relationships – deep, true friendship and love – simply express themselves similarly?
Maybe it’s not that there is anything out of phase, it’s just that friendship like theirs LOOKS a lot like love. Maybe the real revelation is how little air there is between the two? How little real distinction.
Just an idea.
Let me see if I can do this. I’ve been up and at it for three hours and I may be out of good words.
Maybe it looks like Sherlock and John love each other because they do. Love and friendship are two words that we expect to cover a lot of ground. Which is why you used so many lovely words to describe the relationship you are seeing on the screen. What if they love each other deeply, steadfastly, selflessly without whatever element is necessary to tip that into the realm of romance?
What would that element be? Sex? Physical affection? Poetry and flowers? An all-consuming desire for one or all of those things? Is it like porn? We just know it when we see it? Or not. If we are being shown all of the elements of a great romance without the actual romance, what does it mean that we are filling that missing element in?
Maybe it’s a gendered thing. I see women speak of their friends in terms that seem very romantic all the time. Maybe we aren’t used to seeing two men behave in the same way.
Maybe we’ve lost the language for romantic relationships that aren’t sexual.
Reblogged because I love these thoughts and want to think more about all of them.
Yeah, I love love love this discussion, and I’ve also been thinking about how to articulate my response. The older I get, the less obvious to me is the distinction between friendship and romantic/sexual love, and the privileging of one over the other (YES, HELLO, TOPIC OF NEXT NOVEL!). And the less interesting/productive/healthy/compelling is the defining and policing of that line. (What even IS that line? Is it, as I suspect, intimately tied to patriarchal imperatives to control women’s sexual behaviour? To own us?) What would our relationships look like if we hadn’t all internalized this, I wonder? What would my life look like?
Maybe that’s one of the reasons I love Holmes in the first place – that line is so blurry, and neither Sherlock Holmes nor John Watson really seems to have a problem with that lack of definition (at least, in my headcanon). And yes, I find this more novel in depictions of masculine relationships, so maybe that’s part of why it’s so compelling.
I agree so much. I don’t see the line so clearly as I once did, and I also I see no point in ANY of the policing. Things are what they are and no amount of policing can change them. Why do we always need things to be so rigidly defined and why are we so attached to reifying the codes that define them?
Also, this is the thing that, I think, makes me not have any problem with the ambiguous, in-processness of the relationship depicted on Sherlock. I love the blurry line and the lack of finished-ness and the uncertainty. I love the vulnerability of where they are with one another. I like that it’s hard to tell where their lines are. I’m not sure I’ve seen male friendship depicted in that way, and I love the sense that it could be both and it could be either. I like that they have refused to define it. It feels like something I recognise. Something a bit real.
I think you’re right, too, about the way we treat sexual relationships vs. friendships and about the policing of that line. I think it is a way of exercising control over what is happening between people. I feel like the whole project is so misdirected, because friendship, love and desire emerge out of our interactions without our control, and it’s pointless to deny their existence when they do. It just makes people unhappy to police themselves and others.
Yes to so many things in this thread!
Relationships can be far messier and more complex than the stories we tend to culturally tell about how relationships work.
The people I say “i love you” to the most are friends I’m not sleeping with.
I have a best friend I love fiercely, and have at points pined after in a romantic sense, and now would gladly live with platonically for the rest of our lives, if circumstances allowed.
I have had friends I flirt with, friends I sleep with, friends I drift in and out of dating, friends I regularly travel with one on one, friends I snuggle with, friends I would do anything for.
I am very comfortable with unconventional and ambiguous relationships. I wish our society was a lot more so – especially for men, who in my culture are socialized not to talk about feelings much and not to get too emotionally close to anyone other than one romantic/sexual partner. I think as a result, we aren’t great at interpreting guys being super close without no homo-ing, which is a shame and contributes to the while cycle. And in general, we don’t tell enough stories about all the complicated ways people can be devoted to one another.
I was really struck by something Moffat said about a line in the sand they weren’t willing to cross – they never want to either confirm or deny whether Sherlock is really a virgin or not! (I’m paraphrasing but that was the gist of it)
I think they also wanted to do the same thing with his sexual orientation, and they mostly succeeded. I think that ambiguity in itself is important to them. It’s not the absence of data, it’s the presence of deliberate, cultivated uncertainty.
And I really respect that, because of the freedom it allows for fans in their interpretations. Is Sherlock gay, bi, ace? Sure, why not? (Even straight. That’s harder for me to wrap my brain around, I admit – I can totally read/write him having romantic/sexual relationships with women, no problem, but for me he always does it in a really bisexual way. That’s just my bias talking though, no one else is obliged to live by it.)
Ambiguity in relationships in a creative work leaves so much room to grow and change, for the characters, and for fans to see themselves reflected and to develop in our ‘what-if’ storytelling culture. And it reflects reality, very much so, particularly with this iconic relationship that’s had so many different iterations over so many years.
I really relate to that, ambiguous passionate friendships. I too have had so many of those, and many of them have lasted much longer and had more formative influence on my life than explicitly romantic relationships.
Every word of this (both OP and comments) spells out what I’ve grappled with, but been unable to put so eloquently into words (and admittedly I haven’t tried that hard for fear of not being able to really communicate what I was thinking/feeling and pissing people off). I love the ambiguity in Sherlock. I love the deliberately unanswered questions. I love seeing a portrayal of friendship and love that isn’t hindered by societal expectations of what it means to be a male (or female, for that matter). That’s part of what grabbed me about the show to begin with and why it’s still compelling to me years later.
This is a lovely, nuanced thread; my thanks to all participants.
For me it’s about emotional exclusivity. Life-mates might be a good way to phrase it: John is the center of Sherlock’s present and future, and Sherlock John’s; they go to bed in the same flat and wake up to toast and coffee shared across the same table and work on crimes together and make decisions for how they want to live their shared life ten and fifty years down the road. That doesn’t actually have to involve sex; though the way I read the showthere was symbolism and subtext that would easily be parsed as romantic in an opposite-gender couple. It doesn’t even have to *preclude* sex with other people; John’s string of girlfriends documented in ASIB didn’t make everything Irene said at Battersea somehow false. Actually, as an asexual but not necessarily an aromantic, I’m personally most moved by fics that get at the whole gamut of nonsexual relationships.
What bothers me about later series is this standard was applied a bit unevenly. At least as I experienced it. A good example of this is the Janine scene in HLV, where John seems dismayed and even confused that Holmes would have a girlfriend. John has gone and gotten married, but there’s a sense somehow that Sherlock isn’t allowed to have that in his life, he has to be monogamous to John even as John isn’t monogamous to Sherlock. As I said, neither should have to be; but the sense that one’s allowed those other sexualized relationships and the other isn’t just never sat well with me. And similarly, I don’t think we ever fully wrestled with how Mary fit into all of this. I’m not sure she *should*, at least not without reconfiguring their relationship into the emotional equivalent of polyamory. (Which I’m not opposed to, at all, but for a whole host of reasons it wasn’t the story I thought Mofftiss were trying to tell for John and Mary in particular.)
None of which means John and Sherlock have to boink, or that John/Sherlock has to be about getting to the boinking. I quite like nonsexualized John/Sherlock, in all its varied glories. I’m just not sure the show as it exists at the end of TFP has really worked through what exactly Johnlock (non-boinking or boinking, or anything in between) would actually mean, for all parties involved.
I was wondering, if, IF they did a complete 180 in S5 and made Johnlock canon either by erasing all of S4 or actually have them work through their issues, would any of you who have rejected S4 and the show go back to it? Would you ship it again?
I guess the last part is me asking myself because as it stands now, I can’t ship Johnlock anymore in this adapation. And I don’t have an answer to this at the moment. I’m really not sure I want to invest my heart into this show again.
@twocandles I never stopped shipping it, because I’ve just sort of taken the characters and done what I want with them Post-S4, and all my fannish engagement has been with fan-created works along the same vein. Sometimes that means a fix-it. Sometimes that means ignoring all or some of S4. I’m pretty flexible, other than the fact that I personally can’t interact with content that accepts TFP in any way.
But then, I also shipped it before BBC Sherlock, because I had loved the Granada series and the ACD canon first, before I ever saw BBC Sherlock. I’ve always shipped it. I always will. Plus, I liked what Martin and Ben did with their versions of John and Sherlock, I liked the idea of plopping them down in modern day London, and meeting them early on, giving them a chance to grow into the men they would later become (which disappointingly the show dropped the ball on, imo). So I still like to play with the BBC characterisations in a limited and adapted way.
As for the show itself, there is nothing that could bring me back. I feel like the writers have made it clear that they always saw the idea of John and Sherlock being an actual couple as nothing more than a tease or a joke they would play to until they couldn’t play to it anymore (which they later admitted they possibly took too far). In fact, Mark Gatiss had been outright stating they had no intention of going there since Mumbai ComiCon in Dec. 2015, and reiterated that point here during a Tumblr Q&A just before S4 aired.
In the end, I think it was clear that they decided to go the TPLoSH route, of pining gay man, hopelessly in love with an indifferent, and straight ‘friend’, which doesn’t interest me, and which I feel runs in direct contradiction to the way the story had been presented all the way up to TAB, as well as the way the actors had been interpreting the characters’ relationship in earlier seasons.
Finally, there was the way Moffat and Gatiss treated their young queer and/or female fans, and the way the BBC chose to market the show, knowing it was never going there, as well as the way they treated people who complained about the queerbaiting, or general loss of writing/production quality post-S4.
In short, I don’t trust the writers or producers at all anymore, and don’t want them to ever get another cent of my money. So no, I would not go back to watching or loving any new seasons of the show, no matter what they do with it. At this point it would just feel like they were back-peddling in response to fan outrage in an attempt to make a few more bucks. But, really the whole thing is sort of a moot point anyway, as I don’t think that the writers have any interest in or the intention to write any more seasons (they’re moving on to Dracula), not to mention that I think it would be a very hard sell to their very busy and successful leads, after the mediocre critical reception of S4.
So, if you can find a way to make John and Sherlock your own and keep shipping them that way, then I wish you all the joy in that, and if you can’t, if you just want to wash your hands of the pairing forever because it’s too painful, I can understand that too.
I continue to ship them, because I’ve always shipped them, and I’ve made my peace with how I want to engage with the content in the BBC adaptation. It works for me, and I imagine I will continue to engage with fan-created content set in that universe for as long as fans are creating it. But I’m leaving those involved with the creation of the show itself behind me.
I can’t imagine a season 5 that would make me want to watch again (and I don’t think there’ll be one.) There was very little in season 4 I liked and nothing at all I loved. The characterisation of both Sherlock and John strayedtoo far from what I fell in love with in the first seasons. So I’m here for fan content – be it ignoring season 4 or fixing it, as some fantastic fic writers have been able to do.
Thank you so much to everyone who has commented here! I’m probably forgetting people: @very-grumpy-bisexual @lediona25 @readingfanficsblog@elskudani @inthenameofunrequitedfeels (ah yes, thanks tumblr for being useless)
I hadn’t even thought about it much when I yelled this question into the void but @sussexbound you bring up so many important points. One of the biggest is that I also can’t support Mofftiss anymore. These two arrogant bastards are so full of themselves but then show a complete lack of respect for parts of their fanbase, I never want to see their poison again. I’m still pondering whether I want to yell about them constantly to warn others or just ignore them entirely but that constant level of negativity might not exactly be good for me.
I did realise though that whenever I’ve abandoned a show in the past, no matter what the reason, I usually didn’t go back to it. And in this case I’m actually thinking of selling my merch, which I haven’t even done with the other things I’ve lost interest in, so it’s definitely a very bad case. And I am looking forward to the third Ritchie Holmes movie, if that is still happening but I also need to force myself not to get my hopes up too high. Some of the old adaptations/shows have a special place in my heart but I also feel like I need a very big break away from Sherlock Holmes adaptations in general, Mofftiss have put a complete damper on my enjoyment of the entire franchise that I haven’t been able to shake off yet.
I don’t think I’ll ever enjoy Johnlock again in this version, even if S5 happens and isn’t a complete mess. The damage has been too severe. I do assume that no Johnlock will ever happen in this show and while I’m sure it’s vaguely possible to still ship them in a future series for myself I think that’s not happening. It sucks that I can’t even enjoy fanworks anymore but it’s probably better that way, I wouldn’t have been able to move on otherwise.
So I have a lot of opinions about this, shocking right?
First of all, I never stopped shipping Johnlock, even in this version. I honestly just ignore S4 exists at all. And the fandom has ALWAYS written this show better than Mofftiss have. The fandom wrote better resolutions to the pool showdown. The fandom wrote better resolutions to the fall. The fandom wrote better resolutions to Mary shooting Sherlock and the end of S3. And the fandom has been doing their best to make something out of the trash heap that was S4. I really personally just can’t enjoy post S4 fics. I don’t like Rosie, I don’t like the resolution of what they did with Mary, I don’t like anything that happened in TLD. I don’t like Churros.
Now onto the real question. Would I watch S5? Will I be happy if Johnlock happens then? Here’s some possible ideas of how S5 could go down and how I feel about them.
1. They continue as they are. Everything we saw happened just like we saw it. John and Sherlock continue on as friends. John is raising his daughter. John doesn’t live in 221B. They solve crimes. John still has his ring on and mourns his awful dead wife. Maybe they’ll even still have AA narrate and send her dumb fucking videos? God that sounds awful. I’m not interested, thanks. Even if they decided to go the johnlock route after all that, it would be so hallow, it would feel so cheap.
2. The whole E/M/P thing, it’s all a coma or a dream. It starts from ASiP or after the fall or after the shooting, whatever. I can see why people cling to this idea so strongly, Wouldn’t that be nice if we could go back and erase everything and have a fresh start and all the bullshit in S3 and 4 weren’t what they seemed. I just don’t believe it’s possible. What are they going to do? Cake Ben and Martin in makeup to hide their age? CGI their faces to make them look years younger? Other than the fact that I hate the whole “it was all a dream” plot line, it’s just bad and lazy writing to make a whole season fake. And for what? Just so you could have your moments of shock or surprise just to erase it all later? Again, no thanks.
3. Then there’s the unreliable narrator theory. That things are not what they seems in S4 and didn’t actually happen or not the way we think they did. Now, while I actually LIKE this theory….in well, theory, I again sadly just don’t see this actually happening. I don’t think it’s doable either. And honestly, how awful S4 was to sit through would not make this worth it for me. I think it makes for great fic though.
And then my own personal dream situation #4. Mofftiss are both fired and shamed for their awful writing. The show is given to people who actually care about the characters and a coherent plot and we forget S4 ever happened and someone new makes everything right. I just love Ben and Martin as these characters so much, it’s hard to let them go.
NOW to be 100% honest I don’t think there is any way to redeem this show. John Watson is my favorite character. I will NEVER forgive Mofftiss for what they did. TLD was an utter pile of crap and they should be ashamed of themselves for not only what they did with John but how they treated Sherlock as well. I don’t think there is any coming back from their mess. I’m not interested in anymore of Mofftiss crap. I will not be watching anything else they write or are show runners of. They can go fuck themselves.
And to agree with @sussexbound I can also never forgive Mofftiss for how they treated fans. They are two arrogant douchebags who don’t deserve the fans they have. BBC can also go straight to hell for how they baited the fans with their adds and their bbc three tumblr (I don’t give two fucks if it was just a fan of the show having fun, it was irresponsible the BBC should have NEVER let that go on). BBC Sherlock will hopefully be a lesson to others of how NOT to do things in the future.
BUT I’m such a huge supporter and fan of the fic writers and the artist who are doing things right. Thank jebus for you all. I still ship Johnlock. I still love these characters. Honestly the show has been an utter mess since S3 and the fandom has always had to clean up Mofftiss messes with their dumb plots and poor writing. I think I’ll always love John and Sherlock and I’m not going to let Mofftiss ruin something I love. They can kiss my ass.
Sherlock Fandom Archive 