It’s the X’mas present Sherlock received from John. He never wore it, because he actually loved it and this feeling embarrased him.
And John knows that, but he didn’t mind, thinking they have time for it eventually.
Only now he’ll never have the chance watching Sherlock in it.
"So I’m trying to explain to Mike that—Sherlock! You can’t smoke in here."
"For god’s sake, John. It’s 1997. There’s no smoking ban in London yet."
"There is in my flat."
"Fine. I’ll take it outside."
"Do that. Just don’t run off without me."
"Hurry up and you won’t have to worry about that."
An outtake of The Time Traveller’s Flatmate.
god I wish I could force everyone to read it
It’s a metaphor, see
I planned to cover this in the S&S entry for A Scandal in Belgravia, but I’ll do it now…
It’s EXTREME heartbreak music. And because it’s so extreme, it’s used sparingly: we only ever hear it three times, iirc:
1. the hiker deduction (this is the big thing)
2. Mycroft being devastated by Moriarty’s text
3. Sherlock’s epiphany that it’s about to be “too late” when he drops his champagne glass before toasting John’s marriage (sound here)
So what about that hiker, eh? What could that possibly do with heartbreak? Well, we know it’s got something to do with something important because a lot of time is spent on it and it has NO relevance to the plot of ASiB.
It’s actually my favorite subtext in the show, because it’s a tricky one: it’s BEAUTIFULLY constructed and terribly clever. The hiker and the client who sees the hiker are both mirrors for John, but separate parts of him. I’ll set up why each is a mirror, and then explain what’s going on in the scene.
Then for the hell of it, I’ll tell you John’s other mirror in the episode, because it’s a quick one. This is pretty long (pictures and videos, too), so here’s a cut:
Holy crap. I feel like I’ve been watching a different show than you. You are amazing. Thank you for writing this all up and sharing it because… well, I hope they don’t think most people will get what they are doing, I assume not? Especially since I’ve seen these shows over and over and never caught any of this. I feel like a numpty.
I thought I reblogged this when it was released but I guess it didn’t go through on my phone? The retweet went through, the Tumblr phone app is terrible. Anyway, in case anyone missed it, mid0nz did a great interview with Sherlock composer Michael Price. Go read it! A bunch of people have…
I’m not sure where to begin. I admire LSiT’s ferocity, gumption and intensity— I really do. But I’ll go on the record as saying that… well… I feel like I need a badge that says “I believe in Michael Price.” He’s a great guy, an honest one, not some “lying liar who lies.”
About the question of “Mycroft’s theme” you simply can’t get any clearer than this:
Mycroft doesn’t have a theme because we see him more (obviously don’t tell Mark Gatiss this) but we see him more in context of how his character plays against Sherlock and Watson’s, and I think there’s a balance to be found on a scene-by-scene basis and also an overall basis as to how obvious your working is. There’s certain genres of films, Lord of the Rings type films, where it’s a very Wagnerian leitmotif way of working, where literally character X walks on screen and you hear music for character X. We never wanted to be as literal as that with Sherlock, but we wanted to reserve for ourselves the weapon in our arsenal to have tunes that had got emotion and got resonance, and got context with them so that when we needed to we could focus in and play a tune. But if you… I think in the context of this show if everything was literally worked out, it would become too self-conscious. (x)
This sums everything up for me:
MJW: So there’s no nudge, nudge, wink, wink where we can go back later and go, “That was a hint that we missed.”
MP: I think it takes us back again to the fact that music should, or in my opinion, music should be emotionally honest with you as much of the time as it can be, really. That’s when it’s at its best. (x)
Ultimately LSiT and I absolutely couldn’t be farther apart on our views about Sherlock and its creators or our approach to meta. But so what? The conversation is interesting.
#vive la différence!
Just so it’s clear, I think all the showrunners are “liars” in the sense of someone who lies about, say, a surprise party, or a gift that hasn’t been unwrapped yet. It’s a lie told with love, because they don’t want to ruin things for the audience. I don’t think Michael Price is in any way a liar in the sense of being an antonym for a “great guy.” I have huge admiration for Michael Price (and David Arnold), just like I have huge admiration for Moftiss and Thompson, and Cumberbatch and Freeman, and so on. If I thought the show was run by a bunch of people who aren’t great and decent, I wouldn’t enjoy it or have much faith in their vision for the future of the show.
Anyway, we’ll see what happens.
Didn’t mean to imply otherwise— sorry if that wasn’t clear!
Oh, please don’t worry! <3 I was pretty sure you didn’t mean it like that — your response was perfectly polite — it was more for the benefit of anyone else because it’s something that comes up sometimes in asks and whatnot. ilu, no worries. <3 I don’t mind when we disagree on stuff, either, you’re still my hero.
also apologies if something like this posts twice, I tried to post it from my phone and it didn’t appear to post, so I’ve just about given up on the Tumblr phone app. (What kind of world are we living in when I have to get up from bed and open my laptop?)
I love you both: what a wonderful example of polite, intelligent discussion about a nuanced point of fandom. This is how you debate/discuss/clarify/converse positively. You both rock.