m0rnings-hush asked: Hi, so I'm just wondering how you actually feel about johnlock? I've seen all of your "sherlock and john don't actually touch all that much" presentations and I can't tell if you're trying to disprove johnlock or if you're just upset that it can be easily disproven. It doesn't really matter; I'm just confused.
Ohooooooo, oh boy. Oh boy. Okay. Thank you for this excellent excuse. XD Here we go.
I am an enormous Holmes/Watson shipper, from the books onward. Therefore, I am compelled to ship every incarnation, even when I really shouldn’t. (Elementary, anyone? *headdesk*) So I was always going to ship John and Sherlock from the outset. I think they have a lot of chemistry in the show, they can absolutely be reasonably shipped, and that there is an excellent potential narrative in the way their stories are told. I think Sherlock is a show practically dripping with queerbaiting, and it’s awful, but I ship it so damn hard. So. Damn. Hard.
My problem comes with fan interpretations of the characters and their relationship. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for interpretation and reinterpretation: it’s our fandom, and we’ll do what we like. But of course, there are always going to be fics and interpretations that stray pretty far from the original. And I have such respect for the way the charact— wait, no, scratch that. I appreciate the way they wrote Sherlock, and I have the most unbelievable respect for the writing and especially the performance of John Watson; and it hurts, sometimes, to see him mangled by fics. (Of course, I know I’ve been guilty of it myself, but there’s a limit, sometimes…)
The reason I made the powerpoints wasn’t to prove or disprove the ship altogether — it was to prove a point about the way the characters interact. I certainly learnt a thing or two in the making of it, but my original notion stands true: John is not a tactile person. (Sherlock’s just an disrespectful dick, but that’s another matter entirely. XD) Now, I’m a huge sap, honestly, the biggest sap there ever was, probably. I adore fluffy fics, I love me some good kisses and cuddles. And I’d never want to try and dictate the way people write. But there’s a certain trope in the fandom — the ‘casual tactility’ trope — which is fine on it’s own, but also very very prevalent. And I like it, sure — to an extent. It hit the point, in the end, where my desire for accurate characterisation overcame my desire for cuddles.
John is an incredibly complex and nuanced character. What (admittedly sometimes puzzle-edged) bits of backstory and insight we get into his character only enhace his depth. Martin Freeman’s performance is absolutely extraordinary; and this includes his reticence. John — around Sherlock — is very often composed, even defensive. He is an extremely proper Englishman, and he is not generally tactile, even in an emergency (see: his reactions when Sherlock is drugged by Irene). I despise the all-too-common interpretation of him as ~~*~so gay for Sherlock~*~~ — which started out as a joke but quickly became very old — because it misses the nuances of his character. He is incredibly, vehemently heterosexual — and the way I prefer to ship it around this is not to shrug that off and scream about his homosexuality, but to view Sherlock, as was so very briefly and dismissively hinted at in ASiB, as his exception.
I love fandom, and I love fan interpretations, but sometimes you just wanna read something really in-character, y’know? XD
Anyway, TL;DR: Sometimes the fandom can be irritatingly simplistic, but —