The diamond was cut wrong. That size should not have been a single cut. The prop department should have grabbed a proper CZ with a proper cut, because otherwise, it just looks like the rhinestone it is.

Also, those were totally not the crown jewels.

This is a safe space for me to do this sort of cheerfully pedantic quibbling.

I like us.

There's a fricking treadmill that runs past the crown jewels in the Tower. It's not the kind of thing you're likely to forget.

Really, I think they missed some opportunities for hilarity with Moriarty running in place in front of them.

I made a Photoshopped image for Andi, and I've posted it at the link below. It's put together from the last few minutes of this ep.

[link]

So I'm reading this interview with Moffat, and it's making me feel, amongst other things, stupid.

A-ha! So that implies Sherlock has survived. (Not such a brilliant deduction: it's hard to imagine a third series without the hero.)

Did we not freaking SEE Sherlock? Do we need it implied in "clever" conversational gambits that he's alive when the show closed on him?

Then there's this:

But how did Moffat and Gatiss solve the most vexing mystery, Sherlock's sex life?

Why was that vexing? I like a bit of slash myself (if we're going to be coy), and it really wasn't much of a thought.

Also, there is this:

He actually says he declines the attention of women because he doesn't want the distraction. What does that tell you about him? Straightforward deduction. He wouldn't be living with a man if he thought men were interesting.

So, if that's his equivocal stance he's will to state and not really play with on the record, why in god's name is he playing so hard with the are-they-aren't-they har de har? It rubbed me wrong as fangirl pandering by the end of the sixth episode, but it was better when I hadn't read him make his straightforward deduction.

Or maybe I'm missing something in his next paragraph. I don't know. I am confuse.

Never mind him copping to be able to not generate tension with an asexual character. That seems an odd admission of defeat, although he doesn't seem to be accepting that it's his shortcoming.

Yeah, Moffat's logic is not at all like our Earth logic. And it's a very frustratingly-written article.

He wouldn't be living with a man if he thought men were interesting.

"interesting" is an odd choice of words. Also, that is not at all the conclusion that I would reach on the matter.

He does come off a bit sophomoric on the whole issue of sexuality.

I do think that the Sherlock in his head is very different than the one in Gatiss's head, and they write them differently. (Also, I don't think "sociopath" means what Moffat thinks it means.)

I still think he is talking about internal character tension. And if you don't desire sex, you don't have that internal tension when you choose to be celibate.

I also think Moffat and Gatiss are on at most different parts of the same page, but Gatiss is better at articulating his opinions.

I completely agree that they're talking about internal tension.

One would think that there would be other "wants" that they could play with, if they wanted to make him ace. But, like someone said, Moffat's not great at writing any other sort of tension. I think they've done some interesting things with Sherlock's emotional tensions (connect vs. distance, which is not really the same, however much large parts of fandom might wish otherwise).

I feel like I need to do some more reading/watching of Gatiss's take.

I feel like everyone in fandom right now is assuming tension = sexual tension (anyone else see a certain irony in that?). It's irritating me greatly. Must remember to stay of tumblr before I explode in unflattering asshattishness.

I also feel weird defending Moffat, given my decade-long love/hate relationship with the man and his works. I guess by this point, I figure I'll judge him by what he writes, not what he says, and I'm thoroughly sick of people demonizing writers for not being what they want them to be, or saying everything through the correct social justice lens. They're just not going to, kids. Get used to it, remember the fourth wall exists for a reason, and the author is long since dead.

One would think that there would be other "wants" that they could play with, if they wanted to make him ace.

Yep. Weirdly, or perhaps not, I think explicitly ace characters would work best in a romance, and not as the comic relief e.g. Sheldon Cooper. Not aromantic, mind, but still ace. I think it's been done on a NZ soap opera, in fact.