fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2169 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2169 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 078 secrets from Secret Submission Post #310.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

02. http://i.imgur.com/99rag.png

Whatttttt that is just ridiculous. For one thing, there are Holmes stories without Watson, and they're mostly terrible. For another thing, Watson is awesome, and his contribution to the stories, in terms of structure and plot and in terms of atmosphere and character, is immense - I mean that, in addition to being a great character, he's an essential addition to the plot by allowing us to be outside Holmes' view.

This kind of thing reminds me of someone who wants to get rid of the setup of a joke and just leave the punchline - or someone who only ever wants to eat dessert, and no main course.

+1

Everyone is allowed their own opinion but I don't understand that point of view at all. Holmes needs his Watson. (And I too say that in a non-shippy sense, though I do ship certain versions of them.)

Holmes can't write worth shit.

1. YAY! More ACD Holmes secrets.

2. Saywhatnow? That makes *zero* sense. Everyone needs a Watson!

You don't need to be a shipper to think that's a really bizarre opinion. Just...what?

I agree with you, OP. That's just crazy. (Also from a non-shippy POV)

Watson is as necessary to the Holmes stories as Holmes himself is. He's the heart & soul of the stories while Holmes is the intellect. If you had JUST intellect, the stories would be dull as dirt. In fact, they'd be ABOUT dirt.

and tobacco ash....

He's basically Tolkien then. Only instead of just describing dirt forever, you also get the properties of dirt for another forever. Two for the price of one.

When I was reading these stories, Watson was like the everyman character I could relate to. Holmes is not as easy for most people to relate to, so I feel like Watson is the buffer between the reader and Holmes. Also, from a purely technical standpoint, Watson is there to discuss methodology with Holmes so you know what the fuck is even going on in Holmes' mind

Basically, I totally agree with you OP, you are right

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 00:18 (UTC) - Expand

maverickz3r0 - 2012-12-11 01:27 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 18:21 (UTC) - Expand

Watson was always my favorite character, and that goes back to the ACD stories.

But then how would the books be narrated? Who would Holmes give exposition to? I mean, even if you don't like the character, how would the books work, otherwise? You'd have to totally re-vamp the stories.

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 00:35 (UTC) - Expand

visp - 2012-12-11 00:44 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 00:45 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 23:34 (UTC) - Expand

I don't ship JohnLock. I never have. But he's an integral part of Sherlock; take one away, you take both away.

LOL. I'm sad to say your friend is 100% pure Hillshire angus moron.

99 percent of us would know jack shit about what's going on in the story with Watson.

Holmes without Watson is like a peanut butter sandwich without jelly---why would you even bother?

There would be no Holmes stories without Watson.

Yeah, you're right on this OP. I'm actually wondering how they can stand to read the stories if they think they'd be better without the POV character...

What?! But....Watson!!!

You know how some people say all interpretations are valid, and a matter of taste can't be wrong?

Bullshit. This one is completely wrong. It's thoroughly incorrect.

WHUT. Seriously, that wouldn't work. Holmes without Watson didn't work very well even in canon for the few stories where Doyle went with a solo Holmes POV. It wasn't totally unreadable, but it definitely wasn't the same.

Butbutbut Watson's the one narrating the stories! You can't have Sherlock without his Watson and vice versa! That's madness! That's blasphemy! That's... boring!

It's not that serious.

IIRC, that was the opinion of Mary Russell in The Beekeeper's Apprentice by Laurie King--she had a lot of contempt for Watson and couldn't see how Holmes tolerated him. I'm going to guess that the idea that Holmes would be better off and more interesting without Watson comes from someone who identifies with Holmes because they consider themselves a similarly superior intellect.

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 19:03 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 19:26 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2012-12-11 23:37 (UTC) - Expand

Unfortunately, this is the route that several published pastiche authors have taken. It's infuriating. Because the authors know so much more about Sherlock Holmes than Watson did, clearly.