hound-of-the-baskervilles

"It's not in the rules!"

“Then the rules are WRONG!”

Do you remember this moment? Sherlock shouting at John for not understanding his Cluedo accusation? We all know from John’s blog that in this instance, Sherlock thinks the victim faked his own death - which plays out through his story in TRF. Not only is this blatant foreshadowing, this is Sherlock rejecting everything ordinary people suppose about the game and pushing the boundaries of belief. The structure to the game doesn’t allow its players a chance to think outside the box and make new deductions, and Sherlock thinks that’s just WRONG. But he was right in the end, since he (the victim) fakes his own death and it was the “only possible solution”. You know what this sounds like? Do you know where you’ve heard this maddening exchange before? It’s on the tip of my tongue, it’s on the top of my tongue…

“It’s not in the books!”
“Then the books are WRONG!”

The argument that romance between characters, ie Johnlock, cannot occur because it is not explicitly in ACD canon is this exact conflict. There’s a way us boring, ordinary people are used to understanding how the story goes and we reject the possibility of divergence because it’s “not in the rules”. Sherlock, someone clever and extraordinary, thinks that excuse is utter bullshit. Who cares about the rules? There’s nothing else it could be! Haven’t you seen all the signs?! Don’t you see all the evidence?!

“It’s the only possible solution!”

Mark Gatiss is exactly as ridiculously lovely as he seems.

He read a few paragraphs of The Hound of the Baskervilles tonight at the Old Vic Vaults, prior to a showing of Hammer Films’ film of the same name (Peter Cushing as Sherlock).

Yes, he wore a deerstalker (“I couldn’t resist”), took questions, and was flawless. God damn it.