21 10 / 2014

loudest-subtext-in-television:

loudest-subtext-in-television:

Hello y’all! My friend Auriana could use anything you can spare to help her get gender reassignment surgery. I have known Auriana for seven years and it would mean SO MUCH to me if you could help her out, even if you can only reblog this post.

Thank you for helping in any way you can!

Hello AGAIN y’all! I REALLY appreciate all of your reblogs and donations; several of you have moved me to tears. I’ve responded to most of the questions you’ve paid for already, and I’m working on the others; as I said, I’m quite wordy, so even $1 will get you a big answer. Most are at least hundreds of words, some have been thousands.
Now, I’m a simple caveman and I don’t know much about fundraising. Your world with its metals and different colors of paper confuses me. But, I do know this: I am determined to WIN this fundraiser. For instance, if someone else were to raise $1000 for Auriana, I want to be able to silently sit there feeling superior and thinking, Oh, that’s cute. And then when they blink at me and suspiciously say, “What?” I want to look innocent and say, “Oh? Nothing. That’s like, super nice of you, you’re such a great friend.”
But I’m not feeling snotty at all yet, so I’m going to try harder. EVERY SKILL I POSSESS COULD BE AT YOUR COMMAND.
There are now NEW INCENTIVES:
  • $1: (Note that to donate amounts less than $5, you must use Paypal: auriana.danielle@gmail.com)

    I will answer any question you have about ANYTHING. I am sitting on about a thousand unanswered asks and I can state with some certainty I won’t be able to answer them until next year at the earliest. But if you pay $1, you’ll get an answer within days. If all of you donated a dollar, the fundraiser would be over.

    By “ANYTHING” I mean ANYTHING. It can be Sherlock related, but it doesn’t have to be; only some of the ones I’ve gotten so far are Sherlock-related. It can be nosy questions about me; I haven’t gotten anything terribly private yet, but I’m not very private anyway and not much will offend me. You can ask real life advice, which some of you have done already. One person had questions about NASA for my husband. 

    My life is arranged around never doing the same thing for terribly long, so I’ve had a lot of different jobs and hobbies I can answer questions about. I worked in politics in Austin, TX and Washington D.C. for a bit: I managed the website for the Texas Democratic Party for a bit, I was legislative aide at the Texas Capitol, I did opposition research (i.e. dirt-digging and life-ruining, if someone said something shitty a decade ago I would find it) and finance stuff at the DCCC, also did campaigning in Texas — more opposition research — and worked as a legislative correspondent writing articles about committee hearings. I sang demos for a songwriter for a bit and I’ve done several live singing performances. I was a mystery shopper for a while and got some fairly high profile shops (in the hundreds of dollars range), which was mildly James Bond, false-identity covert-recording stuff. I’ll answer questions about any of that.

    Due to my fucked up genes ruining my life, I also know a ton about methylation and genetic mutations which influence it, neurotransmitters, dietary peptides, stimulants, nootropics, and weed (even stuff about obscure cannabinoids, terpenes, strain genetic lineages, the conditions that influence cannabinoid and terpene levels, which cannabinoids and terpenes contribute to what effects, I’ve made most kinds of concentrates except BHO, etc). For related reasons, I know a shitton about cooking and baking as well.

    I also know a lot about parrot health and parrot psychology, having had birds for 25 or so years.

    Oh, also writing, fiction or nonfiction. I can answer questions about that, but you might prefer one of the specific options later in the list.

  • $1: (Note that to donate amounts less than $5, you must use Paypal: auriana.danielle@gmail.com)

    I will write Johnlock, Johncroft, or Sheriarty ficlets, although in the case of the latter know that I will write them with the assumption Johnlock is canon so it gets FUCKING WEIRD. Smut is fine. You have to give me some prompts. For the right price I might do some kinks, but aside from Sherlock’s military kink, or a size kink or something, or maybe dom!John, I’m not much into for kinks and probably suck at writing them.

    If you pay more than $1, you can get something a bit longer than a ficlet. There’s no hard and fast rule, I just try to do more for especially generous donations.

    For a million dollar donation I will write het.

  • $5: I will promo your blog. Give me the URL and write me up a description, and I will post it during peak United States hours. You can include links to specific things you’ve done or written in the description, too, in case there’s anything you want to give wider exposure.

  • $10: I will proofread humanities essays, and offer tips for writing that sort of thing quickly and easily. I used to do this as a tutor back in the day and charged a lot more for it, and people still tell me today it helped them a lot. (I always try to teach general skills that will last beyond writing that single essay.) Just make sure you get it to me days before a deadline, so that I have time to look over it and you have time to make changes if you want to. It’s also up to you to ensure that your teacher doesn’t mind that you got outside advice.

  • $10: Same thing for short fiction (let’s say less than 15k). I’m not at all mean or anything — I always want people to feel encouraged to write — but people identify a lot more with their fiction so be sure you’re okay with hearing constructive criticism; if you’re not going into it hoping to find out what’s not clicking so it can be made better, this probably isn’t a good fit for you. I’ve been focused on novel-length stuff for a while now, but I have a good track record with my own short stories: I won an award in a national-level contest and got to go to a ceremony in Washington D.C., and then another award in an international-level contest and got to go to a ceremony in Hollywood. (Not shady pay-to-compete stuff, in case it needs to be said.)

  • $20: I can’t believe that anyone would want this, but two people suggested I offer it, so okay: I will sing you a song of your choosing and give you an mp3. Run it by me first; at my best I have about a four octave range, and my specialty is imitating different singers, but there are still songs that just don’t sound good in my voice. I also have to be able to find an vocal-less version of the song somewhere. Here are samples of my singing, although they’re all fairly femme-y. English or Japanese is fine. I rap fairly well, about the fastest I can go is Twista on Overnight Celebrity. I censor the n-word and racial slurs, but I’ll say just about anything else unless you ask me not to! Also open to singing alternate lyrics if you provide them, if you want like, a Johnlock version of a song or something. Note that these are going to take a while to get to you because I do some production stuff to make it sound cohesive, but since production stuff isn’t my specialty I’m quite slow at it.
DONATION-LEVEL INCENTIVES:
  • If Auriana reaches the $5000 mark, I will post an entire section from my upcoming secret meta.
  • If Auriana reaches $10,000 mark, I will stop everything I’m doing and post the Subversion and Sherlock entry for The Great Game within two weeks.
  • If Auriana gets all $15,000, I will stop shipping Johncroft. Unless someone comes up with something better, I dunno… the S&S entry for ASiB within two weeks? We’ll see. I’ll be pretty happy, and I will find a way to share that happiness with you.
BUT THAT’S NOT ALL.
Now there is also FANART FROM 221BEHAVIOR:
More samples of her art here and here.
  • $5: A cleaned pencil drawing of 1-3 characters of your choice (chibis or animals), including original characters as long as she gets a clear description or reference image. She cautions that she is not good with porn.

  • $20: 1-3 chibi or non-chibi characters—full-body or portrait, coloring optional.

  • $50: And for $50 and up donations she will draw anything you ask for, her exact words being, “At least, I will try?? Like, I’m terrible with porn but I will seriously try?? ^_^;;;” She can also do little 4-comic sets or 1-2 page comics if an idea or dialog is provided.
REDEEMING STUFF FOR YOUR DONATION:
  • Forward me the receipt for your donation at the.loudest.subtext@gmail.com. Even if you want fanart from 221behavior: I’ll pass it along. 

  • If you donated before this post and didn’t redeem it for anything, but now you see something you want, you can redeem it now!

  • You can hang on to your e-mail receipt to redeem it at a later date! Don’t have a question you want answered now? Have a blog you’re starting and you’re not quite ready to promo it? That’s fine! You can send me a receipt years from now and I’ll redeem it.
ABOUT AURIANA:
Auriana is an amazing person, and completely hilarious, which is why it breaks my heart that her life has been shitty lately. By helping finance her surgery, you are helping to ensure that things like this stay in the world:
Pictured: me getting told
Thank you SO MUCH again for your reblogs and donations. You are the BEST FOLLOWERS EVER, and I can’t tell you how much I and Auriana appreciate it. I hope we can get this fully funded so I can act unbearable. And also, so that Auriana will get her wish and all that.

(via loudest-subtext-in-television)

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Sherlock and the Gherkin

This blog owes its existence to loudest-subtext-in-television. I never thought I’d ever write a blog myself, until I discovered her blog and was just stunned by her mind-blowing metas on Sherlock. I started to look at Sherlock in a new way and to notice details I hadn’t seen before. And suddenly, I felt the urge to share these details with other people, so here I am, starting a blog on tumblr. I dedicate my first post to loudest-subtext. Thank you for your inspiration!

When I read loudest-subtext-in-television’s meta on TBB (x) and watched the video showing Sherlock stepping onto the ledge in Sir William Shad’s office (Sherlock on ledge), something really struck me.

When we see Sherlock taking photographs of the yellow ciphers, there is something lurking in the background: the Gherkin.

Well, the Gherkin happens to be visible from Tower 42 (Shad Sanderson’s bank inTBB) and it could have been chosen by the writers just in order to show an iconic view of modern London. After all, as Mark Gatiss says in the DVD commentary “Unlocking Sherlock”: “We wanted to fetishize modern London. […] Episode 2, which is largely set in the City, we wanted to capture the look of the Gherkin and all those kind of big glass-and-steel cathedrals of finance. It’s part of a vibrancy, which is very exciting to see.”

As an iconic part of modern London, the Gherkin appears in two shots as we follow Sherlock and John on their way to the Shad Sanderson Bank, first in the background of a wide shot displaying a view of London across the Thames, and in the shot immediately after, halfway hidden behind a multi-storey building.

image

image

But I think there’s more to the Gherkin than just representing modern London. I mean, this must be the most phallic-looking building in … the world? At least in London, I suppose. So let’s assume there’s some sexual subtext about the Gherkin. More specifically: sexual subtext linked with John.

Why John? Not just because I believe in Johnlock, but rather because of this scene:

image

When Sherlock, Sebastian and John first enter Sir William Shad’s office, Sebastian leads the way and we see a profile shot of him in front of the window behind which, as we know (looking back from the later scene), the Gherkin could be seen. But there’s no Gherkin. Neither is there when Sherlock joins Sebastian. Only when John joins the two of them, the camera moves around to reveal the Gherkin, towering above John’s head, even for a moment completely framing John. So this iconic building that is heavily charged with subtext is visually connected to John.

So, now to the scene with Sherlock alone in Sir William Shad’s office. (In the following analysis, what we see is written in normal script, followed by the subtext in italics.)

image

The Gherkin is out of focus first, and Sherlock just seems to notice it when he looks ever so slightly to the left. He frowns.

There is something. What is it? Well, maybe it’s better just to ignore it.

image

Sherlock continues to take photographs, then starts to think about the ciphers, turning around 180 degrees. But there the Gherkin is again, this time to his left and – like before – standing between Sherlock and the ciphers.

image

This time, he turns his head to look at it for a moment, then looks back again - just a bit disgusted?

There it is again. Something irritates Sherlock – it’s trying to distract him from thinking. He doesn’t want to deal with it for the time being.

image

image

Sherlock then decides to open the door to the ledge. He raises the blinds, opens the door, and instead of immediately looking down the façade (to find out how someone could have entered the office from the outside), he looks at the Gherkin for rather a long time.

image

Then he looks down the whole length of the building, and that’s when the music’s tension increases dramatically and the camera movement gives you a feeling of vertigo.

image

Only then Sherlock studies the façade of the Shad Sanderson building, getting back to work after a long moment of distraction.

Sherlock decides to confront whatever this distracting feeling is. He raises the blinds and opens the door to his heart. What he discovers in there is huge and disturbing, and looking at it causes vertigo, maybe even suicidal feelings. No, confronting your feelings might not be a good idea just now, so better turn back, close the door and return to work.

That’s exactly what happens in this episode: Sherlock tries to open his heart, but doesn’t succeed, so he goes back to working alone. As LSiT has pointed out in her meta on TBB, Sherlock distances himself from John during his investigations in this episode. But he doesn’t do that from the start. He takes John with him to the bank, but then things go wrong: Sherlock introduces John to Sebastian as his “friend” and is rebuffed by John immediately (“colleague”). From that moment on, he pretty much excludes John from his investigations: John isn’t in the office with him when he tries to figure out the ciphers.

Neither is John with him when Sherlock tries to find out who could see the ciphers from their desk, bobbing up and down behind the desks on the trading floor.

image

It looks almost like dancing, and if dancing is a metaphor for sex, then Sherlock prefers to have sex on his own. It’s safer, no sentiments involved.

image

Btw, any ideas about the paintings of the huge breaking waves in the background? Like, the danger of being drowned by emotions is still lurking in the background? Or is it rather a hint towards the equation between Sherlock’s intellectual epiphanies and orgasms, beautifully demonstrated by LSiT in her meta on A Study in Pink (x)?

Just to clarify my point: I don’t think Sherlock is yet consciously aware of any unsettling romantic sentiments / sexual feelings towards John. The Gherkin as subtext rather reveals his subconscious.

Two more details that support this interpretation:

image

Immediately after Sebastian’s phrase “We’ve had a break-in”, we see a close-up of the news ticker behind the reception desk, entirely filling the screen with red colour. Red could be a symbol of danger, but it could symbolize love as well, thus reinforcing the metaphor of Sherlock’s heart as a locked room by connecting the actual break-in at the bank to John’s attempts at entering Sherlock’s heart.

And look at this:

image

Although the name of the bar at the top of Tower 42 (the Shad Sanderson Bank building), “vertigo 42”, hasn’t been invented by the filmmakers, isn’t it a nice touch to see Sherlock and John walking past the sign, the words quite close to John (John causes vertigo)?

Let’s admit it: Sherlock is in love with John head-over-heels, he just doesn’t know it yet.

LMAO THIS IS FUCKING ME UP

I CANNOT WITH THE GHERKIN THIS SHOW LMAO

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Sherlock tries several different ways of introducing John to other people.

To Sergeant Sally Donovan: “Colleague of mine, Dr Watson.” – Not successful, Sally just snorts at the thought of Sherlock having a colleague.

To Sebastian Wilkes: “This is my friend, John Watson.” – Not successful either, Sebastian just meets him with disbelief.

This way works though:

image

image

image

That’s all you have to know about John.

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:


Doesn’t this look very much like a classic romantic gesture: marriage proposal on one bended knee?
“John, do you want to marry me?” – “Oh, God, yes!”


I can’t believe I’ve literally only ever thought “blow job” when I looked at this. It’s really suggestive of both! And it makes sense too, given that it’s their first HUGE life-bonding moment together… I mean, ASiP and TBB had some heavy stuff happen, but the narrative in ASiB makes it pretty clear this was a point of no return for them both.

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Doesn’t this look very much like a classic romantic gesture: marriage proposal on one bended knee?

John, do you want to marry me?” – “Oh, God, yes!”


I can’t believe I’ve literally only ever thought “blow job” when I looked at this. It’s really suggestive of both! And it makes sense too, given that it’s their first HUGE life-bonding moment together… I mean, ASiP and TBB had some heavy stuff happen, but the narrative in ASiB makes it pretty clear this was a point of no return for them both.

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

image

John turns his coat collar up to impress Joe Harrison.

He has learnt his lesson from Sherlock.

Oh man, I love this part. I’ve been meaning to put it in the S&S entry for TGG but then I got sidetracked by everything else. I love how early they start the “I’m you, aren’t I?” thing with John and Sherlock: lots of people don’t realize it starts in S1, at the same time the Sherlock/Moriarty “You’re me” metaphor kicks into gear too. As soon as John has to go off and play detective, he turns up his coat collar.

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Sherlock and John’s first meeting and the flashback to his deduction on John are certainly two of the most important scenes in the first episode in terms of subtext and it’s definitively worth examining those scenes in detail. Quite a lot has been covered by LSiT in her fantastic meta on “Subversion and Sherlock – a Study in Pink”, but I hope I may be able to add a detail or two. Because – what I didn’t notice at first sight – what we see in the flashback wasn’t there in the first place.

Let me try to explain. What do we see in the flashback? Sherlock and John are staring at one another. They seem to be locked in an intense gaze, completely oblivious to their surroundings.

image

The camera moves forth and back between John and Sherlock, over and over again, for more than ten seconds. But in the original scene of their first meeting, there’s no such shot, not even a much shorter one.

To start with Sherlock: This is his position in the flashback:

image

It must be something that happened between these two shots:

image

(9:23)

and

image

(9:28)

To be more exact, it must happen between 9:25 and 9:27, when we see John and Mike Stamford enter the lab. It could be this moment:

image

(9:26)

But at that time, we don’t see Sherlock (not even his back).

So, the first intriguing point: Sherlock’s very first view of John – which can’t last more than a second – is only revealed in retrospect.

Now let’s look at John in the flashback. We haven’t seen that shot before either. Again, it’s similar to some shots in the original scene, but not exactly identical. This is John in the flashback:

image

During the first meeting, we see some similar shots, but not exactly the same. The moment John first notices Sherlock is probably this:

image

(9:37)

This happens about ten seconds after Sherlock’s first view of John (or I should say, ten seconds after the moment I suppose to be the moment of Sherlock’s first noticing John).

We’ll get some shots similar to the flashback later, but never exactly the same as in the flashback. The most similar one is this (but you’ll notice that in this shot, John’s head is tilted to the left, not to the right, and his look is less intense).

image

(10:35)

So, why is this all so important?

During the flashback scene, the camera pretends to show something that didn’t exist in the first place. The shots of Sherlock and John that are combined in the flashback never happened simultaneously.

The audience is lead to believe it’s watching Sherlock making a deduction about John, whereas, in fact, the flashback isn’t about the deduction at all. Nor is it about finding out as much as possible about a flatmate-to-be. That all happened in an instant in the original scene. The flashback, on the contrary, shows us how Sherlock sees John and vice versa. Sherlock is mesmerized by John the moment John enters the room, and so is John by Sherlock, just a bit later.

Thus, the flashback deliberately combines two shots originally distant in time to show Sherlock’s and John’s respective moments of being instantly fascinated by each other, as if those moments took place at the same time.

I can’t imagine a better way to visualize the idea of “love at first sight”. The flashback shows us exactly where the show is heading, even though Sherlock and John will have to overcome several obstacles before the promise of the first meeting will finally be fulfilled. And I believe it will.

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Did you notice the Pope’s bust on the mantelpiece at Angelo’s (in the Unaired Pilot)? I think it’s Pope John Paul II who is forced to listen to John and Sherlock saying it’s ok to have a boyfriend. And although he doesn’t feel like smiling at all, he has to keep smiling benignly because he’s just a bust.

(I’m afraid I don’t have HD versions of the movies, so it’s a bit out of focus. Can anyone who owns Blu-ray discs read the inscription on the pedestal?)

I have the blu-ray, but you still can’t read the inscription in it. Whatever the inscription is, it’s long though; long enough to be “Pope John Paul II.” It’s almost definitely a pope, though. There’s another shot of it from behind and the zucchetto is very visible.

I love this. Reminds me of Gatiss getting married under a picture of Edward Carson QC, the man who prosecuted Oscar Wilde.

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Here are the gifs from the opening titles I promised in my last post, reblogging kinklock’s list of expected sexual innuendo. Just look at the Gherkin rising through John’s head.

Opening titles, season 2:

image

(note the newspaper headline: Sherlock & John)

Opening titles, season 3:

image

I find it hard to imagine a more blatant erection visual metaphor.

lmao both times the word “Sherlock” accompanies it

21 10 / 2014

i-read-your-writing-upside-down:

Don’t you think the title sequence to Sherlock would be a good place to hide subtext? Well, let’s have a look at one detail (I already talked about the Gherkin in the title sequence here): the blood.

The title sequence ends with a few shots of a petri dish with blood and a chemical reaction that’s part of a forensic analysis of the blood.

image

Due to the position of these shots at the end of the title sequence, I suppose a) they’re important and b) they tell us something about Sherlock.

On a literal level, they show a substantial part of Sherlock’s work, i.e. chemical experiments and forensic analyses.

But there’s more to it: the blood seems to boil when the reagent is added. This could be part of the idea of “solving crimes as a metaphor for sex” (see LSiT’s meta on A Study in Pink): solving crimes excites Sherlock, it stirs his blood.

But I think we can take the subtext even further. The blood Sherlock analyses in the scene these shots were taken from is Ian Monkford’s. Those are the original shots in The Great Game (33:26–33:32):

image

Remember? Ian Monkford’s blood had been frozen before it was applied to the abandoned car (that’s one of the things Sherlock found out by his analysis). Anticipating the possible objection that “frozen blood” might refer rather to Mycroft, the “Ice Man”, than to Sherlock, let me answer: Yes, that’s right. But the show is called “Sherlock” and not “Mycroft”, and therefore I’d argue that the title sequence tells us something about Sherlock, not about Mycroft. Then again, Sherlock can be rather frosty himself.

The name of the man whose blood Sherlock analyses from is telling: Monkford. A monk is someone who – like Sherlock – has chosen to lead a celibate life. But as for Sherlock, his celibate life gets disturbed. Something or someone makes Sherlock, the cool and (sometimes) seemingly asexual man who is “married to his work” become hot-blooded and passionate. Guess who that someone is. I’ll just mention the drop lingering on the pipette’s tip for ages and leave you to your own deductions.

(Another possible objection: It’s Sherlock himself who adds the reagent to the blood, not John. Yes, right again, but Sherlock has chosen to let John enter his life. He has chosen to include John in his detective’s work. And (again, see one of LSiT’s amazing metas) during the best man’s speech he’ll deduce himself into being in love with John.)

So, to cut a long story short: The shots of the blood in the title sequence show Sherlock’s sexual awakening triggered by John in a nutshell. They are the culmination of the title sequence, so we can safely assume that’s what the story is heading for and has been from the beginning. Long live TJLC!

I love this idea. I’ve always felt like the blood appearing to sizzle in the title sequence was symbolically suggestive, but I’ve never seen any meta exploring it. :D

19 10 / 2014

yo btw I have answered several of the questions y’all bought with donations to Auriana and I’ll be working on the rest tomorrow. I’m also working on the fics requested~ THANK YOU EVERYONE WHO HAS DONATED OR REBLOGGED! There’s still a ways to go but we’ve already made a lot of progress!