#sherlock holmes and the internet of things

[drjohnhwatson]

one thing that makes me mad as a hornet is whenever I pick up a detective book especially if it’s in a series and I go to goodreads and see a slew of negative reviews becos inevitably I can tell you the tenor of it without even looking. “SHERLOCK HOLMES RIP-OFF” they all scream.

does your story have a duo solving crimes? SHERLOCK HOLMES RIP-OFF.

does your story have the narrator be the sidekick? SHERLOCK HOLMES RIP-OFF.

is your story’s detective eccentric in some manner of dress or personality? SHERLOCK HOLMES RIP-OFF.

I’ve picked up two detective series recently (the gower street detectives, barker & llewelyn) and we are two for two with people gnashing their teeth over it. Sherlock Holmes isn’t the only detective? Hello?? I guarantee if Agatha Christie was a writer now and published her first Poirot story TODAY, people would be gnashing their teeth and growling about how it’s just a flimsy SHERLOCK HOLMES RIP-OFF.

[myfandomrealitea]

That post you made about Harry Potter and how to not financially support and fund the franchise and put more money in Joanne's pockets felt like a lie because I swear I got the impression that even that wasn't allowed when the whole thing started

To be clear; I stopped. Completely. I compartmentalized it all and just stopped interacting with anything Harry Potter online whatsoever. But I always wished it would be fine to still be able to do certain fandom things without supporting her, but people were saying that even using the tag or reading the fanfiction or making fanart was still supporting the ip and not letting it die completely as a topic on the internet was indirectly putting money in her pockets.

It wasn't until I came across a post from a queer woman from somewhere in the global south with heavy OCD and intrusive thoughts or something like that, commenting on how hostile of a thing it became for someone of her affliction; the way people were treating it like do or die. Pointing out that no matter how much trans people and allys cut off their support of her, she has other large means of income that we won't be able to touch, and there will still always be transphobic homophobic Harry Potter fans that will continue to support her actively, putting that money in her pockets. Another thing she mentioned was the treatment of Harry Potter and Joannes bigotry in contrast to the treatment of FNAF and the creators bigotry. And lastly something about the USAmericanized nature of it? I don't really remember that part but I think I understood it at the time I read it (maybe it was something about all the other countries the IP is popular in who are probably more conservative and unaware or caring of the issues with her who will still put money in her pockets, or maybe it was something about American fans fixating and posing the support of her as the ultimate battlefield of Trans Rights to other queer and trans individuals trying to be quiet fans who are facing Much Worse in their countries)

Anyways after that I briefly started reading ao3 fanfic again, just put a filter for anything before 2019 or so, and then my interest more gently fizzled out.

I can't remember what my point is anymore, maybe just to bring these arguments to your attention(also I am not arguing against the financial boycott or ending of support for this woman through her ip).

Harry Potter will never stop earning money. That's just the flat reality of it; I mean, look at the likes of Elvis and the original Sherlock Holmes books and every other 'dead' media that's still earning money. Short of making Harry Potter an illegal piece of media, yes, there will still always be a number of people giving her money.

The goal is to give her less money. To turn Harry Potter from a prominent, profitable cashcow into a defunct piece of media that only select groups are still clinging to. To make it so that JK Rowling has to choose between paying her bills and funding anti-trans movements.

When something stops bringing in a certain amount of profit, studios start looking elsewhere. When a cashcow starts drying up, they stop trying to milk it as hard. Which in turn means less productions for JK Rowling to collect her pocketmoney from.

What would you rather; JK Rowling getting $100,000 or JK Rowling only getting $10,000?

Something is better than nothing. Damage reduction is better than open exposure. If everyone just rolled over and gave up because "things will keep happening anyway" the world will literally be a rancid, fetid wasteland of bigotry and violence.

I'd much rather watch JK Rowling fizzle out into a bitter old wench sustained only by the dogged support of other stubborn bigots than watch people willingly disregard and condone bigotry because its "easier" and "she'll be a bigot anyway."

I'd much rather JK Rowling only have $10,000 to donate to shitty movements over $72,000. Shitty movements can do a lot less with a lot less money.

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

why do so many people keep calling ed izzy's abuser? I thought it was kind of funny how wrong they were at first because I love being right but at this point I feel like, if you really believe that why do you even like this show? where the main love interest is a violently abusive indigenous man? that sounds boring as shit. what would possess the writers of the show for them to make such an awful decision?

but then I think, if this many people believe it does that mean I'm the one who's wrong? or is it that the creators fumbled that storyline when they should have been clearer about it? or maybe it's just that most people on here have had their reading comprehension scorched away by Sherlock Holmes conspiracy theories and Steven Universe discourse. I can't tell. sometimes I think the internet may have been a mistake.

No they're wrong here's what's going on. People all read this shitty fic called Hell or High Water where Ed was everything the Izzy stans say he was and then instead of realizing that Ed is sad everyone regressed into thinking that the Kraken Era TM was going to be incredibly violent, like serial killing blond men because they look like Stede levels of violence. Even if you didn't read HoHW you saw art or read fic from people who had engaged with this fic and succumbed to it's premise. So there's been this background radiation of misunderstanding what the Kraken is on the fandom for several months. So inevitably when Ed did some mild violence and then attempted suicide by threatening murder until the crew took matters into their own hands, which is not abuse or torture by any stretch, btw, it's a murder-suicide at worst (I say at worst because I consider it fuckery-suicide I don't think Ed was trying to kill people I think he was trying to force them into a situation where they thought it was kill or be killed so that they would choose to kill him, but that is my interpretation and you are free to think it's a botched murder-suicide I have no problem with that), which, murder is something the show has never condemned and if it did it would be horribly inconsistent. So anyway, Ed's whole Kraken Era was categorized in the show by him being sad and doing so many drugs and begging someone please god anyone to kill him and trying to break Ned Low's record out of the evil boredom, but because it had a murder-suicide element to it and Izzy's toes were getting removed and he waved a gun around at everyone once (in a way that felt to me like he was trying and failing to work up the nerve to blow his own brains out but I digress) people who liked HoHW and were mad that people had called it out were like "see hes being violent HoHW author vindicated" as if anything Ed did rose to the level of that fic

And you want to know how I know this read is bullshit? Because when I watch the show with people who don't read fic or interact with the fandom and then I gauge their reactions without showing my hand they all implicitly understand that Ed is reacting to Izzy in a way appropriate to how pirate captains react to threats from subordinates. The spectrum of reactions has been from "hey isn't it weird how Ed was the Kraken because his dad was abusive and now he's the kraken because of Izzy? Maybe there's something there but idk" to "I don't think you can apply the logic of domestic abuse to a pirate captain and first mate but also Izzy had it coming" to "I cannot feel bad for Izzy after last season, I'm sorry." To "lmao Izcel" and I've showed this show to roughly everyone I know. The only thing I can conclude from the fact that people who don't engage with OFMD fic almost unilaterally thinking that Izzy is in the wrong and then coming online to see people thinking the opposite is that Izzy as victim and Ed as abuser is pure fanon, like how Stede is a cinnamon roll who talks like Azeriphael.

But anyway yeah you're completely right about the fact that this would be a bad show if they decided to make Ed into a domestic abuser. I don't want to watch a rom com about a domestic abuser falling in love and I don't want a show that decided to make it's indigenous lead abusive when the stereotype of indigenous men as abusers is still to this day used as an excuse to separate indigenous children from their families and put them with white Christians in order to erase their culture. Good thing OFMD didn't make Ed abusive, so I still like the show.

[preservationofnormalcy]

Ok, so I’m writing a novel involving paranormal investigation (no relation to you, takes place in a fictional town) and I’m on my third draft when the main character shows up behind me, grabs and turns me around to tell me of the “inaccuracies to his case”. Now I wrote them down and how I should change them. And when I looked up from my notepad, he was gone.

I want to continue, and most of these I feel like I can implement within the story, but what exactly happened? And if this becomes a series, will he continue to pop up, or was it one of those “one in a blue moon scenarios”?

And what do I do if it isn’t?

Hey Norm...

Hmm? Didn't you do a PSA about this exact subject in the nineties?

Oh, uh, sure. When I first started. Around '99. It's waaay outdated, now, you know, with the internet and everything, it's better to not even look it up. I don't think it was even digitized, really. I have no idea what happened to it.

Oh, Norm, don't worry! If there's one person who knows your filing system better than you, it's me! Let's see...H for Holmes, S for Sherlock...cross reference to P for Parafictional, 90s...HERE WE GO! "Dear Watson: That's Not Holmes, That's A Lure!"

Oh good, they put it on a disc so that a tech savvy person could find it, uh, twenty five years later. I wouldn't play it, I can't guarantee--

<An old, color degraded video begins playing. It's clearly shot on VHS, with a minimal budget, and had degraded somewhat before being transferred to digital. A man stands in a small, cinderblock room in front of a backdrop depicting a victorian study. He is wearing a tweed jacket with leather patches on the elbows and a pair of smart slacks. A deerstalker hat sits conspicuously on a stack of actual books, Sherlock Holmes novels. The man himself looks sort of like what you'd get if you focus-group-tested the only type of man Don Bluth knew how to draw, and has curtain bangs with frosted tips. The whole ensemble has the energy of a store-brand Milo Thatch. As he speaks, his eyes don't leave a fixed point behind the camera.>

So. You have encountered an entity from a fictional property. You're excited - maybe you wanted to talk to your favorite book character. Or. Maybe you are a writer and you are excited to talk to your protagonist. But...is that entity real?

<There's an extremely awkward camera change, and the man looks to it, his eyes following a point again.>

....or a lure?

<He leans back and there is a too-long pause before he continues.>

When encountering a parafictional manifestation, remember the three S's.

<The visuals change to a grainy blue background, white text appearing as the man's voiceover continues.>

Solidity: are you are this entity is physical and not all in your head?

Subjective: if it's real, are other people seeing the same thing?

Sentience: is this entity sentient, or merely approximating sentience? Is it answering questions like a sentient entity, or like how it would be expected to answer?

<It cuts back to the man, standing behind the chair with his hands on the back. There is a too-long pause again.>

If...uh.

If this entity doesn't pass any of these easy-to-remember checks, that's a red flag. Any number of malicious extranormal entities can exploit the human capacity for creativity in order to feed on our psychic energy, creating a non-sentient construct we call a "Chinese Room" in order to keep YOU from asking questions.

Remember next time you see Darth Vader, Spider-man, or Tarzan - are you so incredibly lucky to experience such a rare phenomena as true parafictional manifestation?

<He awkwardly puts a pipe in his mouth and blows a few bubbles.>

Or are you being lured?

<The video ends.>

....god, my hair.

[holmesxwatson]

The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes dir: Billy Wilder, 1970

I only watched The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes for the first time a few days ago but it lights my brain up in that special way that I know I’ll revisit it a lot. Don’t get me wrong, it’s far from perfect, for one thing Colin Blakely’s Watson is a little too shouty for me, but it’s very worthwhile to check out despite its shortcomings, which I think mostly come from the fact that so much was cut from the intended script.

I absolutely love Robert Stephens as Holmes. His face is so good, he has a way of looking at Watson when he doesn’t know he’s being observed that is very soft. I thought I was hallucinating the beginning of this movie with Holmes telling the ballet dancer he’s gay and in a relationship with Watson. I thought it was going to be played for a joke, and it was a bit, but it didn’t just end there. Holmes and Watson have a conversation about the repercussions in a lengthy scene that turns very serious by the end. I can’t believe this was 1970 and no one has since tried to build on this specific dynamic in a more meaningful way. Someone needs to remake this into a mini-series exactly how Billy Wilder intended it to be, here’s hoping public domain can make it so.

[above: script page from the cut story The Curious Case of the Upside Down Room, where Watson creates a fake case to make Holmes feel better]

Also, the backstory of the making of this film is so out of control: Robert Stephens’s nervous breakdown and suicide attempt during the production, the amount of years Billy Wilder was trying to write it and get it made, the interference of ACD’s son, the Loch Ness monster prop that the crew lost in actual Loch Ness, the immense scope of the episodic story they were going for, the way it got cut down from its original 3 hour 45 minute runtime and how that cut footage was lost forever! (this is crazy! everyone go check your attics and storage lockers right now).

In one of the interviews I found, Robert Stephens says “if something is boring — if it’s three minutes long it’s too long, but if it’s interesting it’s never long enough…you don’t want it to end.” Big same Toby Stephens’ dad, big SAME. I didn’t want it to end. I read the uncut script and I am just floored at what we missed out on. Thankfully some footage and audio remain of some of the cut scenes (but still! check your basements too).

Just fully let it settle into your brain that they filmed all of these stories in the script, and then cut most of it away. Like that is mind-blowing to me, it existed at one point as it was fully intended to be. If this was made now during home entertainment times, they would have no problem releasing an almost four-hour movie, but at the very least there would be a big director’s cut dvd release and we would be enjoying all the small Holmes x Watson moments we deserve.

Anyway, in pretty short order I found a bunch of interesting links to stuff, details below. I also consulted my very well-thumbed Conversations with Wilder book by Cameron Crowe, but there wasn’t that much more information in there. I have Robert Stephens’ memoir Knight Errant and the TPLOSH blu-ray on order so I’ll add to this post if I find any more good resources. Let me know if I’m missing anything, and enjoy!

Full movie on YouTube (x) <-update: this link went private, but it's also streaming for free on Tubi and Freevee, and available to rent on YouTube, Google Play, and Apple TV

Original roadshow draft of script on Internet Archive (x)

Missing footage: Prologue [sound only plus stills] (x), The Curious Case of the Upside Down Room [sound only plus stills] (x), The Dreadful Business of the Naked Honeymooners [footage and soundtrack only, no sound dialogue] (x), alternate ending [sound only] (x)

Making of documentary that includes behind-the-scenes snippets of some of the cut scenes [this doc is in German, but you can turn on the auto-translate to English in the YouTube settings] (x)

Interview with Ernst Walter, film editor of TPLOSH (x)

Interview with Christopher Lee “Mr. Holmes, Mr. Wilder” 2003 (x)

My YouTube playlist with all of the above links in one place plus an excellent fan vid by Just Bee that I added to the list because it’s just so good (x)

Missing Movies: A Case for Sherlock Holmes from 1994 BBC Radio 2 on Soundcloud [includes interview with Robert Stephens and folks involved in the production] (x)

Articles about the lost Loch Ness monster prop (x) (x)

The soundtrack by Miklós Rózsa (x)

[purrlockholmesbooks]

About

(We're not really also on Instagram!)

This is Purrlock, a Victorian book detective:

He has a blog, which is run by his Watson:

This is his 'Watson,' an aspiring writer/artist:

(Yes, the cat version on me portrays my nature more truthfully than the human one.)

Good morrow, denizens of the internet, I am Amanda. The love of my life is stories: antique postcards, Victorian vampire pulp fiction, animations about demons - if it has a good story, I love it!

More specific things I love that you will definitely hear about from me:

Books, a lot of books, especially 19th century literature

The Sherlock Holmes Canon

BBC's Sherlock

Vampires and other Gothic things, especially Interview with the Vampire (AMC) and Dracula (book and the 90s film)

Good Omens

The Grishaverse, especially Six of Crows

Hazbin Hotel

Music: Taylor Swift, Lana Del Rey, Paris Paloma, classical music and vampire-y waltzes

And, if all else fails, I hope you stay for the cats! Look, here's one!

Can you say no to that face?

Feel free to request art in my asks!

Commission for cat drawings, greeting cards and pet portraits are also OPEN on Ko-Fi!

And I sell merch on my Society6 page!

[asoulwithadream]

Shoscombe Old Place / Part 2 - Sherlock & Co From the diary of ASoulWithADream…

I'm so excited that we're getting a three-parter after three-parter. They're brilliant and as the production quality increases exponentially, these drawn out adventures holding more content are so important to me.

Live Soul Reaction (my little on-the-spot commentary):

The episode sub-title just makes me think of Fast Car by Tracy Chapman. "🎵 You've got a fast car, I want a ticket to anywhere,"

John explaining the stupid social hierarchy, state-till-8's, the little 'I dunno's' of doubt, as if he still feels a bit confused or insecure about the whole situation with Carrie and him. The way he phrases it makes me think of superficiality.

"Like some big slobbery traitor!" I like how the roles have switched to Sherlock defending Archie from John.

Again with the card references!

Gary Lineker's mate. That's the second time HE's been mention. There's been an awful lot of emphasis on repeating motifs. Makes me wonder what else from last week's episode will feature today.

"You're invaluable, Watson!" "Awh." "Cheers!" <33333333

"Ah! Goodness! Hello Bob- UH, Robert Knob- Robert Norbertson! Ugh, spit it out, John."

"Just what she needs. Just… what she needs." Bobby you are not making yourself look more innocent you smoldering drama queen.

Sherlock swallowing a fly 😭

Lineker again!

Jump in the river. Jumping into a body of water. This is the third time. For fuck's sake.

"World's colliding. New friends, meeting old friends."

Who's calling John a twat on the internet???

Ash. Ash on the leaves, on the nettles, on the bark of the trees. Didn't Sherlock mention smoke? From the house, Shoscombe? Last week, he said it very explicitly. Smoke.

"It's a house for the dead." "A mausoleum." "Yes, a very tired one."

I SEE DEAD PEOPLE.

"Sherlock." "Yes, Watson." "Quick question." "Fire away!" "Are we… trapped? In a… four-hundred year old mausoleum?" "Trapped is a rather subjective term. We did CHOOSE to enter." "Sherlock." "Yes actually, I think we are."

Pick a tomb, mate! COS' I AM GOING TO KILL YOU >:(

"Brings a certain perspective, doesn't it? Being in here, with the long dead."

The way John realises that he's snapped just immediately forgives and dismisses Sherlock as the cause of their predicament really goes to show the bond they share, how they're able to adapt and just remain sane in their situation.

"What… feels like home?" "Baker Street." <3333333333333

"Rivers are just as doubtful, Watson. Just as unsure. They take the course they find easy, through the soft earth. That's why their paths are winding and splintered. They look for the easy way. Only the most determined bore through the hardest rock. Overtime, much, much time." More water, which could mean nothing. But seriously speaking, I love Sherlock's perspective on things, and how he reassures Watson with these beautiful metaphors, connecting their surroundings and the information he has consumed to describe his dear friend. <3

"Even the torrents that seem so wondrous to us will reach their end in a sea, a lake… a waterfall." HE SAID IT. Before I thought I was being delusional! Anything could be water, but the hesitation, the torrent he speaks of being a metaphor for both himself through John's perspective and the adventure that Moriarty will pose for them both, but especially for Sherlock Holmes!! I'm freaking out!!

"Shout out to Pro- ooh, Professor!" I AM DEAD. I HAVE TO PAUSE. IT CAN'T BE. WHAT I WAS JUST JOKING BEFORE. I'M BEING DELUSIONAL.

PROFESSOR JAMES MORIARTY.

JAMES MORIARTY.

MORIARTY.

WHO IS LISTENING INTENTLY, TO EVER WORD.

WHOEVER THAT ONE TUMBLR POSTER WAS WHO SAID "haha what if he got a shoutout" YOU WERE RIGHT. I'VE TRIED TO TAG YOU BUT I CAN'T FIND THE POST, BUT YOU WERE RIGHT. FUUUUUUUUUU-

"I can hear the corpses from the seventeenth century crying into the mic! I've lost my mind!" I doubt you're as much in shock as I am right now.

I was trying to appreciate their little pre-crypt banter and pep-talk, but I can not stop thinking about the ballistic missile which was the waterfall-shoutout section. Absolutely bonkers, and balls to the fucking walls. The balls are everywhere.

I better not see "42 - The Final Problem - Part One" on my Spotify on the 16th of July in the Year of our Lord 2024.

[hawkinsschoolcounselor]

Regarding queerbaiting: Sherlock is one of the more famous examples, and the tumblr drama surrounding it is an... interesting story that I think is worth knowing if you want to understand the queerbait allegations.

The show, made and set in the 2010s, liked to poke fun at John Watson for being a straight man shacking up with another single dude. The show's creators -- one of whom is a gay man himself -- were born in 60s, so I see these jokes as two guys who were adults during the height of AIDS and Thatcherism taking delight in the fact they're now living in a world where queerness is largely accepted and somewhat normalized. A straight guy being forced to constantly defend himself from nonchalant assumptions that the man he's living with is his gay lover is funny when he's not in any danger of being hate-crimed over it, right?

(I'm not a fan of the joke personally, but I get it.)

They really liked this stupid joke though, so they used it again and again and again, to the point that young fans started to become convinced it was hinting at something. I can't blame them: there was even a lesbian character who fell for Sherlock and explicitly compared herself to John as someone who wasn't into men and yet was just so spellbound by this one special detective boi.

It was pretty lesbophobic imo, which should have been a massive red flag as to how the showrunners really felt about queer characters...

...But where the show went from annoying to actively hostile was the mystery of how Sherlock survived his apparent death at the end of season 2. The showrunners swore up and down it was solvable... and then when the next season aired, the "solution" was "lol who cares how he did it, this is a ~*character driven story*~ and only stupid obsessed idiots would want to solve the mystery. 🤣🤣🤣"

Make no mistake, they singled out the mlm shippers specifically for mockery -- there's a group of Sherlock Holmes conspiracy theorists in the show who argue over a theory that Holmes and Moriarty staged the death together and then kissed about it. (The viewer is clearly meant to laugh at this.)

Some of the Johnlockers on tumblr refused to believe this was happening to them and doubled down and convinced themselves there was going to be an amazing Johnlock plot twist at the end of season 4. My understanding (which might be wrong, I wasn't in the fandom) is that this contingent was largely composed of naive queer teenagers who blindly trusted a handful of influential adults who insisted that the show was deep and clever and didn't hate its fans.

So I can definitely sympathize with the folks who fear Byler is just queerbait. This too is a mlm fandom made up of naive teenagers trusting the adults who swear that the secret gay plot twist is totally gonna happen this time, trust me bro it's not called Surface Things.

And, look. I think it's very sensible to be skeptical of random strangers on the internet who insist they have the answers, no matter how authoritative they might sound. Keep on doing that, folks. 👍

But I think that principle applies just as much to the "this is just like Sherlock" doomers as it does to the "anyone who thinks Byler won't happen has no media literacy" lot. Yes, it's always possible that the Duffers were queerbaiting us all along... but the way Sherlock and Stranger Things approach queerness truly is like night and day.

Huh, well, if what you say is accurate, then it sounds like the Holmes writers were just jerks overall. I can see the joke, as you explain it. I may not think it appropriate to make it a running gag, but it's good for a chuckle or two. If it was truly presented as a joke, then it would be on the fans for misinterpreting it, but I don't know enough about how it was presented to know how easy it would be for fans to make that conclusion.

To me, it only makes it more apparent that things on Stranger Things are "night and day," as you put it. Will's feelings, and Robin's, for that matter, are not treated as jokes. They're treated as dramatic, emotional parts of their individual arcs. In Will's case, his happiness is linked to his relationship with Mike, which is complicated by the fact that he doesn't think he'll get to have a romantic relationship with him, or at all really.

I prefer to think the Duffers are better than whoever was responsible for what you described. While it all remains to be seen, they deserve the benefit of the doubt, for now.

[s-che]

“you are a good nurse” (knives out and great men)

***(this is extremely spoilery for both knives out and glass onion. read with caution)***

In quarantine, in a smaller apartment than you might expect, Benoit Blanc is playing Among Us. This is a game—like Clue—which the celebrity detective hates. It’s too simple, too obvious, and too easy to resolve. Although he holds himself to be better than these “stupid things,” they are also a weakness—later, we will be told that he nearly failed to solve a case because it was too simple all along. For now, the gentleman sleuth is doing poorly in isolation, suffering from an all-consuming boredom which descends between cases (a trait he shares with his literary antecedents in Hercule Poirot and Sherlock Holmes). This is, all in all, a tremendous reintroduction to Blanc, the detective who, in 2019’s Knives Out, solved the murder of James PattersoHarlan Thrombey and who—in 2022’s Glass Onion—will attend a murder-mystery themed weekend getaway of the innermost circle of tech billionaire Elon MusMiles Bron. Blanc shares DNA with the classic sleuths—but he is both more and less of a hero than they were. Much of that has to do with the communities he finds himself in. Murder mysteries have always run on high-energy casts of colorful characters—most especially in the works of Agatha Christie, whose Mousetrap, Murder on the Orient Express, and And Then There Were None feel like important steps on the road to Knives Out. Working with big tropes and cliches makes sense in a genre which is, in many ways, about developing and subverting reader expectations, and the two Knives Out films certainly build on that mold, establishing a set of stock characters drawn from the here and the now. Whether we’re dealing with a wealthy college student who sets her political beliefs aside to bow to the demands of her family (Katherine Langford as Meg Thrombey, Knives Out) or an internet micro-influencer about to explode into the mainstream screaming about the downfall of western masculinity (Dave Bautista as Duke Cody, Glass Onion), the supporting casts of both Benoit Blanc murder-flicks are fresh tropes for a fresh culture. They’re also—critically—all drawn from a particular world. Children of wealthy families, publishing executives, influencers, lifestyle models—these are people given a huge privilege, not only in the quality of their lifestyles but in the degree of their control over the direction of their lives. Although Knives Out and Glass Onion both  depict circles dependent on the charity of individual, powerful men—Harlan Thrombey and Miles Bron, respectively—they are also circles made up of people who society grants decision-making power, imbuing them with the belief that they are the protagonists of life granted the god-given right to personhood in contrast to those in sidelined roles—the help, medical staff, and “Derol.” The heroes of both films, however, are the odd ones out. They are neither the suspects (the colorful ensembles of those who “could have done it”) nor the celebrity sleuth himself (on whom everyone depends to solve the mystery and straighten things out), but rather those who are pushed to the side—assumed to be objects, not actors. Marta and Helen are the Watsons of both movies—the characters through whom we view the story, whose experiences frame and color our own (Helen takes on this role predominantly in the second half of the movie, once her true identity has been revealed to the audience). Unlike Holmes’s Watson or Poirot’s Arthur Hastings, however, these two characters are not neutral “straight characters” but individuals who suffer an active isolation, people who—however “normal” they might be in comparison to the cast—are marginalized and assumed to occupy a passive space. This positioning impacts their perspective, skewing things for viewers, reminding us that there is no apolitical way to view these events—and not to normalize the antics of the elite. In both cases—as Marta is Harlan’s long-term nurse and Helen is dedicated to seeking justice for her sister—they are presumed to, and in many cases do, act without ego, functioning solely as objects and in the ecosystem which surrounds the powerful decision makers (Harlan Thrombey and Miles Bron) and support systems on which the protagonists of life can lean. Although the films work to counteract this assumption—reminding us of the fundamental personhood of both Helen and Marta—it is also partially through their dedication to serving others that both Helen and Marta succeed. Blanc puts this clearly in Knives Out when he reveals that he knew Marta was involved in the murder from the start: “I want you to remember something very important:” he says “You won not by playing the game Harlan's way, but yours.” The heroes of these films do not succeed by using their invisible status to their advantage in playing “the game Harlan’s way,” getting one up on everybody by being the cleverest person in the room. Rather, they succeed by staying true to their values and doing what they know is right—even if that means sacrificing themself to the cause of another because it is right. For Marta this is attempting to save Fran—for Helen it is running out of clever ways to seek justice for her sister, and setting fire to theb building instead. By working against their own self-interest in the “game” or “puzzle” of a murder mystery, both Helen and Marta defeat their antagonists. In Knives Out, the Thrombey family spends much of their time bickering over who really deserves to inherit Harlan’s legacy—and the film is clear that none of them can truly claim to have built success themselves, as each was granted the privilege and security of their family’s wealth. None are truly as independent—we might say, “protagonal” —as they believe. Glass Onion takes this a step further, attacking the “source” of the cycle of  wealth. While Harlan Thrombey seems to have been a generally good man, a skilled storyteller, and a strong judge of character—it was his decision to reward Marta, and not his kin, with the inheritance—Glass Onion’s counterpart in Miles Bron is explicitly framed as lacking substance (being a “Glass Onion,” which appears deep but is in fact easy to see through) and having simply been in the right place in the right time to steal someone else’s work. There is no “self-made man” or “good billionaire” in Glass Onion—only people who were lucky enough to be given the opportunity to step on someone else on their way up the ladder. This developed critique of “great men” plays directly into the events of Glass Onion’s climax. Unlike Knives Out, where the police are presented as broadly interested in justice and glad to work alongside Blanc although their investigation has already ended, Glass Onion demonstrates explicitly how systems of power—the courts and the police, but also social dynamics and community pressures—can be bent to the defense of those assumed to be powerful decision makers (like Miles Bron or Ransom Thrombey). There were allusions to this in Knives—where Ransom claims that Benoit solving the murder means nothing, since he has good lawyers and will avoid a significant sentence—but they are eventually unsubstantial, as Marta tricks Ransom into confessing in front of two officers and he is arrested as a result. When, in Glass Onion, when the only evidence to Bron’s crime is burned, Blanc himself seems to surrender, claiming that “This is where my jurisdiction ends” before leaving the room (though not before handing Helen the physical and emotional material she needs to literally burn Miles Bron’s island home to the ground). Although Helen eventually manages to set fire to the Mona Lisa—defeating Bron by ruining his public image, not through criminal prosecution—this does not seem to be her intention when she begins destroying the mansion. In this, Glass Onion seems to develop a second critique of Knives Out—not only do we come to question the validity of the narrative of “good” billionaires, we are shown that, faced with hostile powers insulating  themselves within systems of law and order, the only path to justice may be working outside the law and our basic (i.e. carceral) assumptions of what “justice” is. As the emergency  services arrive to pick up a body, Benoit sits on the beach, smoking a cigar. His hands are clean, and he has inspired Helen to the heroic action that she must take. He is as smart as any Holmes, but he did not do his part in this adventure in the way Holmes would, by playing the game, solving the puzzle, and handing things over to the police. Rather, Benoit has himself taken on a supportive role—supportive to Helen, who has, in turn, taken action and found justice for her sister. He understands the limits of his jurisdiction—in other words, he knows when it is actually his turn to be the protagonist, and when it is his role to inspire others. In a world full of people who claim to have risen to power by their skill and focus, Blanc actually has remarkable skill—but he uses them, ultimately, to ends of uplifting the meek, not simply restoration of order.

[kolbisneat]

MONTHLY MEDIA: July 2024

I read a lot more than I was expecting this month but I ain't complaining. Here's how I spent the month of July!

……….FILM……….

Evil Dead II (1987) Didn't love Evil Dead (not that it's not good, I just get too spooked by straight horror) but had no idea that this would be what it is. Puppets and stop motion! Looney Tune antics! Magic with rules! This is my kinda movie and I'm baffled the modern films in the franchise don't try for this sort of energy.

Poor Things (2003) It took a while for me to settle into this, but around the time Dafoe's Godwin explains Bella's condition, I was all in. It's a dreamlike movie with dreamlike logic so despite some of the discourse I tried not to take too much of it literally. Beautiful and far funnier than I expected.

……….TELEVISION……….

Columbo (Episode 1.04 to 1.07) Gosh I love the era of television where each episode was self-contained. Episode 7 features Columbo smoking in a doctor's office and I was not at all expecting him to comment on the dangers of tobacco, but he did! I notice this first season only had a handful of episodes with the classic "oh one more thing" schtick so I'm curious if that pops up more in later seasons.

Scavenger's Reign (Episode 1.01 to 1.12) This is a show where I sit down, turn it on, and while the beautiful opening credits play, think, "I wonder what horrifying imagery is gonna f*** me up this episode?" The animation and design are sooooooo good that it made up for the occasionally baffling writing. Please go watch it so a second season can get greenlit.

Bridgerton (Episode 3.05 to 3.08) I missed a few eps there in the middle but it all worked. That final party, and all that went with it (the speech, the bugs, the reveal of who paid for it) was 10/10. Good stuff.

……….YOUTUBE……….

Yoko and The Beatles by Lindsay Ellis Yoko Ono didn't break up the Beatles. And while this video essay expands on the factors that DID split up the band, it's also a really great dive into the weight of fame and the weight of fame on women. VIDEO

Was starting a product business a mistake? by Simone Giertz An honest and detailed insight into the dream vs. reality of small business and internet fame. Looks like it's going to be a full series and I'm looking forward to more. VIDEO

……….READING……….

N or M by Agatha Christie (Complete) Spy Thriller set during the Second World War? With a husband/wife spy duo? Oh heck yeah. Sometimes I find the clues to be a little convoluted/unnecessarily obscure but this one struck a great balance of visible but easily forgettable.

The Knight of the Swords by Michael Moorcock (Complete) Having first read the comic adaptation (penciled by Mike Mignola!) I now realize some of my issues (pacing, understanding the abstract) work better in novel form. An elevated pulp adventure that has some great ironic twists.

Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula or The Adventure of the Sanguinary Count by Loren D. Estleman (Complete) Thrift find purchased based on the premise alone. Exactly what you'd expect but not much beyond that. It's at its best when you get Dracula directly interacting with Holmes and/or Watson.

Spider-Verse by Dan Slott, Christos N. Gage, Mike Costa, Dennis Hopeless, and many many more (Complete) Really enjoyed reading this but am baffled by its production. Why the issues aren't collected in chronological order, I'll never know. I know the book is over ten years old now but the writing (especially all of the Spider-Women) really stands out as...not great. All but the Superior Spider-Man essentially sound the same (perhaps the point?) but Gwen and Jess and Cindy mostly talk about things like body image and pheromones and it's glaring. I'm curious what I'll think upon a second readthrough (reading in order, and after the first wave of nostalgia has completely rinsed off) but I definitely think this story walked so the movies could break the speed of sound.

The Unbeatable Squirrel Girl Beats Up the Marvel Universe! by Ryan North and Erica Henderson (Complete) North's writing and Henderson's artwork are the perfect blend for such a bright and enthusiastic character. Unbeatable Squirrel Girl is such a great series (which I gotta go back and finish) and this is an equally great introduction to the character.

Superior Foes of Spider-Man Vol 1 by by Nick Spencer, Marcos Martin, and Steve Leiber (Complete) I was really excited for this series (the premise! the cover art!) but the pacing, humour, and art just didn't connect. Honestly really bummed that I didn't like this more.

……….AUDIO……….

3D6 Down the Line (Podcast) A nice change of pace from the modern D&D games I play in. They use Old School Essentials for their system (more akin to 2nd Edition D&D) and play with a mindset similar to the 70s style of play (treasure for experience, everything is lethal). I'm still having trouble distinguishing some of the voices from each other, but it's a great listen.

……….GAMING……….

Oz: A Fantasy Role-Playing Setting (Andrews McMeel Publishing) Tuesday crew watched a peaceful inauguration and gained notoriety for saving a neighbourhood from roaming monsters (you can read all about it here!) and the Mof1 crew is dabbling in dangerous contracts with dangerous people (all for a cap that controls the winged monkeys).

And that's it. See you in August!

[meetinginsamarra]

update july 2024

sorted by word count/series

———————

Mutual Attraction 94k , pre ASiP, different first meetings, casefic, pining

The day when a homeless drug addict and a suicidal ex-soldier met was the beginning of something until then unheard-of: Mutual Attraction. Of course, not all was what it looked like in the first place but the days of boredom, loneliness and lack of purpose were history. A case had to be solved, lives had to be saved and a developing relationship had to be tackled.

———————

Here I Am -series, the pornwithoutplot which evolved into pornwithplot with feels and whump

The Toe that didn´t belong 6.9k, Part One

Every time John thought back to the occasion the funny thing was that the first thing he had noticed to be out of place had been a…toe.

The Embers still glow when I´m sober 14,5k, Part Two

When Sherlock woke up the morning after he actually felt good. Which was completely unexpected. Although he was sort of anxious about John´s reaction when he would notice that the punk who did not belong in his bed and who had coaxed him into having shameless sex last night was still there.

Gravity is missing from everything 23.5k, Part Three

People bumped into him, cussing and throwing death glares. Blocking their way, Sherlock stood frozen in a throng of commuters. “Are you high?” one shouted into his vacant face. Funnily enough he actually was not. This was all John´s fault. Inflicting a date on him. To have dinner.

———————

Learn My Scars, 38k, written for whumptober 2022, Serbia and the aftermath

After being thrown down and strangled, Sherlock leaves John in the restaurant, angry and deeply hurt. When John follows Sherlock to 221b, he learns that Sherlock’s scars have not been acquired by “gallivanting around” for two years.

———————

The 13th Book 26.5k,  a magical realism AU with demon Sherlock

Summoning a demon was actually quite simple if you could avoid getting killed in the process. Therefore, only the powerful, the desperate or the stupid would attempt it. John Watson was likely the first, definitely the second but hopefully not one of the third kind.

———————

Wretched and Divine – series punklock and doctor John

Wretched and Divine 5.1k, Part One

Dr. John Watson is on call at the A&E when he attempts to treat a very special patient. Instead he finds himself a very special treat.

The Aftermath is Secondary 19.5k, Part Two

Will John and Sherlock really go on the agreed date in the infamous punkrock club “The Misfit”? Will their sexual tension finally be resolved? Is it really going to be dangerous? And will Sherlock really wear the promised fishnet top? (Oh God, yessss!)

———————

Sherlock’s Secret Laboratory Journal 6k, my outlet for writing cracky hilarious Sherlock, will become a series with adding a chapter for each new experiment

What does a helplessly pining but absolutely clueless Sherlock do in order to woo an oblivious John? He turns to the internet for advice on the art of seduction and notes the experiments in his secret laboratory journal.

Oyster and Mushroom Soup 9k, Sherlock’s latest attempt at seduction, Part 2 of the Secret Lab Journal series

Sherlock’s second try to win over John involves a lot of special cooking recipes.

——————

White Pony Tattoo 10.8k, different first meeting AU in a tattoo shop, happy Johnlock ending, written for calaisreno's may prompts 2024

John Watson needs a tattoo covered up. Sherlock Holmes of "White Pony Tattoo" is one of the best artists in London. He's also difficult and brilliant and beautiful as John is about to find out.

——————

The Perfect Place 10k, different first meeting AU, a cringefest with lots of fun and happy Johnlock ending, a.k.a. The Bed Shop Boys AU, written for calaisreno's may prompts 2024

Sherlock needs a flatmate and already has the perfect person in mind. Now he only needs to convince his object of desire to move in and also find out if he desires Sherlock as well.

——————

Slowly Suffocating 9.5k, TLD fix-it, written for whumptober 2023

Getting suffocated took some time. Enough time for Sherlock to ponder what went wrong. Hopefully also long enough for John to arrive and rescue him. Culverton Smith applied more pressure, impatient to turn Sherlock into a dead thing.

———————

Winning a lost bet 8.2k, pole-dancing at the XMas party

A lost bet makes Sherlock and John perform a pole-dance in costumes at the Yard´s Christmas party. It was supposed to be humiliating but instead the couple nailed it.

———————

Until the final breath escapes 1.9k, spooky Halloween fic

In a world turned hostile they hold onto their love until the final breath escapes.

———————

Sherlock Ficlets for Writing Challenges series/collection of my ficlets of under 1000 words

[chaos-and-sparkles]

I yearn to talk about my Dracula!Holmes au, and the universe has seen fit to give me free will and internet access, so talk i shall.

Listen. Hear me out just hear me out.

We literally have Johnathan motherfucking Harker whose written POV we read Dracula from for like a solid half of the book, right. Well, no more, he's John Watson now babeyyy, a retired army man now gainfully employed as a lawyer who's off overseas to act as estate agent to the strange and eccentric client who has expressed interest in moving to foggy London... Count Holmes! [insert jazz hands]

Instead of being Evil(tm) and plotting to take over London or whatever, my guy is just Autistic. Also riddled with ADHD and in desperate need of some enrichment in he goddamn enclosure. He will also in fact be trans, because. Of course. Vampirism as a metaphor for queerness and the social ostracization that follows as a punishment and having inherently queer narratives intertwined in them etc etc... anyhow! Count Sherlock Holmes, vampire detective!!!

(I do also want him to be aroace, or aroacespec at least, but I'm willing to negotiate for the Johnlock and the Johnlock alone.)

Mina Harker here is of course the one and only Mary Morstan, although it is clearly a lavender marriage, because we aren't cowards in this household and so Mary gets to be gay with her Lucy equivalent here, just as god intended. I haven't decided who her Lucy equivalent will be yet but this au is still young (technically I've been going insane about it in my mind for like a month or two but whatever) and there's no reason we can't make up an OC for her Lucy.

John Watson, resident gay doctor lawyer, of course, is smart enough to realize the enigmatic Count Holmes' vampiric secret within like one adventure, but he sure is going to have a slow burn of realizing just how gay he is for said enigmatic Count Holmes. We, of course, get to witness this tooth rotting bullshit firsthand as we read his diary entries and some later letters to Mary.

And instead of being one long gothic horror narrative, it's just adventure of the week with your friendly neighborhood crime solving vampire, the various other mythical creatures who do said crimes, and Just Some Guy.

Just, every Sherlock Holmes adventure adapted into this au with other supernatural elements. The guy from the Red Headed League is a local villager being bamboozled by a leprechaun, the Silver Blaze thing is about a kelpie. Everyone including Sherlock was operating on the assumption that Irene Adler was a siren, but actually she was just a regular human, and instead of unlearning misogyny (bc I don't see trans vampire Sherlock living so long through changing times and society and being sexist), Sherlock has to learn not to underestimate the intelligence of humans.

Also, he's just really excited to have this new human, John, living in his castle. So curious, too, about humans, he has sequestered himself from them for such a long time and John seems like a very interesting one. He's probably the first friend Sherlock has had in a long time, too.

Also. Instead of being warded off or harmed by garlic, to Sherlock, garlic is just the vampire version of cocaine. He just gets high as fuck off garlic. Could live on the stuff. And the reason people think he's warded off by garlic is just because he was seen getting high off his ass, turning into a bat, and flying away in loop de loops upon consuming garlic one (1) time. And everyone thought it's his weakness. And he never bothered correcting them bc Why Would He. He's basically getting free cocaine left and right from villagers who are scared/wary of the supernatural Count Holmes and only go to him when there's no other option, and it's no bother to leave people he's not investigating alone.

I genuinely do think cocaine!garlic addicted Sherlock has so much comedic potential, it really is so beloved to me. Just imagine, if you will, an extremely put-upon John Watson caring for Batlock who has gotten high off his ass and refuses to stop flying into his own antique chandelier.

I was also thinking that it would be funny to have Mrs. Hudson and Mrs. Turner in place of Dracula's sexy vampire roommates or whatever those three were lmao (I couldn't think of a third character, sorry)

Also. Obviously. Van Helsing has got to be Moriarty, by virtue of opposition. I do think their whole deal has a lot of potential to be very funny and entertaining also. I am also considering it might be fun to have Lucy's other suitors be the Scotland Yarders, like Lestrade, Gregson and what have you, but that risks missing out on the very fun possible dynamic of "Sherlock being exasperated with the dumbass out of their depth Yarders he keeps helping" raised to like the hundredth degree so. I honestly would like people's thoughts on that.

Anyway so YES, Dracula au please and thank you. Maybe with endgame QPR Johnlock? Yes? Please? Queerplatonic husbands Johnlock is my shit.

In conclusion: THANK YOU FOR COMING TO MY TED TALK <3

[queerholmcs]

okay. you know the drill. i do need to elaborate on some of these, moreso than is allowed within the character limit of the polls; see the read more at the bottom of the post. yes it gets a bit long, i'm sorry, i'm not normal about this show, we've established this.

stop making me watch this. this is indecent. this is not suitable for public television. please get a room.

they all know sherlock and they know that he's insane. where they go wrong is in assuming that john must then be the sane one of the pair of them. (save mycroft; see number five.)

'here, use mine' as the obvious opener. but then we also get the bit where john returns to baker street and sherlock's like 'oh haha yeah i called you across town to ask you to send a text' and john gives him the most exasperated, reluctant look before giving sherlock his phone (heart). because at this point, there is no other option. (i won't say more. essays have already been written on the matter.)

the way a point is made to demonstrate sherlock's deliberate ignorance of molly's attempts at flirting. and john's painfully awkward attempts to hit on mycroft's PA. contrasted with their every moment on screen together. 'we can't giggle, it's a crime scene!' SHUT UP.

where do i start with this one. (mycroft is my favourite. i'm not sorry.) he puts so much effort into this stupid little trick and john completely holds his own against him. he's also the only one to see that john is also not sane and that as much as sherlock is going to be some sort of influence on john, john is going to do the same to sherlock. 'might we expect a happy announcement by the end of the week?' → 'i can see from your left hand that's not going to happen' → 'time to choose a side.' hello??????? thank goodness mark gatiss mycroft holmes is here to spell things out for us.

it all starts when john says 'i looked you up on the internet last night' (weird move, it has to be said) and then doesn't immediately praise sherlock's blog. but then he also doesn't tell sherlock to piss off for deducing him and airing his family secrets like that? and from that point on, every remotely clever thing sherlock says, he looks to john for his response. ('do you know you do that out loud?' 'sorry, i'll shut up.' 'no, it's... fine.') i maintain that he only points out anderson and donovan's little affair to show off for john.

look. do i even have to say anything here. we establish that everyone sherlock interacts with thinks he's gay. we establish that john and sherlock are both unattached and that girlfriends definitely aren't sherlock's area and that it's fine to have a boyfriend, by the way, john thinks this is fine, just if you wondered, he's also unattached and it's fine if girls aren't your cup of tea and have we mentioned they're both unattached? and they have what is about the most intimate eye contact ever for far too long while doing so.

chance or chess? play the game. engage with the story. read between the lines. is it a bluff? or a double bluff? or a triple bluff? play the game. (mention the game one more time. i dare you. shut up.)

this is in both the physical and the metaphorical sense. they have no concept of personal space, either of them, and it is a bit awkward for everyone else in the room who's forced to watch them make bedroom eyes at each other. on the metaphorical side—john is the first to say 'actually, it's not obvious, so get on with it and share your thoughts with the class, would you?' and '...bit not good, yeah. maybe be slightly more sensitive to people's emotions, there.' and 'you're so full of it. you absolutely do guess, admit it, i can tell when you're lying.' lestrade watches them interact for all of ten minutes and then declares that, though he's known sherlock for five years, he still doesn't know sherlock nearly as well as john does.

who is he? well, he's with sherlock. it's sherlock holmes and doctor watson. they're a set. (do not separate!) they go together, they are defined by each other, they balance each other far too perfectly to ever be removed again. welcome to The Dynamic. you'll never know peace again. (or is that just me?)

[musingsofanaroace]

Autistic Thinking Styles

There are three autistic thinking styles: visual, verbal, and pattern. Most autistic people fall into one of these three.

Visual - This person thinks in pictures. By visualizing things in their mind or reality, they're able to process information more efficiently.

Think Sherlock Holmes and "mind palace". Think Temple Grandin and "photographic Internet search engine".

Essentially they're able to visualize their thoughts and use these visuals to come up with creative solutions.

Verbal - This person thinks in words. Usually, they're good at learning languages; retaining verbal facts; and having an affinity for words, literature, and speech. They love making lists, memorizing mundane or unusual things, and engaging in word play.

Think history nerd who knows everything there is to know about the Crimean War. Think Elvis Presley fanatic who knows the exact date of every song he ever recorded.

Essentially, they're able to interpret and paint the world using words and language.

Pattern - This person thinks in patterns. They can find meaning in both meaningful and meaningless patterns. These people tend to do well within the fields of math, music, or science.

Think musician who can play a song on the piano note for note, a song that they only heard once on the radio. Think mathematician who sees the pattern in a string of numbers and uses this pattern to solve a complex mathematical equation.

Essentially, they interpret the world through these patterns, and these patterns, in turn, shape their thoughts and creativity.

Personal Experience:

I have the type of aphantasia where I don't see anything if you tell me to imagine an apple. It's just black and gray with a bit of light filtering through the eyeball lids. So I definitely don't have the visual style of thinking.

As for patterns, I only grasp those dealing with letters and phrases. I'm bad at maths, and I can't carry a tune to save my life. So out goes the pattern style of thinking.

That leaves the verbal style of thinking. And I would say that this style of thinking suites me the best.

When I write, I create a scene not by visualizing an image in my head, but by constructing the image with words and phrases. I use these words to describe the scene, to set the tone, to convey emotions, and to engage my readers.

When I remember an event, I see not an image but hear an audio description. It will set the scene, it will provide necessary background information, it will describe the memory in excruciating detail, and it will describe what I felt in that moment.

I love creating lists of all kinds. Throughout the years, I have created several lists of my favorite movies, songs, quotes, historical facts, books that I want to read, and the strange things I've seen my neighbors do.

I love talking about my special interests and will talk about them "until the cows come home". I know the most unusual and useless information about dinosaurs, ancient civilizations, natural history, and psychology. Not to mention the various random pieces of information that I've picked up over the years, such as the fact that Mr. Schneider is the name of the dummy in The Monkees TV show.

Well, that's all I have for today. Until next time, take care and stay curious.

Source:

The Autistic Brain - Temple Grandin

[eldritch-spouse]

I heard down the grapevine that Santi reads crime novels, and I am also aware of his hot-pocket-rotating-in-a-microwave brain, sooo... Santi with a Sherlock Holmes type of S/O?

And by that I just mean super intelligent (way too intelligent and they're a smarmy asshole about it), can deduct almost anything from just a look (it's freaky to most people), works as a private detective... But is also socially constipated, has no real friends, and learnt what they do know about sex solely from books and the Internet (and definitely need Santi as a 'tutor', wink wink).

[Hmm, I'm not sure how this would work in the long-run, so excuse the briefness.]

So- Essentially, you're Sherlock and Watson. But Watson's very horny and took a couple wrenches to the head. An interesting dynamic, yes.

Naturally, you can tell what Santi wants from you as soon as he sets his eyes on your figure. Not that he's ever made an effort to hide his intentions, your intellect just gives you a heads up. And although you might be flustered or feel out of depth around him, a greatly uncomfortable experience for someone as used to being "in the know" as you, it won't be hard for you to maybe gouge what the demon's like and try to skirt around his attempts to bed you. Just one little thing that you can focus on and use to divert the conversation, carefully posed questions, the works- Although, Santi's used to conversation with his meals, and he can sense discomfort, your discomfort, so long as you keep humoring his presence, he won't push for sex much. You won't escape without a promise of seeking him out again, a phone number at least.

It's only after he starts reflecting about your conversation that Santi wises up. You knew things about him you shouldn't. Little details, yes, nothing concerning, but details nonetheless. You're highly intelligent, and he knows he's going to have to be on his toes- But he's also thrilled. He knew you caught his attention for some reason, but unlike you, Santi doesn't question his gut too much when it tells him to follow a person. It's just like his favorite books, oh you came straight out of those pages, he's sure.

Although emotionally constipated (or stunted) yourself, as an observer, you can likely spot the telltale signs of infatuation. And you'll see them in Santi very early on. Dilated pupils -As tricky as a lust demon's eyes are, this is still reliable- Softer, less facetious grins, longing stares, gentler tones, a crystal clear desperation to keep you hooked on him- Personal nicknames, gifts, the works! He does call you Sherlock, which is something you're likely sick of by now. But he also calls you Minx, his darling Athena. That's... New.

Seeing his infatuation progress, being aware of it, likely takes a sour turn when you start to grasp how unhinged the demon is slowly getting. The signs of obsession are something you've probably already had contact with in your professional life, but seeing such directed at yourself is a whole new story, isn't it?

You know right away what your Achilles' heel is. Sex.

You can't let Santi get you aroused.

If he arouses you, he wins, your rationale is significantly impaired, he takes control because you have no experience. In that state, he can do anything to you. Anything. Mark you, keep you at arm's length always, make you crave him- If not romantically then at least bodily.

Every single day that passes, you can tell the demon grows more and more restless. Beneath the charm he exudes, beneath his helpful attitude during your work, his jokes and smiles- He burns alive. He burns for a taste of you. He's a ticking time bomb and you can see it in the way his fingers twitch.

You have to make some choices now. Think them over very well.

[howmanyholesinswisscheese]

Welcome!

It’s come to my attention I don’t have an intro post (could’ve sworn I did but it’s disappeared somewhere) so here it is :)

NOTE: Fam FAQ under the cut :D

Hello!

You can call me Arthur

He/him 🏳️‍⚧️ (pronouns.page)

Peppa pig was not my sexual awakening she just made me sound British. Yes I’m the guy who gave the Good Omens Mascot dad issues. No comment.

I’m aroace but it’s all a bit hand wavy, autistic, trans masc (ish???), and overall a bit of a mess. Enjoy my flailing.

I write fics sometimes

Multifandom (Good Omens, EPIC, Sherlock Holmes, etc) blog with a hefty serving of shitposting and family drama.

DMs and asks are open, I’m always up for a chat. I mean it. Tap on the glass. TAP ON IT.

Send me writing prompts!

More info under the cut (fandoms, other sites, tags)

Fandoms I’m into right now:

Good Omens (primarily)

Sherlock & Co (COME YELL AT ME ABOUT THEM)

The Odyssey/Iliad (PLEASE YELL AT ME AAAHJGKG)

And various other random stuff if I feel like it

Other things I post/rb about:

Asexuality

Neurodivergence

Writing

Adoptive family drama (under #the fam)

And shitpostery.

Other sites I’m on:

AO3

Discord - DM me for that if you’d like it

The Fam FAQ

It terrifies me that this is at a point that I must make an FAQ, but I will.

"Arthur, what the fuck is the fam?" you ask.

I don't know either. All I know is I've managed to amass several adoptive children, a mother, a brother, multiple niblings, a wine aunt, and a reputation.

I'm your dad. Your cishet deadbeat dad. That is the extent of the information available to my bewildered brain.

"How can I join the fam? Do I need to be good friends with you?"

Just send me an ask!!

Good news, the fam is like a subway sandwich: there are so many options available to you and you don't need to know the names of any of them to point and go "hey underpaid customer service worker, I want that one". Point is, I love you, welcome to the fam.

"But Arthur, what's my role?"

*Commercial voice* To chose from, you have...

adoptive child (very popular option. i will call you champ whether you like it or not. and bonus: chat with me over games of catch or golf like a true cishet dad does, and permanently be a better child than @weirdly-specific-but-ok will ever be)

nibling (general version of niece/nephew) (join @queermarzipan and @hoarder-of-dragons, i will still call you champ even though im your uncle)

grandparent (aka one of my or my (absent) wife's parents, this is @hell-hath-no-fury-like-love, my disapproving mother)

sibling (be the weird aunt/uncle to, like, seven or more strange and traumatised children)

by request, you can also become an in-law if you find a willing maggot to marry (@random-doctor-on-the-internet happy now)

i can't think of any other relations but if you come up with one YOU ARE COMPLETELY FREE TO CLAIM IT

you can be anything -- in the end of the day, you'll always be better than @weirdly-specific-but-ok :D

My tags:

#let me tempt queue — queue tag

These others I really should implement but half the time I forget. Good luck.

#arter speaks — my own posts

#arter writes — any sort of writing or prose I end up doing

#arter flails — long reblog chains, general idiocy

#arter gets needlessly patriotic — I somehow seem to post a lot about australia. I don’t even like it here.

#the fam — I have somehow managed to adopt several children, I try to tag our shenanigans with this for Memories, feel free to block it as they often take the form of very long rb chains

#arthur's snazzy gomens teacher au -- what it says on the box. Tags for my good omens teacher AU: "Love As A Hallway And Several Novelty Mugs".

#arthur’s numerous adoptive children #and niblings — adoption records

Don’t really have any others. This blog is as unorganised as my thought process.