needlesslydefiantwithtea: mazarin221b: ...

mazarin221b:

ivyblossom:

sherlockspeare:

Sherlock, John is the most precious gift that heaven decided to give you.

First: I think it’s really sweet that John never judges Sherlock for not being able to tell the difference between behaving well or badly when it comes to other people’s feelings. I mean, once he understands that Sherlock actually can’t tell.

I know fandom gets a lot of mileage out of the “bit not good” thing, which I enjoy, but I also think it’s a sort of bittersweet phrase coming from Sherlock’s mouth. It sounds like something he’s been asking himself for most of his life. Because he doesn’t say, “oh, was that inappropriate?” he asks, “not good?” as if his goal is to be good.

But good is never his goal. Great, maybe. Right. Brilliant, certainly. Flawless. Impressive. But never just good. Never morally good, either. He is not, I don’t think, a good person. The fact that it comes up in ethical or moral situations makes it sound like a really old criticism.

We don’t dissect cats on the pavement, Sherlock. That’s not good. It sounds like something you tell a child, because more complex words and meanings are either too harsh or will be lost on them. You’d say something is not good rather that telling a child they’re doing something bad. As opposed to using language even stronger and more precise than that. I like this element of the show, because it demonstrates that for all Sherlock’s sophisticated and mature intellectual prowess, he reverts to childhood notions of good and not good when it comes to social interaction. As if the more mature distinctions and nuances are completely beyond him.

I also appreciate that John says one word to Sherlock to get him to realize his behaviour is inappropriate. “Timing.” It suggests (as most things in Hounds do, thank god for you, Mark Gatiss) that they have had a previous conversation wherein John attempted to explain to Sherlock that the timing of his commentary can sometimes be improved, because people are frequently not ready to hear about Sherlock’s deductions in moments of pain and weakness. John’s “timing” line here sounds like he’s reminding Sherlock of that conversation (or set of conversations). This rings especially true because Sherlock knows exactly what John means with that one word. He’s instantly frozen by it, too. He listens to John. He takes John’s direction extremely well.

This relationship is so well-written. *dreamy sigh* That’s fine, you can go on about Cumberbatch’s cheekbones. I’m going to be over here pining over that character development and relationship building. I have such a crush on these narrative structures!

God, yes. The fact that John can say a single word and stop Sherlock in his tracks speaks such volumes of the trust and intimacy (not like that, god) that they’ve built over the time they’ve known each other, through conversations that, like Ivy, I’m absolutely positive they’ve had multiple times.

this is what i love about this fandom

i’ll come across a pretty gifset and i just know that along the line of reblogs SOMEONE will have added some absolutely intellectually brilliant commentary

i just

i love it so much

especially, in this case, the distinction between moral “not good” (which, as the OP rightly says, doesn’t really apply to sherlock), and the term “not good” in regards to behaviour and the advising of such.

just

ugh

awesome