fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2583 ]

[ SECRET POST #2583 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2583 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #369.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

If I remember right, isn't it not just that he didn't know this stuff at first, and more that when John found out how much he didn't know, Sherlock explained that he deliberately forgets all of those things that he doesn't consider useful?

Why would he "learn it later" then? I mean, maybe eventually he decided some of it was useful, but he was pretty adamant about not wanting to know that the Earth revolves around the sun or whatever astronomy tidbit it was.

Because people, especially 27 year old guys who are poor and trying to work out the kinks in their very unique and experimental profession, can change their minds?

Also, don't call them Sherlock and John. Please. They are Holmes and Watson. Sherlock and John are for the BBC version only.

Um...ooookay? Didn't realize there was some kind of policed nomenclature for how to "properly" refer to them. Terribly terribly sorry.

Not saying that Sherlock can't change his mind, but there's no need to get super snotty about it. He seemed pretty confident that he'd found a way to organize his mind that worked for him. That's one way to handwave it, sure. But it's not like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle never made some continuity errors. So it's fine for that to be one and it's okay to mention it as such, instead of trying to handwave it way. I mean, I "know" that you can make the Kessel Run in twelve parsecs because the run goes close enough to the pull of a black hole that a skilled pilot can use the gravitational force to cheat at space travel, but it doesn't mean that when George Lucas had Han Solo bragging about it, Lucas didn't think that a "parsec" was a unit of time.

Oh no, I'm not assuming Doyle intended it, but then again no one gives a shit what Doyle intended. :P Doyle is, as far as Holmes fans are concerned while they're doing the whole "Holmes was a real person!" shtick, Watson's super-lazy editor. :D

What I meant was that Holmes directly contradicts his rubbish brain attic remark later on when he frequently demonstrates that random knowledge IS helpful -- for example, his unfamiliarity with theology flummoxed him on Mrs. Barclay's "David!" comments, which he explicitly admits was the cause of his inability to figure out the solution at the end of The Crooked Man. Meanwhile, knowing an American slang phrase like "jumping a claim" clued him into the situation of Hatty Doran in The Noble Bachelor. All evidence that shows that the brain attic thing does not at all come in handy in detective work, no matter how "confident" he was about this idea when he was just starting out. And then there's this passage from The Valley Of Fear:

"I don’t doubt it, Mr. Holmes; but that is no business of ours."

"Is it not? Is it not? Breadth of view, my dear Mr. Mac, is one of the essentials of our profession. The interplay of ideas and the oblique uses of knowledge are often of extraordinary interest."

Which is quite a change from "what does it matter to me and my work?" So I say that, from the evidence, he must have changed his mind.

I...didn't mean to sound snotty? There's a thing in SH fandom called "the Great Game", where we argue about "what really happened" in a faux-super-serious way, which is just an act, but it's one that we keep up as doggedly as Stephen Colbert keeps up his nutty conservative persona. I sometimes forget that not everyone plays it. Apologies.

But regardless: these days, Sherlock and John are generally considered to be the BBC characters specifically, who have nothing factually to with the canon characters because they are from a modern AU.

DA

Well done for your rational and polite response, but you have no need to apologise to this person - who clearly isn't interested in anything but the faux modern version and themselves is being snotty and overreacting to anyone who knows anything else.

who clearly isn't interested in anything but the faux modern version

Lol, no. But good job being a smug dickmunch. I'm sure you're the same anon from down below, but I'll clarify here--I like the books. I've seen the new show, and it's alright and fun enough for what it is (and between that and the RDJ thing, I like finally seeing John played as less of a chubby bumbler), but when I think Sherlock Holmes, I think the books. I mean, seven hells, I would think you could "deduce" that I was talking about the books by the way I...I dunno, actually talked about the books, and not the BBC show.

Seriously, is the Sherlock Holmes fandom exactly this stuck on themselves and their superiority of medium or something, because if so I'm thinking I missed exactly nothing by never participating.

'Cept you called them John and Sherlock and you have no manners. Don't sound like a canon fan at all. Sound like a wannabee.

Dude, I'm not the one calling people "wannabee." Seriously, if showing "manners" is how you define a canon fan (um...what on earth does that have to do with fandom at all?), you're not doing to well yourself buddy.

Their names are John Watson and Sherlock Holmes. I'm terribly sorry that I never felt the need to go play with the other canon fans online to learn that there is ONE TRUE WAY to refer to them (that according so some canon fans, judging from this, only became so hotly contested after the BBC incident).

But dude, fine, you're calling folks "wannabee" because they don't like the canon the way you like canon. I think you outted yourself as a douchetroll.

Or at the very least, an incredibly good reason for people to avoid the old school Sherlock Holmes fandom. I'm not a teenager or even a college student anymore. I am so done with groups that play games about judging who is "worthy" enough to be a "true fan." I read the books, I like the books, I'm pretty sure, dickmunch, that that's all that is required to Being a Fan. Oy.

Oh, don't be so fucking touchy. BBC fans don't own the franchise you know. They were only ever Holmes and Watson for a hell of a long time, and remain so in the books.

Double ummmm okaaaaaaay, because I'm not a BBC fan. I mean, I've seen the show (not this past season) and it's alright and fun. But I'm a fan from reading the books. Nice superiority bit there, though. How am I touchy for calling people out on being snotty but other people aren't touchy for getting their feathers ruffled over characters being called by their given names?

Don't call two characters whose names are Sherlock and John by their name? Why, exactly? Please explain why these two characters are the only two versions in a hundred other versions of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson whose first names are reserved solely for their use? I seriously would like to know your reason for this.

ayrt

Nowadays, Sherlock and John are used to refer specifically to the BBC characters. Before the BBC series came out, there would be no problem with doing it, but nowadays it has different connotations.

Also, given that they are always referred to by last name, it's a bit like referring to Harry, Ron, and Hermione as Potter, Weasley, and Granger. But that's a rather irrelevant quibble.

1) Thank you for that response.
But
2) your hypotheses with only one solution is based on the rest of fandom sharing your exact perspective. No doubt some people will.
But
2a) others will not. Why not let people enjoy fandom however they want to enjoy it, which includes, but is not limited to, referring to characters by any of their given names, not just the ones of which you approve. If it truly bothers you that other people are not appreciating Sherlock on your level, please consider some advice:

http://xkcd.com/1314/

ayrt

Well yeah, ITA with that in theory, but in practice, almost everyone (except BBC-only fans) refer to only the BBC versions as Sherlock and John. Not just me. So the fact is that using the first names does refer to something different, not because there's something fundamentally wrong with referring to them by first names, but because that's just not how they're referred to by canon fans, and using their first names implies, to almost every canon fan you will ever talk to, that you're referring to the BBC version. It's mostly just a communication thing.

using their first names implies, to almost every canon fan you will ever talk to, that you're referring to the BBC version

Or perhaps I've just never been involved in the old school fandom. I read the books, I love the books, and I've talked about them with my friends in person. Never really felt the need to go jump into the online fandom. So I didn't know that there is a "correct" way to refer to them, and really, I think it's silly to insist that other people use it as some kind of swordfish password to prove that you're one of the "proper" fans. I guess it is just a communication thing, and I can see why it is, but hell, I just read books and talk about them with friends. At this point, I don't actually want to know all the secret-handshake ins and outs of Emily Post's Guide To Sherlock Holmes Fandom, because it's always seemed like a cold, smug sort of place where people really insist on things being Right and there being a proper interpretation of everything, and if I really want that in my fun reading again, I can go start a slap fight with an Oxfordian Shakespeare fan.

All this "ooh, it's all elitism and secret handshakes" is more about your inverted snobbery and hurt feelies that someone dared to suggest you might change your practice than anything real. Holmes and Watson are just their names in the books (used by the most casual observers, nothing to do with fandom), and how in hell it hurts or offends you to call them that, I can't understand. It's not a personal criticism. How on earth do you handle everyday life if you take such a hump at something so small?

Do you not say Dickens and Darwin, not "Charlie"? Shakespeare not "Bill"? I'd bet you do.

A polite "Oh, OK" would probably have served you better than all the rude and childish name-calling.

(no subject)

fadeinthewash - 2014-01-30 07:20 (UTC) - Expand

Aaaaand the accusations of elitism come out. Or you could, y'know, just be accurate.

i think i'm going to refer to th,em as potter, weasley, and granger, now. seems like good fun.

lmao what the hell you're describing it like they're slurs or something.

The context should make it clear which versions you're talking about.

Because he did learn it later. He knew stuff like that later, so he must have learned it later. Therefore he must have either changed his mind, or he lost the ability to forget. I would put my money on him changing his mind, as in later stories (particularly in The Valley of Fear), he points out the usefulness of acquiring a wide breadth of knowledge.

And ditto on the anon above me on "Sherlock" and "John." Just....no.

Sherlock John Sherlock John Sherlock John Sherlock John...

Geeze, it's their names. It's just a discussion on a fandom forum. Get the hell over yourselves, what are y'all, Baker Street Irregulars or something?

And are you twelve? Not giving a very good picture of BBC fans there. Why don't YOU get over yourself?

Again with the assumptions. Tsk. Although yes, you've made it quite clear that you hold the BBC fans in low regard.

Why are you even assuming they are a BBC fan? When uh it seems pretty clear that they are't?

Not clear at all. But if they say so.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only