dun-dun-dudek-blog - Tumblr blog

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Sherlock S4 fuckiness and the post-its I keep to remind me of it

In no particular order, I present the list of things that are particulary infuriating to me about S4 that I’ve been keeping on post-its by my bedside table the last month in case I lose hope. They are, for me, enough proof for The Lost Special. Today being 8th of March it seems fitting to keep them in mind.

(Disclaimer: this is a compound of theories developed by hundreds of people over a long time and I cannot possibly credit everyone or explain them at this point, so I’ll just list them.)

The Importance Of Being Ernest, by Oscar Wilde being quoted in TFP

Mycroft-> Lady Bracknell, the baby in the handbag = gun in the handbag (Euros and Vivian Norbury). The baby gets thrown in the Thames?

Queen’s I Want To Break Free in TFP stoping at “I’ve fallen in…” (love)

Elephant Glass Shock Proof in Euros’s cell

The elephant in the Thai menu in Mycroft’s frige

Rosie’s elephant toy

The elephant in John’s living room

The endless horror film references in TFP (many of them being hyper meta, especially Shutter Island)

John/Culverton mirror

Una Stubbs’ voice in TFP “Softer, Sherlock” intead of Euros’

Russian and Turkish leaks with no reaction

Over reaction with the promo chess pictures being leaked

Promo pictures being very similar to Clue’s movie poster -> Clue’s different endings and the similar final paused shot in TFP

The bulding up to Moriarty not making any sense (especially if we take into account M Theory, because he IS alive)

TLD having the gun shown multiple times, a smoking gun that is definitely not a tranquiliser gun. The last shot fading with red, like in Bond movies

The enormous red carpet under John in the therapist that resembles the blood pool in the market

HLV/TLD paralels

Martin breaking the 4th wall in T6T noding to the camera while holding the wine glass

SHERLOCK: Romantic entanglement, while fulfilling for other people … JOHN (interrupting): … would complete you as a human being. NO PAY OFF FOR THIS. This mirrors the greenhouse conversation in TAB

Why was Molly upset when Euros called in TFP?

John/Molly mirror (Molly wearing the same jumper she wore in TEH while taking John’s place, the framing of that hellish shot with John and the coffin cover “I love you”)

“John is clearly standing behind him in the trailer, so unless he’s talking to a mirror for some very bizarre reason, I should think not.” -Mark

Sumatra/Samarra pointing out to TEH which lead us to The Lost Special and MINDING THE FREAKING GAP->Moriarty

“It’s never twins”

The camera shown in the hotel in T6T

Season 4 DVD not having “complete” like the other DVD’s had

Mark’s picture with the 4 fingers raised in Twitter

“Has it just occurred to you you’ve been played for an ad campaign” hello Apple Tree Yard  

Moriarty at the end of S4 DVD “You didn’t think I would just disappear, did you?”

The whole promotion about S4 and the season itself being about hacking

Skull Hell

Sherlock saving the tea cup and the boy in the hotel in T6T dropping the tea

Tea code being confirmed

“Is this a new person? I’m against new people.”

“You’d be better off with clown outfits. At least they’d be satirically relevant.”

Cake=violent death John and Sherlock going to get cake

Lady Smallwood’s name

Vatican cameos ignored

“And boop, they are fine”

Sherlock breaks the 4th wall (like in Queen’s I Want To Break Free videoclip)

WHERE IS JOHN’S LETTER

The Garridebs literally cliff-hanging

Chekhov’s gun on the promo picture and literally hanging on the wall in the Garridebs scene

“People always give up after three” 

Blue Power Ranger gay subtext

T6T being an old case about a gay couple -> Margaret Thatcher getting smashed, Sherlock not knowing who she is despite the fact that he knew in THoB

“Fresh paint to disguise another smell”

Mycroft watching his own romantic movie turning into an horror film

T6T starting with doctored footage

“That’s not what happened at all”

“Why does anyone do anything” Norbury/Moriarty

“Sherlock, the dragon slayer” (Mycroft, Moriarty and kinda Magnussen have all alluded to this and now Mary does)

Shark hell

Sherlock’s recurrent dream (?)

“Oh, good, I love an acronym. All the best secret societies have them.”

“It is what it is” either being followed by “says love” or being a quote by John Locke

MARCH 8. THE SECRET WILL BE UNLEASHED

"I don’t like loose ends. Not on my watch” says Mycroft/Mark, as he holds a pen and looks at the camera

#Ohwhatabeautifulmorning tying in with Oklahoma! and consequently with  Green Grow the Lilacs, a play with gay subtext all over that got misunderstood and very famous

Steven starting TLS rumors

TD-12 being memory corrupting

The freaking guy from the official Sherlock Youtube channel teasing TLS and saying “The greatest love story never told”

The girl on the plane being the same one from ASiB

The TAB-like transition when John faints in TFP

The S1 scripts being released for no reason

“Childhood trauma masked by an invented memory. Boring!” THoB (person=dog)  

Mary’s death not being realistic as pointed in HLV (thank you for reminding me, @antisocial-otaku)

TFP as a whole. Too much to analyze there

Bonus:

“Love conquers all” 

“Groundbreaking”

“History making”

“Rug pull”

Derren Brown

Tags under the cut

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Listen, I don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow, but if I was hiding a lost special, and I had planted a billboard-sized clue in one of my episodes with the words “on March 8th the secret will be unleashed,” I would almost certainly release a teaser on BBC One featuring a glitching Moriarty saying “You didn’t think that was the whole story, did you?” and if not that I would definitely put a surprise minisode on YouTube with the announcement for the upcoming lost special at the end… either one would get lots of buzz and people reassessing their impressions of series 4 and going back to do what all of us have been doing all along, looking for clues and playing the game they’ve laid out for us within the show itself… get everybody intrigued and excited again for this history-making insane wish fulfillment etc etc… who knows about Mofftiss I’m just saying that’s what I’D do…

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

What if this is actually true?

I was thinking yesterday and I realised I never questioned how well Moriarty was able to sell his fake actor persona. Sherlock thought it was because of the key that’s able to break into every computer, but we know that that key doesn’t exist, so how was moriarty able to do it?

I definitely hated the reporter chick, but are you telling me she didn’t at least check out these shows and see if he was actually in them? And it took the police over two years to prove Moriarty was actually real. If all of these were fake I’m sure it would only have took them a couple of days. Or what Moriarty was actually an actor on the side in case this situation ever came up? 

No, I think Richard Brooke got the same deal as the cabbie. Maybe he was dying as well and in exchange for money he took up the persona of Moriarty.

So, who’s behind Moriarty? Mary, of course. She’s been orchestrating all of this from the beginning. Remember in the blind banker just before Shan was killed, she got a message from M and we assumed it meant Moriarty? Well, what if it was actually Mary?

It was Mary all along who wanted to burn Sherlock’s heart out. She made him into a fake and got him to take his own life. I do think that for a while there she actually believed that he was dead, but if Anderson could figure out he wasn’t dead then so could she. She called Mycroft and got him to tell the police and media that Moriarty was real and Sherlock is innocent, so he could come back.

So, I think she realised that killing him wasn’t the best idea anyway and decided to take something way more important from him, John. And boy did she try to break them up. Marrying him, then getting pregnant all that just to chain John to herself. 

Shooting Sherlock in HLV was a mistake, because she didn’t plan on him interrupting her. What Magnussen knew could have blown her whole operation apart and she had to stop him, but also couldn’t let Sherlock stop her.

And then in s4 we really saw her evil side. Saving Sherlock from a bullet and making John lash out at him trying to drive a wedge between them. Sending Sherlock to hell was just a little bonus.

This is it though. She ruined him and the possibility of John and Sherlock ever getting together. I mean look at her evil face. This was her plan all along.

But yet again she underestimated the love John and Sherlock have for each other and that they can always find their way back to one another. 

So, I think she was done waiting and just ended up shooting John. There’s no Eurus, it’s always been her and she put a bullet through John’s eye and Sherlock is the only one who can save him.

So yeah this is my theory, on the one hand i hate it cause it would mean moriarty is not real but i love him so much, but on the other hand it would reveal mary to be even more of despicable human being than we could have ever anticipated. 

Sorry if this has been talked about before, please do link me to other metas on this if you have any.

Tags under the cut (if you want me to untag you please let me know, i just don’t have too many followers but am excited about this)

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

What if this is actually true?

I was thinking yesterday and I realised I never questioned how well Moriarty was able to sell his fake actor persona. Sherlock thought it was because of the key that’s able to break into every computer, but we know that that key doesn’t exist, so how was moriarty able to do it?

I definitely hated the reporter chick, but are you telling me she didn’t at least check out these shows and see if he was actually in them? And it took the police over two years to prove Moriarty was actually real. If all of these were fake I’m sure it would only have took them a couple of days. Or what Moriarty was actually an actor on the side in case this situation ever came up? 

No, I think Richard Brooke got the same deal as the cabbie. Maybe he was dying as well and in exchange for money he took up the persona of Moriarty.

So, who’s behind Moriarty? Mary, of course. She’s been orchestrating all of this from the beginning. Remember in the blind banker just before Shan was killed, she got a message from M and we assumed it meant Moriarty? Well, what if it was actually Mary?

It was Mary all along who wanted to burn Sherlock’s heart out. She made him into a fake and got him to take his own life. I do think that for a while there she actually believed that he was dead, but if Anderson could figure out he wasn’t dead then so could she. She called Mycroft and got him to tell the police and media that Moriarty was real and Sherlock is innocent, so he could come back.

So, I think she realised that killing him wasn’t the best idea anyway and decided to take something way more important from him, John. And boy did she try to break them up. Marrying him, then getting pregnant all that just to chain John to herself. 

Shooting Sherlock in HLV was a mistake, because she didn’t plan on him interrupting her. What Magnussen knew could have blown her whole operation apart and she had to stop him, but also couldn’t let Sherlock stop her.

And then in s4 we really saw her evil side. Saving Sherlock from a bullet and making John lash out at him trying to drive a wedge between them. Sending Sherlock to hell was just a little bonus.

This is it though. She ruined him and the possibility of John and Sherlock ever getting together. I mean look at her evil face. This was her plan all along.

But yet again she underestimated the love John and Sherlock have for each other and that they can always find their way back to one another. 

So, I think she was done waiting and just ended up shooting John. There’s no Eurus, it’s always been her and she put a bullet through John’s eye and Sherlock is the only one who can save him.

So yeah this is my theory, on the one hand i hate it cause it would mean moriarty is not real but i love him so much, but on the other hand it would reveal mary to be even more of despicable human being than we could have ever anticipated. 

Sorry if this has been talked about before, please do link me to other metas on this if you have any.

Tags under the cut (if you want me to untag you please let me know, i just don’t have too many followers but am excited about this)

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Since I’m never gonna do a whole rewrite of The Final Problem I might as well post my version of the “I love you”-scene here. Enjoy

“I love you” the golden plaque on the coffin stated.

“Someone who loves Sherlock”, Mycroft said.

“Irene!”, John burst out.

Sherlock shook his head, almost irritated. “Look at the coffin, too big.”

Mycroft just stood in the corner, hands behind his back, fixing both of them with a look that was hard to read.

“It’s simple, not a lot of fuss.”, Sherlock walked around the coffin again, stopped, bent down to look at the padding again. Then he shot up.

“Molly. Molly Hooper”

John nodded “Yes, it has to be her!”

The screen in front of them switched on, Eurus was giggling. “Oh Sherlock”, the voice in the speakers sounded genuinely amused “Romantic love is a beautiful thing, isn’t it? Molly Hooper is certainly someone who loves you, but where would be the fun in picking a person whose feelings you already knew?”

“Well how am I supposed to find the name then?”, Sherlock furrowed his brows.

“You will”, Eurus smiled sweetly, which only benefitted her in looking more sinister. “And”, she continued “to give you some motivation I’m setting a countdown. You have one minute to find the name or the room will blow up.”, she smiled again “though I will give you a hint: look close to home.”

The screen changed abruptly to Jim Moriarty’s face whispering “Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock” in a nerve-wrecking loop. Suddenly the room was tinted red, another screen counted back the seconds mercilessly.

Sherlock was already in deduction-mode, waving his hands in the air, shifting clues only he could see, his mouth talking stream of conscience.

“OK, close to home, close to home, that means Baker Street, where else? Or it could be in a figurative sense, meaning people who are close to me. Well, that narrows it down quite a bit. It’s not Molly, and although Mrs Hudson has a poor track-record in choosing romantic partners I doubt she carries that kind of sentiment for me-”

“Sherlock”

“Lestrade has been recently divorced, but is he that desperate? How about-”

“Sherlock stop it!”

John wasn’t looking at him, eyes firmly fixed on the ground. The fists with which he held on to the sides of the coffin trembled slightly.

“John, we don’t have long!”

“Yes, and that is why I’m trying to tell you something if you’ll just listen!”, he pressed out between clenched teeth.

Surprised by John’s anger Sherlock blinked.

Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock

“It’s me.”

It was almost a whisper, but it rang through the room like a gunshot.

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

s4, breaking the fourth wall, the arg, and gaslighting as literary device

And if the pretentious title didn’t frighten you away, or cause you to immediately unfollow / block me, I offer some thoughts:

Following the cues left by the hot mess s4, it’s reasonable to assert the following (which has been asserted just about non-stop since each of the episodes aired; I am not pretending to be original here):

s4 is fucky in a way that seems to call attention to its own fuckyness, especially if you take events and themes of the previous series as guidelines for what to expect / how things work in the world of Sherlock. (A ton of people have done a ton of work on this, but thanks to @antisocial-otaku​ for making it clear how frickin obvious this pattern is, here.)

The subtext is richer / more coherent than the text, especially in The Final Problem. (Links # 2 and 3 to videos by @marcespot​–shameless self-promo in #1 and #4)

Breaking the fourth wall is a major theme. This includes s4 references to Twitter, and the #sherlocklive event, as well as the numerous and sometimes literal references to breaking the fourth wall. (post by @inevitably-johnlocked​) 

As much as recent arg developments have been A Ride, I really think we’ve missed the obvious, because it wasn’t nearly as much of a challenge as people were looking for / as the fandom genius hive brain is capable of meeting. I think we’ve been looking too hard.

The puzzle, the thing we are supposed to figure out, is s4 itself. The game is simply this: we are invited to have discernment with regard to what is and what is not possible in the world of BBC Sherlock, and to conclude, as most people did, that much of s4 is, indeed, not compatible with the world of Sherlock. The truth of the narrative is in the subtext, as almost everyone here has argued.

The narrative of s4 is, for the most part, really hard to get hold of, and full of content that blatantly works against everything the show has tried to set up so far. As much as I appreciate attempts to make sense of s4 as is, my mind, like a lot of people’s, recoils when asked to consider (for example) that the people who wrote this:

.

Also wrote this:

.

You’ve all seen the evidence. You’ve all watched The Final Problem and thought–what the hell is this? 

People in this fandom were crying foul from the moment TST ended. I think we were already playing the arg then (if such a thing exists), and we kept playing it all through s4, because we were thinking critically about the episodes, and questioning the reality status of the story with which we were presented.

Up until recently, I would have said, meh, maybe this apparent lack of skill on the part of the showrunners was deliberate, maybe it wasn’t. Maybe they just threw in a ton of excess detail (like Mr. Glowy Skull) because why not? I am not very big on writerly intention. The text I’m presented with, I feel free to interpret however I wish, and this, to me, is the point of s4. It undoes itself. It undoes the text of series 1-3. It invites critique in a whole new way. Regardless of what does or does not happen next, I will always choose to question this narrative, to read against the text, because that reading is more interesting and less infuriating. s4, like mofftiss, lies. 

But.

The part that makes me think the arg is happening right in front of us, and it’s still live: 

This fucking thing.

This “John and Mary really love each other” barf festival video, released on 28 February. (Savage and efficient crit here, by @smoljohnlock​) 

WHY NOW?

I could see, maybe, that video flying as an s4 preview, but we have it released here, now, after…all that, when we know that the picture being presented in it is nowhere near the reality that we got in the narrative.

I don’t want to say it’s a sign. I don’t know, man. I’m tired. We’re all tired. But that video certainly did invite a renewal of the wtf-was-that outrage of s4, didn’t it?

The fourth wall, in my opinion, has already been broken. 

The show has been teaching us how to observe, and not just see, to think critically, and to look for solutions to puzzles, since the beginning. Now it’s turning the function of detective over to us. 

Just like the #sherlocklive game was designed to allow us to practice our puzzle solving on a small scale, so is s4. The entire narrative invites us to sit up, take notice, and say, come on, that can’t be how it really happened.

I’m still not going to predict the future here. The show has broken the fourth wall before, and paid off careful observation, via the “1895″ clues. It might be doing that with the “March 8″ billboard thing. It might not. When I say that the narrative is unfinished, I mean exactly that–it lacks an ending (much like my languishing WiPs…sorry about those, btw). What will happen next? Who knows? None of us. Signs (that’s literal, billboard-type signs) point to something more. 

BUT IS IT ART?

So: we have been presented with not one, but two false narratives. If mofftiss finish their damn story, and offer some sort of explanation for all the fuckery of s4, then we’ll have been told a bunch of lies in-story, about “what happened” to John and Sherlock, and a bunch of extratextual lies, about s4 being finished after three episodes. 

I will always assert, regardless of what happens next, that the in-story lies are there, and believing the textual level of the narrative makes less sense / is less happy making than believing that the story lies. As for the bigger lie, about the length of s4 / the end of this narrative–we’ll see. 

It’s a peculiar choice, this, as modern storytelling goes. Rather than just, you know, tell the story they wanted to tell, about a detective and his blogger, they’re really going the long way round. If the “s4 is fake” reading is confirmed, and there is a plan in place, it’s show-offy. It’s audacious. It’s gaslighting the audience to make a point. It’s putting us through an experience–the textual level content of s4–and asking us to believe something contrary to that experience. 

It’s not…enjoyable? Like with everything else, I think I’ll be left questioning why this way, and not some other way. It is, potentially, fascinating. 

If this is what we think it is, we’ve been playing all along, without even trying.

Tags under the cut.

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Have we talked about the swoop man on the plane?

He’s got a swoop.

Ooh, look, he’s overlaid with John here:

Probably a coincidence.

But then there’s this:

So is the plane scene meant to represent this car ride somehow?

@disregardedletters @tjlcisthenewsexy @jenna221b @consultingeastwind @holmesianscholar @just-sort-of-happened @marcespot @sister-edgelord @the-7-percent-solution @tjlc

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Confused over a scene

John’s Note scene. Here is Sherlock emerging up the stairs after receiving the note from Molly in unaired footage. 

Watching this made me wonder about a setlock discrepancy. Why did they shoot this scene twice and then not use the Molly shots? Let me explain:

OK: They shoot the scene in Cardiff at the location for the Watson’s flat/maisonette used in HLV.

Blue door to Watson’s basement maisonette.

Molly and Rosie with Sherlock.

Then during TLD Sherlock has a memory of this event but not at the same location:

This is on location in London and the basement flat of this London mews house apparently reminds Sherlock of John’s note as he hears Molly’s voice in his head saying the lines from the actual event filmed in Cardiff.

But here is the thing. They went to the expense of having Loo on set during the London location, dressed in the same costume as she wore in the Cardiff scene and with a baby. 

This was from setlock in London on TLD. They even brought the Watson’s front door to the London location:

Yet they didn’t use this footage. Just had Sherlock walking down a street and hearing Molly’s words concerning John’s note.

Why go to the expense of having Loo there, only to use a voice over? They paid for the baby to be there, they transported the door. Why?

It could be an editing choice. It could be there is more to the note than we are shown. What the hell did that note say? Is there a third version of this event we haven’t seen? Will Sherlock revisit this in his MP another time?

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

S4 Inconsistences

I know we’re already discussed a ton of times how S4 doesn’t make sense (specially TFP) but I wanted to make it even more clear, and explain with this why to me S4 (and again, specially TFP) is fake and why there must be something more to explain all of these inconsistences. I understand there could be continuity errors or some things that they could have not noticed, with such big projects there’s always this kind of things, it can happen, but please look at this:

1) We’re told in ASIB what happens when a person falls from Baker Street window

And then in TFP is just like:

??? Ok Mark, sure!

2) In HLV we clearly saw how a gunshot looks like

But then in TST is like:

What was that? seriously! Why is the blood coming out like that?? Why is Mary flying? 

3) In TGG we’re shown how how a flat explosion looks like 

But then in TFP we get this:

(sorry for the shitty quality but this gif was long af D:) But the wall, them and Mrs. Hudson are perfectly ok. 

4) In TGG we saw how Sherlock reacts when John is in danger and has to save him

But then in TFP we get….this?

WTF Sherlock, mate??? He’s gonna drown! *SIGH*

5) In TRF we painfully see how John reacts when he knows he’s about to see a beloved person die

And yeah, in TST he’s like:

He looks like he was waiting for her to die fgs!!

If you come up with more examples please tell me and I’ll gladly gif them.

I’ll tag some people under the cut, if you want me to untag you please tell me

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Look at this transition from this fan video by @thepteryx I am    s c r e a m i n g

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Ostalgie

I’ve been musing about this for a while, and finally took the time to put it together. It’s a long one, but mainly because of the images.

In The Six Thatchers, we are shown Mary’s apparent flight from London, through randomly selected places around the world. Many of us have noticed that elements of this flight are strange; I’m going to discuss some of them here.

First, Mary seems to be selecting her destinations based on (a) three rolls of a die and (b) the selection of a location based on this roll – from this source:

Many of the place names listed here are obsolete. There are references to East Germany (reunited with West Germany in 1990), the USSR (dissolved in 1991) and Yugoslavia (dissolved in 2006). Many of the cities are very old, but Noranda, Quebec, was founded in 1926 and became Rouyn-Noranda in 1986, so that sets the date limits for this source. Most of this period was dominated by the Cold War, which lasted from 1947 to 1991.

Maps and more under the cut.

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Irene vs. John What might we deduce about his heart?

Bonus:

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Part One

Part Two

AO3

For the first time in several weeks, Sherlock allowed himself to look in the mirror.

His face was still gaunt, his eyes still dim, but there was a vibrancy that hadn’t been there a few days ago. That would be due to all the tea and food he’d been force-fed by Molly, Mrs. Hudson, and Lestrade. The dark circles under his eyes hadn’t lessened much, but they weren’t as pronounced now. And, most importantly, his growing facial hair was gone. His hands still had difficulty keeping steady, but Lestrade had helped shave him when he’d been by two days ago.

Once Sherlock had composed himself, Lestrade eyed him thoughtfully and ran his fingers over the stubble on Sherlock’s jaw. “You hate this, don’t you?”

“What do you think?” Sherlock tried to sound his normal haughty self in an attempt to erase the memory of what had just transpired between them, but his nose was still stuffed, and it just made him sound pathetic. Lestrade nodded and steered him into the bathroom, where he carefully shaved off every strand of hair.

That simple act was what spurred Sherlock into cleaning the rest of himself up. He showered once Lestrade left and washed his hair. The next day, instead of wearing his dressing gown and pajamas around the flat, he’d put on one of his usual suits and button-down shirts. He even wore shoes despite not actually leaving the place. He just needed to feel clean again. To feel like an actual functioning person.

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

This is not the end (we were told between the lines).

We all know: TAB works as a mirror-episode for the events of following episodes. And how does TAB end?

With a remake of ACD’s TFP: Moriarty and Holmes face each other at the Reichenbach Falls to die together. But: TAB doesn’t follow ACD’s storyline here anymore, because the circumstances - times - have changed; other than in ACD’s TFP, John is there to save Sherlock from his demons, because he is the only one capable of doing so. The only uncontrollable variable.

But how does Moftiss’ TFP end?

John is reduced to a simple plot device; his absence wouldn’t have changed the events much either. He doesn’t save Sherlock, because he is utterly helpless. Again, Sherlock is the one to save John. But it’s not framed like any of that would really matter, anyway.

John is not there to save Sherlock from his demons; Sherlock has to face them all on his own. And - because John is not there this time - he gives in: Other than putting to rest what/who destroys him, moving on and living in happiness, he makes himself a humble, dependent slave to his demons.

That’s another reason for feeling rejection towards TFP: Because it wasn’t what we were told it would be, and it wasn’t at all what “love conquers all” feels like - it wasn’t a “happy end”, not for any of the characters at all. It was nothing new; it was subtly and slowly killing off the characters’ arcs which they painstakingly achieved throughout the first ten episodes:

“Does it really make a difference, killing the innocent instead of the guilty?”

It was no different than ACD’s TFP, because, in the end, Moriarty does win over Sherlock, does burn the heart out of him, for John is nothing more than a plot device - just for decoration and for the sake of character-set completeness, even his clothing merging with the background.

TAB’s foreshadowing may have gotten lost in people’s minds somewhere along the way - so remember:

It’s still to unfold.

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

The Alibi Woman

Something occurred to me the other day! (Observation Forthcoming!)

There are several reasons why The Six Thatchers begins with us revisiting the shooting scene in His Last Vow.

Firstly, Mofftiss had to do something to address any possible punishment that Sherlock might receive, especially after Mycroft made such a big deal of it after the event took place.

Secondly, Mofftiss needed the D Notice meeting scenes to establish the IDEA that events can be altered. (which is pretty much the theme for TST)

And finally, Mofftiss needed the meeting to introduce something that was missing from the original CAM shooting scene in His Last Vow.

What was missing? The woman who serves as an alibi.

What am I going on about, you might ask?

In the original story, “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton,” an anonymous woman shoots and kills CAM in front of Holmes and Watson, who are hiding in his office.

“She had drawn a little gleaming revolver, and emptied barrel after barrel into Milverton’s body, the muzzle within two feet of his shirt front. He shrank away and then fell forward upon the table, coughing furiously and clawing among the papers. Then he staggered to his feet, received another shot, and rolled upon the floor. “You’ve done me,” he cried, and lay still. The woman looked at him intently, and ground her heel into his upturned face. She looked again, but there was no sound or movement. I heard a sharp rustle, the night air blew into the heated room, and the avenger was gone.”

Maybe.

Moftiss have commented on this story several times, and from their point of view, the woman never existed and was made up by Watson as an alibi for Holmes. 

“Moffat: Also, if you read [The Adventure Of] Charles Augustus Milverton, Dr. Watson in the opening paragraph tells you that he’s about to tell you a porkie. He says, ‘I even now must be very reticent.’ I think what Doyle is hinting at is that Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson sat in Baker Street and said, 'Right, we’re going to have to go and kill him, aren’t we? That’s the only way we can do this.’ So they break in, kill him, and then Dr. Watson writes up a version of the story that puts the murder [on someone else].

Gatiss: They’re hiding in their burglar masks behind the curtain, and this random woman comes and shoots Milverton in the face and then grinds her heel into his face. It’s odd, isn’t it? So I mean really, it’s just an extrapolation of saying, 'Well, he probably did it, I think.’

Moffat: If Sherlock Holmes decided that somebody should die, he would kill them. I don’t think he’d have any problem with that.

Gatiss: He regards Milverton as a sort of plague, something that should be eradicated.”

(Empire interview)

For reference, here’s the beginning paragraph of the original story that Moffat mentions:

“It is years since the incidents of which I speak took place, and yet it is with diffidence that I allude to them. For a long time, even with the utmost discretion and reticence, it would have been impossible to make the facts public, but now the principal person concerned is beyond the reach of human law, and with due suppression the story may be told in such fashion as to injure no one. It records an absolutely unique experience in the career both of Mr. Sherlock Holmes and of myself. The reader will excuse me if I conceal the date or any other fact by which he might trace the actual occurrence.”

Ok, now back the the beginning of TST, and the D notice meeting.

Who is introduced here?

Vivian Norbury.

My theory is that Mofftiss took the alibi woman and moved her from one story into the next one.

Instead of Sherlock needing an alibi for killing CAM, in The Six Thatchers, John needs an alibi for killing Mary.

So, enter Vivian Norbury. Who doesn’t really exist. Just like the vengeful woman in “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton.” The writers took inspiration from their interpretation of the original story, as they have done all along in the show, and we had a clue to ‘alibi theory” all along.

I just didn’t notice that aspect of it until now. 

I have more to say on the topics of the aquarium scene, Mary’s death, and other reasons why I don’t think Vivian Norbury exists, and they can be found below, so I don’t have to repeat myself here. That would be boring for all of us, especially if you’ve already read them!

1 Rewatch the Aquarium Scene (initial post about this)

2 Bringing TST and TLD Together (a good recap of a couple of entries)

3 You Told Yourself a Better Story (doesn’t mention Norbury, but it feels weird not to put it here, as it relates to the others)

As always, apologies for tagging the unwilling or missing a tag! Please share with whoever may be interested. 

@marathecactupus @k-s-morgan @the-7-percent-solution @sherlock-overflow-error @sherlockedmeta @gingerhermit @mycroftseyebrow @averybritishbumblebee @inevitably-johnlocked @just-sort-of-happened @melody-clark @hnm22705

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Bringing TST and TLD together.

Before TFP airs, I wanted to create a post that brings together my theory about what’s been going on in these first two episodes. I can’t speak to every plot point, because I don’t have all the answers, and this blog will be long enough! Since my opinion on some things has changed slightly since the first episode, I wanted to clarify.

For me, the two most problematic aspects of The Six Thatchers were John’s behaviors and the aquarium scene. At first, I believed that Sherlock was the narrator here, so that whatever was wonky about these scenes was coming from him. I‘ve revised that idea a bit, because John is the reason for the wonkiness, supported by Sherlock, and all their friends.

First, the aquarium scene:

Some of you have read my initial post about the aquarium scene. I stand by that. 

Humor me for a moment, ok?

Rewatch the aquarium scene, (remembering the text that Sherlock sent Mary immediately before this about final acts) and pretend for a moment that it’s Mary that Sherlock is meeting at the aquarium.

Pretend that Norbury is Mary and that everything Norbury says is coming from Mary. Disregard what Sherlock says about Norbury…his deductions about her specifically, like the cats, flat, etc. (for purposes of this exercise, he’s making it up)

Listen to Norbury’s lines as if they are coming from Mary. Now pretend that when Mary shows up in the scene, that it’s actually JOHN showing up, and pretend her lines and actions are coming from him.

I think this is what might have happened here, and that John wouldn’t let Mary shoot Sherlock. John chooses Sherlock over a woman again, and he shoots Mary with the gun he always brings along. And Sherlock is either intentionally making up this Norbury story to cover for John, or he is so traumatized by Mary’s betrayal that his mind pulled a Henry, like in THB, and made up a better story, one easier to cope with.

And then

I have come to believe that Vivian Norbury doesn’t actually exist. I’m still not certain about whether Sherlock invents her to cope with trauma or as an alibi for John, but I lean toward coping mechanism. I’ll get to why in a minute.

Evidence for the idea that Vivian is made up entirely:

The first time we see her, no one speaks to her but Sherlock. No one even acknowledges her presence. Mycroft makes a comment about not creating minutes, but he is merely looking toward the front of the room when he says it. Then, in the same scene, he says that only four people (4 code names) will know the truth of the Magnussen mess. There are supposedly five people in the room. (Also, are there only four glasses on the tray?)

The next time we see Norbury, she is with Lady Smallwood when Smallwood gets brought in for questioning. No one speaks to Norbury here either.

And finally, the aquarium scene. As I said, I think that Norbury is actually Mary. All of the dialogue here about Norbury directly is suspect. I think it’s Sherlock making up details/deductions to support his delusion/alibi. Which explains Mycroft finally speaking to Norbury/Mary.

Would you like some visual evidence that Mary is Vivian? I can do that. 

Keep reading

[dun-dun-dudek-blog]

Rewatch the aquarium scene!! *spoilers*

Humor me for a moment, ok?

Rewatch the aquarium scene, (remembering the text that Sherlock sent Mary immediately before this about final acts) and pretend for a moment that it’s Mary that Sherlock is meeting at the aquarium.

Pretend that Norbury is Mary and that everything Norbury says is coming from Mary. Disregard what Sherlock says about Norbury…his deductions about her specifically, like the cats, flat, etc. (for purposes of this exercise, he’s making it up)

Listen to Norbury’s lines as if they are coming from Mary. Now pretend that when Mary shows up in the scene, that it’s actually JOHN showing up, and pretend her lines and actions are coming from him.

I think this is what might have happened here, and that John wouldn’t let Mary shoot Sherlock. John chooses Sherlock over a woman again, and he shoots Mary with the gun he always brings along. And Sherlock is either intentionally making up this Norbury story to cover for John, or he is so traumatized by Mary’s betrayal that his mind pulled a Henry, like in THB, and made up a better story, one easier to cope with.

It might also explain the rage from John in this scene. And the reoccurring cheating dream might be Sherlock’s mind trying to cope with his feelings for John and the guilt associated with that and the whole Mary/baby situation.

I do feel a little wobbly about certain aspects of this theory as it relates to the rest of the storyline, but I think this really solves some of the weirdness we are associating with the episode. And we know Sherlock is an unreliable narrator, so it’s hard to know what’s going on for sure.

Thoughts?

I’m going to tag a couple of people, so I hope that’s ok. I haven’t done much of it, so…..

@just-sort-of-happened @finalproblem