#howard holmes meta | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

brudnopis · 4 years

Link

Directors mentioned by name:

• Jean-Luc Godard • William Greaves • Christopher Nolan • Judd Apatow • Billy Wilder • Charlie Kaufman (meta!) • George Clooney (mentioned as a handsome celebrity, not a director) • Sidney Drew • Jean-Pierre Melville • Alain Resnais • Oscar Micheaux • Georges Méliès • Wes Anderson (later nicknamed Wanderson) • Martin Scorsese (later as 'Scorseso', then later as 'Marvin Scorsesso') • Quentin Tarantino (deliberately misspelled as 'Tarrantinoo') • Sidney Poitier (mentioned for his acting work in To Sir, With Love) • Alfred Hitchcock • Harvey Weinstein (mentioned as a terrible human being, he also happens to have directing credits) • William Dear (protagonist B. Rosenberg's film professor) • Paul Thomas Anderson (nicknamed Panderson, later mentioned as one of the Paul Andersons) • Jean Cocteau • Ron Howard (as 'Ronson Howard') • Giuseppe de Liguoro • Francesco Bertolini • Adolfo Padovan • Sam Shepard • Vsevolod Pudovkin • Tony Scott (in reference to A.O. Scott, possibly a tribute to the director) • Marc Forster • Zach Helm (as 'Zachary H. Elms', in reference to his Stranger Than Fiction writing credit) • Manolo Cruz • Carlos del Castillo • Lav Diaz • Juho Kuosmanen • Danis Tanovic • Koji Fukada • Thomas Vinterberg • Hannes Holm • Makoto Shinkai • Martin Zandvliet • Preston Sturges • Alec Baldwin (as a Baldwin brother) • Angelia Jolie (as married to Brad Pitt) • Russell Crowe (as 'Russ Crow', for "crazy blinking" in A Beautiful Mind) • W.C. Fields • Luis Bunuel • Alexander Payne • Francois Truffaut • Kurt Maetzig • Lana & Lily Wachowski • David Cronenberg (as 'David Cronenbauer', and later as 'Dave Cronenberg') • Robert Altman (as 'Bobert Altman') • Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne • Vittorio De Sica • Satyajit Ray • Bob Balaban (mentioned as an actor in B. Rosenberg's daughter's film, playing a fictionalized version of B.) • Jonah Hill (mentioned as the star of a hypothetical Charlie Kaufman film) • Warren Beatty • Michael Cimino • Diane Keaton (mentioned as who B. had a falling out over with Warren Beatty) • Duke Johnson • Art Clokey • Andrei Tarkovsky • Ray Harryhausen • Willis H. O'Brien (initially misspelled as Wallis O'Brian) • Andy Warhol • Hal Roach • Yoko Ono (mentioned in reference to her art piece 'Wish Tree') • Giovanni Pastrone • Richard Burton (referenced as one of Bettie Page's ex-husbands, which is false) • Goldie Hawn (President Donald J. Trunk has a signed photograph in B.'s dream) • Lin-Manuel Miranda (in reference to a fictional White House rap. Note: Lin's directorial debut is in production) • Mike Myers (in reference to Austin Powers/Dr. Evil) • Alexander Sokurov • Francois Ozon • Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck • Claire Denis • Dome Karukoski • Masato Harada • Jakub Paczek • John Trengove • Charlie Chaplin (mentioned for his "dapper insouciance") • James Cagney (an actor who wore lifts) • Burgess Meredith (an actor who wore lifts) • Al Pacino (an actor who will wear lifts) • Buster Keaton • Melvin Frank • Mike Nichols (as 'Michael Nichols') • Nicolas Cage (mentioned as star of Adaptation.) • Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle • Sofia Coppola • Jerry Lewis • Shawn Levy • Rainer Werner Fassbinder • Paul Reubens (reference to Pee-wee Herman) • Robert Downey Sr. • Werner Herzog • Steven Spielberg (as 'Steve Spielman', later as 'Steve Spielberg') • Frederick Wiseman • John Candy (reference to Uncle Buck) • Beyonce (a safe talking point) • John Carpenter • Stephen King (as author of Christine) • Antonio Campos • James Cagney (as star of Man of a Thousand Faces) • Ludmil Staikov • Burt Reynolds (as star of fictional Children of a Lesser God theatre production) • Gary Oldman (mentioned in reference to his performance as Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour) • Carl Theodor Dreyer • Robert De Niro (incorrectly mentioned as star of Taxi) • Tod Browning • Alan Alda (reference to his character in M*A*S*H) • Ingmar Bergman • Ike Barinholtz • William Friedkin • Maya Deren • Samuel Fuller

Note: Directors most frequently mentioned throughout the novel are Jean-Luc Godard, Christopher Nolan, Judd Apatow, Charlie Kaufman & Wes Anderson.

TV shows mentioned:

• The Courtship of Eddie's Father (1969–1972) • Blossom (1991–1995) • Monty Python's Flying Circus (1969–1974) • The Bernie Mac Show (2001–2006) • Friends (1994–2004) • Grey's Anatomy (2005–present) • M*A*S*H (1972–1983) • Black Mirror (2011–present) • The Twilight Zone (1959–1964) • American Idol (2002–present) • Happy Days (1974–1984) • The Flintstones (1960–1966) • Doctor Who (2005–present) • Fox & Friends (1998–present) • Taxi (1978–1983) • Mad TV (1995–2009) • Trapper John, M.D. (1979–1986) • Bob's Burgers (2011–present)

Fictional films and TV shows mentioned:

• Herbert and Dunham Ride Bicycles (1896) [prologue] • Moutarde (dir. Rene Chauvin) • Gravity in Essence (dir. B. Rosenberg) • Ich Habe Keine Augapfel (dir. Heinrich Telemucher) • Untitled (dir. Ingo Cutbirth) • Help Me, Teach! (starring Robin Williams) • Teacher of the Year II (starring Robin Williams) • The Teacher Who Cared Very Much (starring Robin Williams) • Professor Salvador Sapperstein and the Sad Students of Salisbury High (starring Robin Williams) • Help Me Again, Teach! (starring Robin Williams) • I Am Your Teacher and I Love You (starring Robin Williams) • Jolly Roger (dir. Nunley, 1952) • Found Again (dir. Kertes Onegin) • Thyestes/Obliviate (dir. Tobleg) • 10th Birthday Party for Bobby [home video] • It's Tough Being a Teen Comedian in the Eighties! (dir. Judd Apatow) [#4 in B. Rosenberg's top 10 of 2016.] • Soy un Chimpance (dir. Unknown) • Untitled [orphan film festival film B. Rosenberg watches and describes in detail] • So You Want To Be a Funny Guy? (dir. Judd Apatow) • It's Not Appropriate to Punch Him (Cowlick) • Shrimp Coctail for Two [TV show] • The Doctor Is In[sane]! [TV show] • Who Shall Remain Nameless [hypothetical film directed by B. Rosenberg] • Dysgu i gi bach gachu (dir. Talfan) • Here Come a Coupla Fellas (starring Mudd & Molloy) • Ain't She a Corker, Boys? (starring Lucy Chalmers) • Abbott and Costello meet the Killer Robot From the Phantom Creeps [fictional film within Ingo Cutbirth's film] • Father Nose Jest (dir. Grace Farrow, B. Rosenberg's daughter) • A Coming of Rage Story (dir. Grace Less) [film within Grace Farrow's film above] • Dreams of Absent-Minded Transgression (dir. Charlie Kaufman) • Guns Blazing (dir. B. Rosenberg) [hypothetical film] • Woomin! (dir. Grace Farrow) • Woman of the Ear (dir. Sharon Old Bear) • Citizen Funny Guy (dir. Judd Apatow, a Citizen Kane remake) • The Notorious Vice Lords (starring Lance Farmer, who is an actual tornado) • What's Buzzin', Cousin (starring Rooney & Doodle) • What's Tickin', Chicken [hypothetical competing Abbott & Costello film in Cutbirth's film] • Mudd and Molloy Meet the Unseen Man [planned Mudd & Molloy film] • Fingerspitzengefuhl (dir. Sterne) [#5 in B. Rosenberg's top 10 of 2016.] • Hey, Timothy Gibbons, This Is Your Mother Calling! (dir. Judd Apatow) [#4 in B. Rosenberg's top 10 of 2017.] • Bad Luck in Bumfuck (starring Mudd & Molloy) • Mudd and Molloy Meet the 32 Foot Man (starring Mudd & Molloy) • Well Plastered (starring Rooney & Doodle) • Morons of Arabia [planned Mudd & Molloy film] • Scream Me to Sleep (dir. Egg Friedlander) • I Wake Up Sleeping [film within B's dream] • Willibald and Winibald [Hanna-Barbera TV show] • Pachinko (dir. Eisentstein) • Effluence (dir. Frederick Wiseman, 1978) • Quod Erat Demonstandum (dir. B. Rosenberg) • Issues at Hand (dir. B. Rosenberg) • Cave (dir. Plato) • Lumpy Mattress (dir. Mamoud, 1958) • Kitsui Kutsu (Tight Shoes) (dir. Kitagawa, 1997) • Hey, I'm Not Just a Towel Boy, Fellas (dir. Judd Apatow) • What A Sight! (directed by and starring Calcium, an ant) • Calcium Carbonate (directed by and starring Calcium)

#charlie kaufman #antkind

3 notes · View notes

acdhw · 5 years

Text

Victorian fic community

It seems like ACD Holmesfest on DW has a lot of enthusiasts when it’s on, so how about we all create an open community on DW (idk how it works here) for fics of any genres, pairings, etc written in ACD ‘verse? Or basically any Victorian setting, including Granada, Howard!Holmes, Whitehead!Holmes, Cushing!Holmes, My Dearly Beloved Detective, Russian Holmeses, Downey films, BBC’s The Abominable Bride, anything.

Anyone could post their fic recs or promote their old or new fic, on a constant basis, not only several times a year.

Let me know what you think. Tagging people who might be interested, but since I’m new in this fandom and don’t know many people, do spread the word ;)

@a-candle-for-sherlock, @sanguinarysanguinity, @artemisastarte, @granada-brett-crumbs, @tremendousdetectivetheorist, @scfrankles, @elwinglyre, @sarahthecoat, @luthienberen, @sanspatronymic

Also, it would be cool if meta and info on the time period could be posted there too, for writing reference, discussion, and backing up.

@devoursjohnlock, @sherlock-overflow-error, @norburylibrary, @sherloki1854

135 notes · View notes

cat-clawz · 6 years

Text

The Three Garridebs

So, I might be going a bit crazy (it's a far more likely theory that something that I hypothesize about actually being correct) but I found a few similarities between The Three Garridebs and some of bbc's stuff (Not sure if someone's already been over this or not). Anyways.

My working idea here is that John is shot by Eurus at the end of TLD and is currently in a coma. During TFP, we are in his mind bungalow, where he figures a lot of stuff out. During this, there is a literal 3 garridebs scene, which many fans were disappointed in. However! Think about maybe what happened was MAYBE the three garridebs happened earlier. It happened when Eurus shot John, like John Garrideb did in the book. Note that Eurus is one of 3 siblings. Well, if we count Eurus=John Garrideb, and Sherlock=Nathan Garrideb (similarities below), that means Mycroft=Howard Garrideb, one who seems on the surface to be completely legitimate but upon close examination is a fraud. The advertisement is not how it first seems to be, and is actually something that the villian, John Garrideb, uses to fool Nathan Garrideb.

Key points:

-Eurus=John Garrideb

×Lies about pretty much everything

×Shoots John Watson

×Turns out to be an insane criminal who has killed in the past

×Has escaped prison in the past due to political influence

×Multiple aliases throughout

-Sherlock=Nathan Garrideb

×Incredibly eccentric

×Very smart and studious

×Rarely leaves his rooms unless it is something which interests him

×A man of many studies

-Mycroft=Howard Garrideb

×He is who is left as the 3rd garrideb

×Seems upon first glance to be normal but turn out to be a fraud

×Is really a front for the mastermind behind it all

×Manipulates Nathan Garrideb away from the nature of his real mission

(Possibly the 3 Holmes siblings are in themselves representative of the three Garridebs mentioned in the story, or at the very least that Eurus is representative of John Garrideb)

It's my first meta-ish thing, so please feel free to add on or correct me here, because this is just a thought, and not a very well-formulated one at that.

#tjlc #theory #the three garridebs #M theory #maybe.#a baby meta?

5 notes · View notes

tractamentdismenorreaprimaria · 4 years

Photo

Abdollahi, N., Mirghafourvand, M. & Mollazadeh, S. (2018). The effects of fennel on menstrual bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Complementary and Integrative Medicine, 15(3), pp. -. Retrieved 16 Mar. 2020, from https://doi:10.1515/jcim-2017-0154

Armour, M., Parry, K., Al-Dabbas, M. A., Curry, C., Holmes, K., MacMillan, F., Ferfolja, T., & Smith, C. A. (2019). Self-care strategies and sources of knowledge on menstruation in 12,526 young women with dysmenorrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 14(7), e0220103. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220103

Chen C-H, Lin Y-H, Heitkemper MM, Wu K-M. The self-care strategies of girls with primary dysmenorrhea: a focus group study in Taiwan. Health Care Women Int. 2006;27(5):418–27.

Chien, L.-W., Chang, H.-C., & Liu, C.-F. (2013). Effect of yoga on serum homocysteine and nitric oxide levels in adolescent women with and without dysmenorrhea. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 19(1), 20–23. https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/10.1089/acm.2011.0113

Howard F, Perry P, Carter J, El-Minawi A. Pelvic pain: diagnosis and management. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2000.

Jo, J., & Lee, S. H. (2018). Heat therapy for primary dysmenorrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis of its effects on pain relief and quality of life. Scientific reports, 8(1), 16252. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34303-z

Marjoribanks, J., Ayeleke, R., Farquhar, C., & Proctor, M. (2015). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for dysmenorrhoea ( Review ) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FOR THE MAIN COMPARISON. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001751.pub3.www.cochranelibrary.com

Matthewman, G., Lee, A., Kaur, J. G., & Daley, A. J. (2018). Physical activity for primary dysmenorrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 219(3), 255.e1–255.e20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.04.001

McGovern, C. E., & Cheung, C. (2018). Yoga and Quality of Life in Women with Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review. Journal of midwifery & women's health, 63(4), 470–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.12729

Feng, X., & Wang, X. (2018). Comparison of the efficacy and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for patients with primary dysmenorrhea: A network meta-analysis. Molecular pain, 14, 1744806918770320. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1744806918770320

Sachedina, A., & Todd, N. (2020). Dysmenorrhea, Endometriosis and Chronic Pelvic Pain in Adolescents. Journal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology, 12(Suppl 1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.4274/jcrpe.galenos.2019.2019.S0217

Woo, H. L., Ji, H. R., Pak, Y. K., Lee, H., Heo, S. J., Lee, J. M., & Park, K. S. (2018). The efficacy and safety of acupuncture in women with primary dysmenorrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine, 97(23), e11007. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011007

Zhu X, Wong F, Bensoussan A, Lo SK, Zhou C, Yu J. Are there any crossethnic differences in menstrual profiles? A pilot comparative study on australian and chinese women with primary dysmenorrhea. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2010;36(5):1093–101.

0 notes

sherlockshadow · 7 years

Text

@ebaeschnbliah

I read your meta: The Three Garridebs of Sherrinford

I have a different interpretation I wanted to share with you.

I don’t think the brothers are Sherlock’s facades. They are John. Dropping them in the ocean is about John committing suicide. Each of these locked rooms is answering the question Sherlock asked Ella in TST: “What do I do about John Watson?” How does he save him?

This room has the walls painted like the crime scene in ASIP with Jennifer Wilson. JW suicide parallels. Sherlock hands John the gun. Sherlock’s suicide is John’s suicide. He might as well just hand John a gun. A big gun. Prior to this scene we saw John walk out on the ledge and look at the water. Sherlock ignored Vatican Cameos. John is alone on an island metaphorically. He doesn’t see the love and loyalty behind the cold mask.

Let’s look at the brothers:

Nathan wears glasses. Sherlock is being reminded that he doesn’t see them as equals in their relationship. He often patronizes John. Treats him condescendingly like his Mary facade.

TEH: Sherlock imagines Mummy and Daddy Holmes as married mirrors for himself and John. Foreshadowing Sherlock’s facade marrying John in TSOT. Mummy/Sherlock is the one in charge. Daddy/John wears glasses, but has lost them. “John, you see but you don’t observe.” They are not being presented as equals here in this scene in TEH.

As we know, case in point, there are plenty of times when Sherlock doesn’t observe himself, especially concerning romantic entanglement. And he realizes this twice: TAB and in TST.

Howard: John’s alcoholism. Hand tremor.

Alex: John in S4. His change in appearance is superficial. John is mirroring Sherlock, so Sherlock isn’t shortsighted anymore, he’s had laser surgery. Sherlock is seeing the consequences of his actions through John’s eyes. He’s seeing his life in a new light.

Sherlock killed CAM to protect his Mary facade and was sent on a six month exile...his death. Sherlock dies/John dies. Alex killed Evans six months ago. John killed himself six months ago.

Sherlock has been telling himself a better story. Eurus condemns them all because all leads to the same conclusion: John’s death.

This leads directly into the coffin room and Sherlock realizing he has to say “I love you” first so John can see the love and loyalty, saving him before it’s too late.

Eurus, before the hug, is how Sherlock see’s love as manipulative and dangerous. These rooms are suppose to be proving the point that love is a dangerous disadvantage, but they are proving quite the opposite. Instead these locked rooms of his heart are answering the question “What do I do about John Watson?“ The little girl on the plane is John. Sherlock’s constant reminder that this is all about saving John.

“Alex.” Sherlock looks at John. The camera pauses on John’s sad face.

“Condemn him. Condemn him with the knowledge of what will happen to the man you name (love).”

“Who loves you, Sherlock?”

Bonus: Alex was also one of the members of AGRA. Alex was tortured to death. Another metaphor for self-harm?

#sherlock #sherlock series 4 #tfp #garridebs #johnlock #tjlcmeta #tjlc #johnwatson

40 notes · View notes

sanguinarysanguinity · 7 years

Text

Sherlock Holmes recs, various adaptations

These are the works I rec’d during the March 2017 round at 221b-recs! Most don’t require knowing much about the adaptation; check the rec for details.

Fic

Breakfast Declarations, by hoc_voluerunt Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (1979 TV, aka Whitehead Holmes) Holmes declares his love over breakfast, and Watson is hugely entertained. (recommendation)

The Domesticated Detective (series), by @sanspatronymic ACD Canon Domestic chores, squabbling, and make-up sex. Retirement-fic. (recommendation)

A Simple Deduction, by riventhorn Sherlock Hound Hound, Watson and Mrs. Hudson never say it, and don’t need to. (recommendation)

The Professor’s Daughter, by pocketbookangel Mary Russell novels, Laurie R. King Moriarty’s daughter claims her inheritance. (recommendation)

Hounded, by Random Phantom The Hound of the Baskervilles (Roxburgh, 2002) A paragon among Watsons becomes a paragon among werewolves. (recommendation)

Robots and the Men Who Love Them, by JaneTurenne Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd Century x Doctor Who (Shalka) Silly, fluffy, slashy, robot-lovin', timey-wimey crack. (recommendation)

Vids

Everybody Loves Me, by @caesarevich New Russian Holmes Everyone doesn’t love Holmes (but surely they will any minute now?) (recommendation)

Love Game, by @redscullyrevival Elementary Different kinds of love, different kinds of games; the evolution of a partnership. (recommendation)

Dixon’s Girl, by @stardust-rain Elementary x BBC Sherlock Meta-vid about women of color in Elementary and BBC Sherlock. (recommendation)

A Strange Kind of Love, by Barbuzuka Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (1979 TV, aka Whitehead Holmes) Happy-making old-fashioned slash-vid, from one of my favorite adaptations. (recommendation)

Art

like a spider in the centre of its web, by @still-sophistory 221B Baker Towers In which the greatest enemy is not a man, but the mighty machine of state. (recommendation)

untitled Holmes/Watson art, by @grossbees Sherlock Holmes (1954 TV, aka Howard Holmes) In which there are sweet and sexy snuggles. (recommendation)

#sherlock holmes #moreholmes #221b-recs #art rec #fic rec #vid rec

14 notes · View notes

retiredbeekeepers · 7 years

Text

The Future of the Beekeepers

Hello! In February we had a meeting, our second anniversary, to discuss the realistic trajectory of the group. Since Elinor left the UK a year ago, we’ve all had a few life changes, and it’s been harder for us to put together in-person meetings. But we don’t want to disappear or stop doing what we do, so we tried to come up with a plan to continue as the reliable, queer Holmes resource you know us to be..

We will still have at least two real life meetings every year: the July field trip to the Downs and the February General Meeting. We will also get together and plan events as they arise locally: going to London to see a play, getting together for Brighton Pride perhaps, and so on. We’re open to suggestions on local gatherings.

We will also maintain our online presence through this Tumblr and the Handbook. Here are a few things we discussed, some of which we will need input on or submissions to:

A fanworks exchange

Watch/tweet-alongs of adaptation episodes (Granada, Howard Holmes, Basil Rathbone, Russian/Soviet series, etc). There are ways to screen-share an episode, or all start at the same time, and we’d love to have the pleasure of your company.

A monthly blog feature, such as the historical background of a Sherlock Holmes case or story-related expertise, with further reading. We like the idea of keeping close to the society model of discussing the canonical stories, but we are interested in going further afield than just “how we felt when we read it.” We need your meta for this! Also, consider this a proving ground for an article that ends up in the Handbook.

Book reviews! We know there are some of you already reviewing books for your own amusement. Again, these could go in the Handbook.

Real beekeeping posts by Elinor who has just bought her first hive

We are also planning on having a resource guide, such as books that people ask us about frequently that we already know are amazing or terrible.

What else would you like to see? What can we offer to queer and queer-adjacent fans of the Sherlock Holmes canon and adaptations?

Updates on the Handbook are forthcoming, but the theme for the summer is “doctors & soldiers” and the deadline for submissions is May 15th. We want fiction, poetry, art, essays, meta posts you already posted on Tumblr, anything. Send it our way!

#retired beekeepers #sherlock holmes

53 notes · View notes

teaandforeshadowing · 7 years

Text

TJLC Survey Assumptions

As with all statistics and data analysis, certain assumptions have to be made in order to interpret data and charts correctly. No set of data is 100% accurate, and very seldom is it a true representation of the population you are sampling.

Therefore, I ask you to please look at the following lists and take every amount of data I put out with a grain of salt. Please try not to cite this data as scientific evidence or base arguments on the data I present; I started this project for fun and simply because I was curious, and it should be treated as such.

I have done my best to interpret the responses I got so that they could be used as legitimate data points while also staying true to the participant’s intentions and original opinions. Listed under the cut are descriptions of these interpretations followed by assumptions readers should make for each question.

This post will be updated as I release new data. If you have any suggestions or additional assumptions that you think I’m missing, please don’t hesitate to contact me about it Please don’t hesitate to ask questions or for clarification either, my ask box is always open!

The Data So Far:

24-hour Update ~ Part 1: Fandom Favorites ~ TBA

General Assumptions:

The medium influences data - This survey was posted on tumblr, and while TJLC is mostly tumblr-centric, there are fans outside of the tumblr-sphere who are informed of TJLC through other means. I cannot say for sure how many non-tumblr users took the survey, but it is important to consider that a lot of the personal data may be more indicative of the tumblr demographic than TJLC. The internet is also a public place, so it’s inevitable that some people took the survey who were not part of TJLC. I did my best to omit these responses so they would not sway data.

The time/day influences the data - I posted the survey to tumblr around 3:30pm EST on a Saturday, and while I reblogged the post every 4 hours for 24 hours after the initial post, the post's activity died down in the first 8 hours. Although the notes are clearly not indicative of who took the survey, it is safe to assume that more bloggers in timzones when it was day time had exposure to the survey than those in timezones where it was night time.

The survey's language/origin influences the data - I wrote the survey in English and referenced the American school system. This may have deterred international or non-English speaking TJLCers. The blog I run is also in English, and I have very little exposure to non-English parts of the Sherlock fandom, so it should be assumed that the survey may not have reached these TJLCers.

Personal opinion influences the data - The survey is completely voluntary, so while there were a few responses indicating that they are not 100% TJLCers and more of a lurker/casual bystander to metas, most people responded to the survey because they had strong opinions. Case in point, very few negative responses were received, but they were very strongly negative (trolling antis). Many participants did not answer every question, so the total number of responses to the survey does not reflect the number of responses to each question. Be sure to take note that sample sizes vary from question to question.

Anonymity influences the data - This survey was done over the internet, which provides some level of anonymity to begin with, but participants were also not required to sign in or name themselves in any way. While this can encourage more people to take the survey, it makes it possible for participants to lie or take the survey more than once. I strongly discouraged this behavior in the description on the first page, but that is the extent of my control over this variable.

Edits to the survey influences the data - I made several edits to the questions in the survey, making clarifications and changing answer options. The hundreds of participants who took the survey before these changes made their choices based upon what information was available at the time and may have answered differently if they'd taken it after the edits. Unfortunately, I do not know the exact times edits were made. [See sections below for the specific questions this affects].

Q1: Age

Interpretations - The nature of this question made it possible to limit answers to exactly the kinds of data I needed: whole numbers. Very little interpretation was needed. Less than 10 people put decimals in their answers, which I rounded to the nearest whole.

Assumptions - None

Q2: Pronouns

Interpretations - I edited this question very early on, changing the answers from single bullets to check-boxes to be more inclusive. I also added an "Any" option for those individuals who do not care which pronouns are used. Any responses similar to "I don't care" were placed in the "Any" category. Any responses similar to "I don't know" were omitted. Any responses indicating specific pronouns that were "She", "He", or "They" were placed into an "Other" category. These were more often than not variations on "Xe". Here's the full list:

Ey/em, Ne/nem/nir, Xe/xir, Xe/xer, Xe/xem, Ve/vir, Ve/vim/vis, Xe/xyr, Ze/zem

Assumptions - Participants were able to make several selections and enter in their own answers. Some overlapping may occur.

Q3: Gender Identity

Interpretations - Any responses similar to "I don't care", or "Female" were omitted. Any responses similar to "I don't know" were placed into the "Questioning" category. Any responses indicating specific identities not on the list were given their own categories.

Assumptions - None.

Q4: Sexuality

Interpretations - Any responses similar to "I don't care" were omitted. Any responses similar to "I don't know" or "X-ish" were placed into the "Questioning" category and an additional category if applicable. Any responses indicating Demisexual/romantic were placed into the "Asexual/Ace-spec" category. Some responses indicating specific identities not on the list were given their own categories, other single instances were omitted for simplicity.

Assumptions - Participants were able to make several selections and enter in their own answers. Some overlapping may occur. Prefixes are indicative of both romantic and sexual identities.

Q5: Location

Haven't tackled this one yet, too many time zones. May just narrow it down to country.

Q6: Employment

Interpretations - Any responses similar to "student", "in the job market", or "stay at home parent" were placed under "Unemployed". Any responses similar to "Education" or indicated a seasonal position were placed into the "Employed full-time" category. Any vague responses that I could not place into a specific category with confidence were omitted.

Assumptions - None.

Q7: Education

Haven't tackled this one yet, too many unamerican answers. I'll have to take a whole day to figure this one out.

Q8: I am...

Haven't tackled this one yet.

Q9: Holmes Fan

Interpretations - I converted all the data in terms of years: 11 months, 12 months, 1/13 months all got rounded to the nearest whole year; 2 months, 3 months, and 4 months got rounded to X.25 years; 5 months, 6 months, and 7 months got rounded to X.5 years; 8 months, 9 months, and 10 months got rounded to X.75 years.

Any responses that were less than 1 month were included in the “0.25 years” category. Any responses similar to "X+ years" were rounded down to X years. Any responses similar to "since childhood" or did not otherwise indicate a specific date were omitted. Any responses similar to "4 or 5 years" were averaged between the two dates provided. Any responses similar to "#" without units were interpreted as years.

Assumptions - All values indicate a minimum amount of time.

Q10: Favorite Holmes

Interpretations - For any responses that listed several adaptations, I chose to sort by the first adaptation listed and omitted all others. Any responses similar to "I don't know/can't pick" were omitted. Any responses similar to "It used to be BBC Sherlock" or "BBC Sherlock before S4" were noted, then omitted. Any responses similar to "I like all of them" were placed into a new "All of the above" category. Any responses indicating a version of Sherlock Holmes not listed were placed into an “Other” category. Those others are listed below:

BBC Radio 4 (with Clive Merrison) x3

Detective Conan

Howard Sherlock Holmes x2

Monk

NRK Oklahomo x2

Russian Holmes x7

Sherlock Hound

They Might Be Giants

Veggie Tales

Assumptions - I searched the Sherlock Holmes Wikipedia page for a list of adaptations and chose those which I thought were the most well-known and well-liked in the fandom. House M.D. is not a direct Holmes adaptation, but I chose to include it because it is focuses very heavily on the Holmes-based characters in comparison to other Holmes/Watson dynamics in other not-Holmes media (such as Jenny/Vastra in Doctor Who, or Kirk/Spock in Star Trek). The inclusion of this option may have influenced people to select it over other options because of the popular doctor/hospital drama aspect of the show.

Q11: BBC Sherlock Fan

Any responses that were less than 1 month were included in the “0.25 years” category. Any responses similar to "X+ years" were rounded down to X years. Any responses similar to "I don't know" or did not otherwise indicate a specific date were omitted. Any responses similar to "4 or 5 years" were averaged between the two dates provided. Any responses similar to "#" without units were interpreted as years. Any responses longer than 7 years were omitted.

Assumptions - All values indicate a minimum amount of time.

Q12: TJLC member

Any responses longer than 3 years were placed into a "Longer" category, or omitted. Any responses similar to "I'm not" were omitted completely. Any responses similar to "I'm just a lurker" were noted, then omitted.

Assumptions - All values indicate a minimum amount of time.

Q13: TJLC rating

Interpretations - The nature of this question made it possible to limit answers to exactly the kinds of data I needed: whole numbers. No interpretation was needed.

Assumptions - None.

Q14: Active Participation

Haven't tackled this one yet.

Q15: Passive Participation

Haven't tackled this one yet.

Q16: Favorite Part

Interpretations - For any responses that listed several parts, I chose to sort by the first part listed and omitted all others. Any responses similar to "I don't know/can't pick" were omitted. Any responses similar to "The Johnlock" were placed in the "Characters" category. Any responses similar to "Ben and Martin" were placed in the "Acting" category. Any responses similar to "Symbols and subtext" or “Canon references” were placed in the "Writing" category. Any responses similar to "Everything" were placed into a new "All of the above" category.

Assumptions - The inclusion, exclusion, and combination of some options may have influenced participants to chose another answer over their favorite. Many people indicated that they would have picked writing had TFP not happened, which dismisses 12 previous episodes of writing.

Q17: Favorite Episode

Interpretations - The nature of this question made it possible to limit answers to exactly the kinds of data I needed: single episodes. No interpretation was needed.

Assumptions - None.

Q18: Positive Impact

Haven't tackled this one yet.

#feel free to ignore this post #its simply for reference for later data posts #survey #tjlc #tjlc survey #taqqy talks

20 notes · View notes

brilliantorinsane · 5 years

Text

The Case of the Lady Beryl

As the name suggests, the closest canon analogue for this episode is The Case of the Beryl Cornet. As far as I can tell the similarities are pretty superficial, basically just consisting of the fact that both mysteries feature a suspect taking the fall for a crime they didn’t commit for the sake of a loved one. I didn’t notice anything particularly interesting in the episode’s use of the canon story, however, so I am going to set that aside and focus on Watson.

Introduction, Ep1 Pt1, Ep1 Pt2

This episode features Holmes at his best, but I was initially bothered by the fact that Watson spends the first half of the episode being rather stupider than normal. Now, characters needn’t be intelligent to be loved and lovable, and the fact that Holmes and Watson take their turns being played for fools is frankly one of the strengths of the series. But given the history of adaptations erasing Watson’s capabilities I get touchy when he is being underestimated, so when in the span of 10 minutes he has fallen for a transparent lie from Lestrade, mocked Holmes’s experiments, taken 24 seconds to process a perfectly straightforward sentence, and flat-out forgotten how bullets work, I start getting defensive.

Fortunately, fandom has taught me a great deal about the potential for audience interaction with texts to be transformative as well as analytical, so I’ve brought my stubbornness to bear and found an interpretation that (mostly) satisfies me. I do not know whether the reading I have to offer was in any way intended, but I do think it is consistent with what exists on the screen and adds depth to Watson’s characterization. That being said I don’t suppose I’ll ever entirely forgive them for implying that John Watson, a fricken doctor and soldier, is unable to differentiate between a bullet-wound and a bashed-in head.

The observation that prompted my re-evaluation of Watson’s behavior was realizing that in every instance his slowness is directly related to his following Lestrade’s lead or being more focused on Lestrade than Holmes. This is a curious thing, particularly since I think it would be far too simplistic to infer that Watson is simply looking for someone to follow and imitate. After all, even though Holmes has a deep effect on him, Watson frequently challenges Holmes’s conclusions and never adopts his manner. So of all people, why would Watson choose to imitate Lestrade, a man who is frequently the butt of the joke and at times seems to care about his own image more than the justice he has been given the authority and responsibility to protect?

My theory, counterintuitive though it may seem, is that Lestrade is the sort of man Watson believes he ought to be. I think there is evidence that this Watson, regardless of his actual personality and inclinations, thinks he ought to be a traditionally proper English gentleman. Throughout the show he continually protests Holmes’s eccentricities, and yet far from meaningfully attempting to abate or escape them, he not infrequently joins in wholeheartedly. To me, this seems indicative of a pattern: in this series Holmes and Watson are both eccentric madmen, but whereas Holmes is perfectly comfortable with the fact, Watson has put effort into appearing ‘normal’ and ‘correct’, and periodically struggles to maintain or reclaim that image—both in the eyes of others and himself.

And the funny thing about Lestrade is that, for all his buffoonery, in a very real way he represents the proper English gentleman. When Holmes isn’t busy destabilizing Lestrade’s self-image he is confident, assertive, and takes the lead. His manner (when he feels in control) is dignified and polite. He has the socially sanctioned “correct” opinions about gender and class and English superiority. And granted much of this is a facade which interferes with his accomplishing his job justly and well, but it has been sanctioned by the symbol of the police cap and the power of the Inspector. He has been chosen as the protector of a society whose cultural ideal he (superficially) embodies.

So, all things considered, Watson is very little like Lestrade, but Lestrade is very much like the sort of man Watson has been socially conditioned to aspire to.

(As a side note, part of the reason I enjoy this reading of Howard Watson is that it puts him in conversation with other Watson adaptations and the canon itself. Certainly it fits with my reading of the BBC Sherlock and Guy Ritchie Watsons. I haven’t decided the extent to which I read canon Watson in a similar manner, but the potential for such a reading is there in the way he paints himself as a deeply normal man while engaging in highly abnormal behavior. The Sign of Four, I suspect, provides especially good material for such an interpretation).

Perhaps the best part of this reading is that, if Lestrade leads Watson into performative normality, it is Holmes who releases him. Once Holmes is included in the investigation, a gradual shift occurs. At first Watson maintains his alliance with Lestrade, but for all that Lestrade has the advantage of social pressures pushing Watson towards him, this cannot last long once Holmes has re-entered the picture. By the time they are interviewing the primary suspect, he has returned to his usual intelligent and capable self.

Because that’s one of the many the beauties of their relationship: Holmes frees Watson from the endless task of conforming, and his genuine self is far better than any cheap imitation. And while I didn’t get into in this write-up, Watson returns the favor by loving Holmes as he is while curbing his more dangerous exterminates and keeping him grounded and present. Also in this episode he’s already 2-for-2 saving Holmes’s life and property and they’re just so good for each other and I love them.

My Story:

I don’t have anything particular to add on this point aside from what I’ve already said, but here’s the link to chapter two of Hidden in the Moments:

https://archiveofourown.org/works/12795147/chapters/29238576#workskin

Highlights:

Although Watson’s behavior around Lestrade isn’t his finest, I quite enjoy the fact that in the second episode Watson has already wheedled his way into cases on his own merit. Then his first move is to convince Lestrade to involve Holmes, which is adorable.

Also when he suggests they bring in Holmes his eyes get all soft and he has this warm little smile, like he’s so pleased and excited at the prospect of seeing Holmes at work again (3.20).

It’s also worth noting that the first thing that gets Watson on Lestrade’s side is Lestrade ranting about how Holmes deserves more credit. I’m pretty sure it’s insincere deflection on Lestrade’s part, but Watson believes him and is so endeared to Lestrade for defending Holmes and it’s honestly quite sweet.

Wilkins!!! Have I mentioned yet that I really love Wilkins? He’s smart without being showy, plays everything straight but is actually rather snarky, doesn't dismiss Holmes’s experiments like most people do and is maybe the only character who always enjoys Holmes’s intelligence without ever feeling threatened by it. I just find him really endearing.

So Wilkins walks into Baker Street when Holmes is doing an experiment, and Holmes immediately drags him into his experiment while absentmindedly offering him tea twice. And I love this scene because this Holmes is actually pretty social, it’s just on his own terms. He’s probably not going to do small-talk most days, but when he’s in the right mood he will serve you endless cups of probably-not-poisoned tea and ramble about his current fixation, which I honestly feel is very true to canon. Also I think he just genuinely likes Wilkins.

When trying to hurry Holmes off to a crime scene Lestrade calls his experiments ‘nonsense.’ Poor Holmes looks absolutely stricken, then passionately lectures Lestrade on the importance of Science and Progress all the way to the crime scene. Holmes is a nerd and I love him.

As they rush off to the crime scene Watson pauses to turn off the burner under Holmes’s experiments, and by Holmes’s estimation very likely saved Baker Street. It’s a lovely little example of how Watson’s somewhat more grounded personality works in tandem with Holmes’s absentminded hyperfocusing.

I quite like Lady Beryl. Granted her performance and circumstances are a bit melodramatic, but she has a quiet and calculating strength that draws me to her.

There’s a scene at 16:15 when Holmes is (rather unnecessarily) ribbing Lestrade and Lestrade begins to get worked up and defensive. Matters could have escalated from there, but Watson quietly leans forward and relays some pertinent facts about the crime scene to Holmes. It’s just a little moment of unpretentious conflict-resolution born of what Watson has already come to understand about these two men, and I really appreciate it.

24:27–24:32: “Brilliant Holmes, absolutely brilliant!”“Thank you Watson :)”

Watson again nabs the criminal efficiently and without posturing, while Holmes watches with all the attentiveness he offers a crime scene before offering one of his secret little smiles.

Holmes runs off in a panic upon realizing he left the burner on, and the episode ends before Watson can catch up and reassure him. And while I have my own (much longer) mental timeline of events, I must admit that what with our not being privy to it, the rush of gratitude and relief when Holmes realizes what Watson has done makes that unseen moment an excellent candidate for a first kiss.

@the-prince-of-professors @tremendousdetectivetheorist @devoursjohnlock@mafief @the-hopeless-existentialist@irishunic0rn @a-candle-for-sherlock@rfscommonplace @acdhw @artemisastarte

#it's 10:24 #which means its still jan 29th here #i mean it's not actually about their meeting #but it still is about them #and at any rate this gave me an arbitrary date to force myself to post it by #anyhow i've been struggling to get this one close to right and i'm currently half-asleep so i've no clue if it makes sense #enjoy!#howard holmes #sheldon reynolds #howard marion-crawford #ronald howard #howard holmes meta

49 notes · View notes

conlasbasesllenas · 4 years

Text

Los Atléticos de Oakland nombran su roster de 60

Los Atléticos de Oakland nombran su roster de 60.

Los Atléticos de Oakland nombran su roster de 60 hombres para el entrenamiento primaveral que comienza este primero de julio.

Roster de 60 hombres Lanzadores derechos:

Chris Bassitt Tyler Baum Paul Blackburn Parker Dunshee Mike Fiers Daniel Gossett Liam Hendriks Grant Holmes Brian Howard Daulton Jefferies James Kaprielian Frankie Montas Yusmeiro Petit Jaime Schultz Burch Smith Joakim Soria Lou…

View On WordPress

0 notes

murfreesboronews · 5 years

Text

Central Magnet DECA members competed at the TN DECA State Career Development Conference in Chattanooga, TN on March 7-9, 2019.

The members competed in role play scenarios, team decision making events and written presentations. 23 members advanced to the International Career Development in Orlando on April 27-May 1, 2019.

Ricky Pletan-Business Finance Series 5th place

Sydney Copeland, Madison Murray, Macy Speight-Entrepreneurship Promotion Project-3rd place

Tom Smith-Entrepreneurship Individual Series-3rd place

Brady Bryson-Entrepreneurship Individual Series-4th place

Natalie Anderson and Alexis Butner-Financial Services Team Decision Making-4th place

Cristina Ortega and Megan Scott-Entrepreneurship Team Decision Making-5th place

Zakiya Cooper-Financial Consulting Individual Event-4th place

Georgia Holmes-Food Marketing Individual Series-4th place

Kate Center-Food Marketing Individual Series-5th place

Tania Gutierrez-Human Resources Mgmt Individual Series-5th place

Brooke Dugan, Piper Taylor, Emma Winters-Integrated Marketing Campaign-Event-2nd place

Jessica Howard, Chloe Marson, Kaylin Wiley-Integrated Marketing Campaign-Product-2nd place

Sharde’ Charles, Alexis Nelson, Kennedy Stevenson-Start-Up Business Plan-2nd place

#gallery-0-5 { margin: auto; } #gallery-0-5 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 33%; } #gallery-0-5 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-0-5 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } /* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */

Central Magnet DECA students compete at State Career Development Conference Central Magnet DECA members competed at the TN DECA State Career Development Conference in Chattanooga, TN on March 7-9, 2019.

#award #central magnet

0 notes

cefletche · 7 years

Text

Infamous 'Ripper Crew' member to walk the streets again in September

Infamous ‘Ripper Crew’ member to walk the streets again in September

Thomas Kokoraleis, believed responsible for 20 cult-like sex slayings, up for parole.

Serial killers in America have been around since the 19th century. In 1897, a man by the name of Dr. Henry Howard Holmes confessed to 27 murders, targeting naïve and gullible women, though only nine of those murders were confirmed. Several of the women that the man better known as H.H. Holmes claimed to have…

View On WordPress

#HH Holmes #Jack the Ripper #My News #Ripper Crew

0 notes

madforfashiondude · 7 years

Text

Oscar® Nominees Honored At Annual Academy Luncheon

Nominees for the 89th Oscars® were celebrated at a luncheon held at the Beverly Hilton, Monday, February 6, 2017. The 89th Oscars will air on Sunday, February 26, live on ABC. More than 165 Oscar® nominees came together at noon when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences honors this year’s Oscar contenders at its annual Nominees Luncheon. Among the Lead Actor and Actress nominees, Casey…

View On WordPress

#Casey Affleck #DENZEL WASHINGTON #Emma Stone #ISABELLE HUPPERT #MERYL STREEP #Natalie Portman #Oscar® Nominees Honored At Annual Academy Luncheon #Ruth Negga #Ryan Gosling #Viggo Mortensen

0 notes

brilliantorinsane · 5 years

Text

Howard Holmes: The Case of the Cunningham Heritage (Pt 2)

I confess that when it comes to Holmes stories I tend to neglect the cases in favor of examining character and relationship dynamics. Certainly I didn’t think I had anything interesting to say about the case in this episode apart from the ways it continues to reveal aspects of this Holmes and Watson’s relationship. But as I watched it again, I realized that I had nearly missed out on one of the best parts of the episode. For although this case is not in itself especially compelling, its framing contextualizes Holmes and Watson as not merely crime-solvers, but as defenders of the innocent and the unheard.

Introduction, Episode 1 Part 1

After Holmes and Watson receive a letter from Lestrade inviting them on a case, we are removed from their already comforting presence and transported to the scene of the crime, where we see a desperate woman begging three stone-faced onlookers to believe she did not murder her fiancee. The power differential between the woman and her accusers is visually emphasized by her being seated as the others stand over her, and we soon have confirmation of what their positions suggest: her accusers relish wielding their power over her.

The first accuser, being the actual murder, has obvious motives for wishing her to be found guilty; the second, the wealthy mother of the murdered man, is eager to judge a woman she always hated on the basis of her being a poor governess engaged to her son. Lestrade, the third accuser, practically gloats over her pain and proves to be far more interested in concluding the case quickly and looking good in the process than in ensuring justice. By the time it is revealed the woman once spent nine months in jail, her accusers regard it as confirmation of why they already wished to believe.

As a result of this framing, Holmes and Watson are not primarily up against the supposed stupidity of the police-force. The real obstacles are class prejudice, laziness, pride, and a base pleasure in wielding power over the weak. During this case what is needed is not only or even primarily their intelligence, but rather their fair-mindedness and their empathy.

And indeed, the tone of the room does shift the moment they enter. Whereas the previous occupants seemed primarily interested in flinging accusations at the woman, Holmes’s first move is to examine the scene for evidence. Intentionally or not, in doing so he draws attention away from the now sobbing woman, allowing her a moment to compose herself.

For his part, when attention returns to the woman Watson quickly relinquishes his position of power, lowering himself to his knees and offering her comfort. It is true that he stands again when Holmes reveals that she married her fiancee in secret and thus will gain financially from his death, and the woman’s despairing glance at Watson as she finds herself overhung now by four men is a little heartbreaking. But it is worth noting that in the wake of the revelation of her low class-status, former jail-time, and secret marriage, he finds no satisfaction or even complacency in her apparent guilt, insisting despite Lestrade’s assertion that one get’s used to these sorts of things: “I still think it’s a tragedy.”

This series doesn’t always display that level of social critique, and Lestrade, who generally assumes the role of good-hearted buffoon that this Watson has mercifully vacated, doesn’t always appear in a negative light. But I love that the first episode is structured to emphasize that Holmes and Watson aren’t heroes merely because they have unique levels of intelligence and physical capability, but also because their love of truth and their compassion serve as protection against prejudice, complacency, and pride.

My Story:

I don’t have much to add to what I said in part 1. However, if there is a moment in which Holmes begins to fall in love, it is when Watson rescues them from the actual murderer. Obviously Holmes liked Watson enormously from the start, but when Holmes realizes he has led this poor innocent man into mortal danger, only to have said ‘poor innocent’ neutralize the threat with quick efficiency, he looks at the man like … like … well, like this:

Highlights:

One think I enjoy about the duo’s case-working dynamic is the way Watson immediately becomes Holmes’s confidant for anything from thoughts on the case to snide asides. For example: 11:09–11:22, 12:33–13:00, 15:40–16:25, 19:25–31, 20:17–20:20, 24:11–24:26.

12:33–13:00: Although it ultimately has little bearing on the case, I appreciate that Watson’s medical skills are immediately made use of.

19:44: A Baker Street Irregular!!!

20:17–21:36: Honestly, few scenes better encapsulate this iteration of the duo than Holmes proposing illegal means of investigation and Watson objecting every step of the way without once raising a finger to stop Holmes or remove himself from the situation.

22:41–22:46: I briefly discussed Watson taking out the murderer, but I have to mention this eloquent exchange of looks: Holmes: “I’m sorry Watson, I don’t know what to do and I shouldn’t have brought you here.” Watson: “Well, I did tell you, but I’m not frightened.”

23:47–23:51: Watson is so very delighted at having the chance to be useful and impressive (despite Holmes having just dragged him into a potentially lethal situation) and it’s adorable.

23:57: “Only a man could have struck that blow” …………… *sigh*

24:42–25:36: Two days in and Watson has already appointed himself Holmes’s knight in shining armor, defender of his honor. I love him.

25:36–25:53: I have mixed feelings about Holmes’s response to Watson’s outburst, which is to wonder whether Watson may have suffered a head injury while abroad. The observation always struck me as a bit mean-spirited, but I still enjoy it’s implications for two reasons: first, this adaptation refuses to cast Watson as the straight-man, the mad detective’s ‘normal’ associate. In case the audience hadn’t picked up on that when Watson broke into a house with a man he met the day before, Holmes’s musing make this quite clear. Secondly, I am intrigued by the fact that this is the action which leads Holmes to question his partner’s sanity—it doesn’t seem to occur to Holmes that Watson’s behavior might be easily explained by the fact that Watson cares about him.

@the-prince-of-professors @tremendousdetectivetheorist @devoursjohnlock@mafief @the-hopeless-existentialist@irishunic0rn @a-candle-for-sherlock @rfscommonplace @acdhw @artemisastarte

#howard holmes #howard holmes meta #sherlock holmes 1954 #sheldon reynolds #Howard Marion-Crawford #ronald howard #I actually made this 1/3 shorter than the last one!#it was harder than writing it in the first place #and still ridiculously long ...#i really might have to do away with the 'my story' and 'highlights' sections #i suppose it will depend on whether my desire to write them #or my desire to have people actually read this thing #wins out

40 notes · View notes