a satire of pathologising intelligence in TFP as a criticism of pathologising gayness

just-sort-of-happened:

Ok, so the Holmes parents know that Eurus is like a neon, nuclear-powered genius and they don’t have like say a library for her?  Where she can see books?  And can learn about anatomy and physiology?  So, she has to dissect her own arm to see how it works?  Dude…  

Just.  dude.  

If Eurus isn’t 100% symbolism and not meant to be taken seriously as a human for a single second then I can understand this.  Because it’s not supposed to make sense.  but if it is then, yikes.

like mummy holmes is a math genius who’s like not aware that her child geniuses need outlets for the intelligence?  Sounds fake but okay.

And like Molly before me, I know it’s not.  It’s not.  It’s not supposed to make sense literally but like it’s so hard for me sometimes just not to come crashing into the rocks of the surface narrative with just a million questions regarding the basic common sense of like anyone in TFP.

How can I think that we’re meant to take this narrative seriously, at face value?  Like, ‘kid was so smart she was a killer?’.  Dude, if that’s not about Sherlock’s feeling alienated because he was a gifted child, I don’t know what is.

Maybe Sherlock, as a child, had some of these thoughts and maybe shared them with others and those others weren’t cool but flipped out and jumped to some extreme labels for him like, ‘sociopath’, etc.

So, I can either believe that the writers really think that being super smart is intrinsically and mysteriously dangerous or maybe they’re trying to tell us something that’s actually off about that idea.  Like, to the extent that everything about Eurus as a dangerous person seems fake: she can control your mind with her clichés, etc., we can see that this is a satire on the very idea that someone’s, ‘too smart’, for their own good.  

The whole of Sherlock is basically an ode to the importance of thinking for yourself, of using your brain, and lately, your heart, too.  I really don’t believe that, ‘incandescent’, and poorly parented Eurus is supposed to be a real child that the Holmeses had.  She’s symbolic of how the Holmes parented their children as being, ‘different’.  But, in light of the fact that we know that Mrs Holmes is a, ‘genius’, as of HLV, then even this theory falls apart.  Why would a genius not know how to handle her genius children?

Because here, ‘intelligent’, is code for gay.  Since it doesn’t make sense that Mrs Holmes doesn’t know what to do about her smart children, it makes more sense that she doesn’t know what to do about her gay children.  (I legitimately forgot my own theory that, sociopath is code for gay, so yeah, Eurus is a sociopath and therefore gay.  She’s the gay secret of the Holmes children).

Now, who seems more incandescently gay: Sherlock or Mycroft?  I’d say it’s a tie, personally.  Since, ‘this is family’, according to Mycroft, himself, let’s speculate that this, ‘Eurus’, phenomenon is about both of them.  The Holmes parents found them to be incandescently gay, some might say, ‘flaming’, as children and they internalised the message that that was somehow a pathology.

I think the parents didn’t intend this but they didn’t realise the influence that Uncle Rudy’s struggles and their own ignorance would have on them.  The message they received is that their true feelings were dangerous and needed to be locked away in a very secure part of themselves.  Lest something terrible happen if their feelings were released.

So, yeah, as facile as it is that Eurus psychopathy is suddenly cured by Sherlock’s hug, it makes actual sense to think that facing family secrets actually can heal a family.  Finally having the Holmes family discuss that Eurus is still alive, means finally talking about the fact that their kids are you know, ‘still’, gay, despite having hidden it all these years.  The parents never wanted that, but they didn’t realise that it had happened, either.  It makes way more sense to think that the Holmes parents didn’t know how to raise two gay boys than to think that they didn’t know how to raise to geniuses considering that Mrs Holmes, herself, is one, too.

Looking back on Eurus’ ludicrous mind-control powers we can see that this is actually a satire of how ridiculous homophobia is.  Like, people fear that hanging out with a gay person will make you gay.  Somehow, through their gay magic they will make you gay, too.  This is equally as absurd as what Eurus does with her incandescent intellect.    

Seriously, think about the word, ‘incandescent’.  Why that word?  Mycroft is not prone to poetic liberties, why here?  Because it’s code for, ‘flaming’.  To be a, ‘flaming homosexual’, means that you’re very obviously gay; everyone can tell.  Eurus isn’t just symbolic of the Holmes siblings’ queerness, she’s symbolic of how easily others could see it.  This is why they internalised that it must be hidden, because it was very obvious to others, even when they were children.

Back to Eurus’ powers: homophobia often includes a fear of seduction by a queer person.  Dracula doesn’t just drink your blood, he makes you want him, first.  He puts you under a spell.  We get tons of Dracula coding for Sherlock in series 1.  (Part 1, Part 2, Mary, Molly, Sally).

In a way, then, TFP is a satire of horror movies because it’s a satire of homophobia.  It’s satirises the fear of intelligence and that intelligence is code for, ‘the other’, ‘woman’, ‘gay’.  

If you’ve read @heimishtheidealhusband‘s meta about victorian ghosts you will know that Gothic Horror expressed the anxiety of that time about same sex romance.  So, it’s possible that the reason that TFP appears to be both an homage and a satire of horror movies, is that it’s really about the destruction of this homophobia.  It’s about throwing out all of these fears and stereotypes that are deeply embedded in our horror movies because they’re deeply embedded in our psyches.         

“The Final Problem” Survival Pack [NEW UPDATE, 27/1]

loveismyrevolution:

may-shepard:

sherlock-overflow-error:

This is the third update of the original TFP Survival Pack posted on 20/1. It contains all of the information in the original along with the most recent meta.

New highlights include:

  • A section addressing concerns and counterarguments
  • Meta on specific subtheories, such as John going blind on one eye
  • Clues about January 29th

Search Ctrl + F + “[NEW]” to look at only the new information.

(Note: if the section is labelled [NEW], all meta in that section is new.)

Still screaming over that crazy episode? Some hope remains! This masterpost and theory table collect the fandom’s last hopes—and they’re less crazy than you’d think.

The main takeaway is that the episode contradicts the rest of the show and real-world events far too much for it to be just a mistake. In fact, the evidence suggests that there will be a fourth episode.

“What? That’s ridiculous!”

That’s what I thought at first, too. But things in real life don’t add up, and they can’t be explained by bad writing. At this point, a rug pull is simply the most logical explanation. And if we’re wrong, well…it can’t really get any worse, can it?

This pack has 6 parts:

  1. Issues: Everything within the episode that makes TFP not only a dumpster fire, but a (literally) unbelievable dumpster fire.
  2. Clues: Real-life weirdness such as cast quotes that don’t fit, scenes missing from filming, and strange new promos that hint at a fourth episode.
  3. Descriptions of the two main theories
  4. Theory table: Compares which theories explain which issues
  5. Resources: Links to meta that explain specific issues or the episode’s weirdness as a whole
  6. Conclusions: What it all means, and why we should hold out a little longer.

Enjoy!

-soe

Disclaimer: Everything in this post is speculation. If you don’t want to get your hopes up, by all means skip it. However, I’d suggest at least waiting until January 29th before going full-out against Mofftiss (reasons below).


=============== Issues ================

Everything weird about that episode. With over 70 nontrivial plot holes, it’s hard to view the episode’s quality as an accident.

(The bolded phrases are descriptions, not the actual titles.)

Within the episode:

Unresolved plot holes and narrative problems:


=============== Clues ===============

Real-World Inconsistencies

The Missing Scenes

Scenes that were filmed but that we’ve never seen? Quotes that make no sense with TFP as the finale? Something is up.

==============Theories================

It’s in Sherlock’s Mind

Everything in Season 4, since either the end of TAB or Mary shooting Sherlock, is in Sherlock’s mind as he is comatose. This theory requires all three episodes to be at least partly imaginary. A main variation is that John is talking to him as he is comatose, and that what John describes influences what Sherlock imagines.

For meta on variations of this theory, including EMP and John’s alibi, please see the TST Survival Pack.

It’s in John’s Mind

Everything in TFP is in John’s mind after John is shot. Variations include:

  • TST and TLD also took place in John’s mind.
  • Mary shot John, not Eurus.

This one is starting to gain more ground, particularly because it would make the whole season an adaptation of “The Three Garridebs”, leading to canon Johnlock, etc.

==============Theory Table=============

Green = Completely addresses this issue

Yellow = Addresses this issue somewhat plausibly, but not the best solution

image


=============Resources===============

[NEW] A Brief Rundown by @myminionsandieatcereal

Sherlock’s POV

John’s POV

Clue/Multiple Versions Theory

Clarifications and Misinformation

[NEW] Addressing Concerns and Counterarguments

[NEW] Subtheories/Independent Theories

[NEW] The Importance of January 29th


On Issues in the Episode

Chronologically:

Meta on a single issue that specifically support one theory are labelled [John’s POV] or [Sherlock’s POV], respectively.

On the Whole Episode:

On Breaking the Fourth Wall (and Why):


============Conclusions=============

They broke every rule of writing unless it’s a rug pull. The filming, cast and crew quotes, promotional material, and subtext within the episode make no sense unless a fourth episode reveals that it took place in John’s or Sherlock’s mind. The reputation of the whole show relies on them successfully revealing the real season finale.

So when would they reveal this fourth episode? When would it air?

They’ll air it on 29/1 or announce it on 29/1 and air it soon afterwards, via:

“The Final Problem” is either sheer stupidity or utter genius. Either way, let’s enjoy one last conspiracy.

The game is on.

I will be updating the table and theory list regularly.

  • If you have theories, issues, or meta to add, please comment.
  • If you think a theory does address an issue that the table says it does not address (or vice versa), please comment.
  • If I described your theory inaccurately or you just want to add something, please comment.

If I tagged any of your meta above: I would love to add any other work you’ve done that I haven’t seen.  If you’d like to add something, please comment it and I would love to include it in the next update.

-soe

Tags under the cut.

Keep reading

This is stunning! Thanks for assembling this incredible list!

Wow amazing list!!! Thanks for all your work you put in here @sherlock-overflow-error

HOLD THE FUCK UP

sherlockedtjlc:

At the end of tfp, Sherlock says, “You killed my best friend”, while crying. This could be referencing the fact that John really is dying because he got shot in tld. Victor Trevor is a mirror for John, and John is Sherlock’s best friend. They made a huge deal out of establishing them as best friends in tsot. I don’t think they would use the term again if they weren’t making a connetion between them. So if tfp really is happening in John’s mind bungalow, he’s imagining Sherlock getting upset over his possible death. end meee nowww

there’s a tranquilizer gun in 221b!!?

shouldjuststopbeinghurtingnow:

Okay so I went back to check out 221b on google maps again and made a very intersting discovery. this is the table in their living room…

let’s zoom in on this a bit and…. voilà!

there we have it. what else is this if not a bloody tranquilizer gun?!?

like, I I did a quick search online and couldn’t find the exact same model but it looks very similar to this one:

so yeah, Mofftiss clearly know the difference between a handgun and a tranquilizer and so does John Watson – who was definitely shot in TLD – and not with a tranquilizer gun…

“I made me” vs. “Eurus made you”: some rambling and likely incoherent thoughts on this apparent contradiction

anarfea:

unreconstructedfangirl:

Something I really liked in the story from TAB to TFP is the whole question of what made Sherlock what he is – and indeed, I think it’s the central question in TFP. I’ve read lots of comments on this in people’s meta around here, and wanted to have a go at saying what I liked about the storytelling in this particular regard.

Many have noted the apparent contradiction between Sherlock’s “Nothing made me. I made me” and Mycroft’s saying that everything Sherlock is, ever decision he’s ever made is because of Eurus. I feel like a mistake we make is taking everything the text tells us as a thing we are being told directly by the text, rather than thinking about how reliable what the text is telling us really is, considering the source and the character who says it.

I loved Sherlock’s “I made me” in TAB. It was one of my favourite moments. I loved the idea that in his mind, he was able to take responsibility for himself, and know, somewhere deep inside, that he was the one making the decisions that kept him separate and alone. I feel like, if we can realise that WE choose things, then we have some kind of agency, and power over them, and I like the idea of his having that kind of power over his own narrative. So, when this story of Eurus and young Victor comes along, and Mycroft tells us of that this isn’t true – in fact, Eurus made him? If I’m  to take that at face value, it’s disappointing – childhood trauma made Sherlock what he is.

Dull – and done to death, right?

The thing I love, though, is that they are both right, and both wrong, and I really enjoyed thinking about what the constellations are in the spaces between them.

What we all do, every day (and I think being in love with and retelling this story is part of this effort for many of us) is tell ourselves the daily story of what we mean and who we are. In the words of Neurologist Oliver Sacks, we “throw bridges of meaning over abysses of meaninglessness” and create ourselves via narrative – the stories we tell ourselves about who we are. This is what makes us human beings – this continual myth-making – and this narrative of who we are and what we mean is a construct of our minds.

So…Sherlock told himself a story – he made himself. It was a defensive mechanism, and it coincided with his emotional withdrawal, a mechanism he used to protect himself from the pain of love, loss, grief, and importantly, horror. Sherlock made himself, and part of making himself was denying the fact that other people have the power to shape us, and reshape our narrative. He radically claimed agency in defiance of pain. But, it’s not quite true, and what’s more he can’t quite stay away from a world full of horror, can he? As a detective and a junkie, he tries to solve the mystery of horror and pain over and over again while keeping emotional reality at a distance.

Mycroft, meanwhile, sees Sherlock from the outside – sees him as a victim of trauma whose subsequent decision not to feel has kept him safe from further trauma, and he encourages it: “…caring is not an advantage … don’t get involved … Redbeard!” Mycroft sees Sherlock as fragile, prone to self-destruction, and in need of protection – as powerless, and he’s not wrong. Sherlock is compulsive, an addict, and a person in denial of his own heart. Mycroft acts out of love in a paternalistic manner towards not only Sherlock, but the whole family, because that’s the story Mycroft told himself… and the story tells us that this is “limited”, and it is. It’s nice that in the end, Sherlock is able to see that Mycroft did his best, though. That’s real progress.

The fact that both of these things “made” Sherlock isn’t a contradiction, it’s two seemingly contradictory things that are both true from different perspectives; two data points that allow us to see what’s happening when Sherlock remembers Victor and opens his heart to his Eurus, and then chooses the path that will allow him to remake himself, having integrated what he knows into a truer version of events. He DID make himself, and also, she made him. We are not impervious to others, but we do choose which way we go. Sherlock chooses love.

The experiments Eurus runs to try to find out who Sherlock is – what he will do given the choices she gives him all lead to this question of what he will do with her when he knows the truth – and she needs him to know, or she can never come down from her metaphorical plane. She loves him and she needs his love, so she is trying to find out how his love works throughout the episode. Because, Eurus did something terribly damaging, and she needs her brother to know it. She also loves him, and needs him to love her. I love that Sherlock, because of everything that he has been through and felt and experienced is able to have the empathetic response that he has. That he realises that he has a role in healing something in her, as she has healed something in him by finally helping him to see that he is not, never has been, and can never be an island.

And I love, at the end, seeing Sherlock embrace the fact that who we are
is a co-creation – a relationship between the people we love and our
responses to them. We are not islands of independent myth-making.
Sherlock Holmes is not an isolated freakish genius – he is a person of
some experience and the wisdom that came from it – he has a past, he
lived a life. 

The final scenes, in which John and Sherlock embrace what they can be together, and rebuild their home and their hearts to include all that they have experienced and become because of love, and they are surrounded by their village of loved ones were really moving to me. In fact, when I watched it again, I didn’t even hate Mary’s voice over – she was an important part of their shared story, she loved them both, and she belongs there. I really like this as the beginning of them BEING WHAT THEY ARE in legend – a brilliant, humane detective and his astute storyteller who is smarter than he looks, and now the myth they are making is their partnership. It’s a story with both horror and love, and the only way it is what it is, is in partnership. I mean… I loved that!

Plus, parentlock. COME ON! It’s like a cherry on top.

Was it ham-handed in some ways, and even stupid? Yes. Yes it was. But, I
loved what it was TRYING to do, and I think that was enough for me to just
go with it in TFP, rather than picking it to pieces. I liked thinking these thoughts, and I like who Sherlock and John are in the end.

Anyway, YMMV, but… that’s
me. I think this is a big part of what I liked about TFP.

So, I agree with your analysis but one of the things that always got me about the line, “you do remember her, in a way. Every choice you ever made, every path you’ve ever taken, the man you are today: is your memory of Eurus.” is how true this is–of Mycroft.

Mycroft says, “what Uncle Rudi began, I thought it best to continue.” Locking Eurus up wasn’t Mycroft’s choice. If we decide that they took Eurus away when she was five (which I’m basing solely on child Eurus’ apparent age and Mycroft’s comment to the governor that “she’s been capable of [enslaving people] since she was five”), then Mycroft was thirteen. He was a child. Rudi decided to lock Eurus up in Sherrinford with the “uncontainables” and like to Mr and Mrs Holmes about the fate of their daughter. Mycroft simply carried on the lie. Again, he was thirteen and presumably traumatized by knowing that his sister killed his brother’s best friend and his brother no longer remembered her. Presumably he thought it would be best if his parents could also, if not forget that Eurus existed, then move on with their lives thinking she was gone.

But that decision irrevocably changed Mycroft’s relationship with his parents, and with Sherlock. It isolated him from his entire family (ironically, except for Eurus, the only one in on his secret). Mycroft spent Christmas with Eurus and Jim Moriarty and then went home to drink alone while Sherlock celebrated at 221b surrounded by friends.

Uncle Rudi also seems to have set Mycroft on his career path. He seems to have been some kind of shadowy government spook, and put Mycroft on the path to shadowy government spook. Who knows who or what he might have been if he hadn’t spent his entire life protecting this secret.

So yes, Mycroft is the man he is today because of Eurus. And IMO, he’s projecting when he says that about Sherlock. It’s true for him, so he thinks it’s true for his brother. And on some level, it is. Someone on my dash (i think @themissadventurer?) was saying that when Sherlock says “I made me,” in TAB, we hear a dog barking in the background and he says “Redbeard,” immediately after. Of course his childhood trauma influenced him. We are all shaped by our childhood traumas (or at least I know I was). So Eurus having shaped them is the truth.

But the truth, as Oscar Wilde said, and TFP keeps reminding us, is rarely pure, and never simple.