So Sherlock is not sure he IS one of them, but also is not sure he is NOT. That is an important distinction.
I don't think Sherlock is not sure he is NOT "one of them." Assuming Moriarty defined "them" as "regular people," non-exceptional people (and I don't mean honors students, I mean freaky-brained people who are really among the smartest in the world). By that definition, Sherlock -- and Moriarty -- will NEVER be "one of them." Moriarty might wonder how Sherlock has learned the bare minimum to play nicely with "regular" people when he wants to, but that's only because she doesn't want to.
Bell was badly hurt thanks to the fallout.
Not Sherlock's fault. Bell was badly hurt because a guy with a gun shot at Sherlock and Bell reacted according to his training. I get that Sherlock feels bad about it, and I get that Bell blames Sherlock. Still not his fault. I think the show really wants us to blame Sherlock, and I'm not buying what they're selling.
I so don't get why Bell getting shot should be a wake up call for Sherlock. That makes no sense to me at all, and yet it's what the show keeps telling me.
I'm not sure what Sherlock and Moriarty meant when they said "them" in that conversation, or if they meant the same thing, and I really like that.
I so don't get why Bell getting shot should be a wake up call for Sherlock. That makes no sense to me at all, and yet it's what the show keeps telling me.
I'm so glad I'm not the only one.
I don't get it either. It was really bad storytelling, imho.
It was really bad storytelling, imho.
Yup. WAY better was last season's plotline where Sherlock decided to kill the man he thought was Moriarty, and there was hell to pay from Gregson. THAT was a direct consequence of his actions, and it affected him. And so goddamn well done. Aidan Quinn is no slouch in the acting department.
I have read that cops and criminals do think they have more in common with each other than with people with day jobs.
I can tell you from personal experience that what you just said, erika, is stone cold fact.
1) Don't think "one of them" refers to "like everybody else" or "Plays well with others" but to "gives a damn and is not a psychopath" which I think has always been true for Sherlock. I think part of his unsureness is that he confuses "gives a damn" with "plays nice".
2) I don't think it was poor story telling to blame Sherlock in part for getting Bell hurt. No, this guy being homicidal and attacking Sherlock was not foreseeable. But Sherlock carelessly ruined the guy's life in passing during an investigation - because he could not be bothered to do his homework. He did something pretty awful to the guy for no good reason. That triggered a nutso reaction, but the awful thing he did that triggered it still means he gets part of the blame.
It is like hitting a guy with a glass jaw and killing him. The hitter may have had no way to foresee that hitting guy once on the jaw would lead to his death. But the hitter has to take his victim as he finds him; that punch makes him guilty of some degree of homicide, not first - but 2nd or 3rd or manslaughter or whatever the particular state law calls it.
Sherlock did something pretty terrible. Even if the consequences were far worse than could have been reasonably foreseen, he triggered them and bears partial responsibility for them. Unlike the case of the glass jaw it is not criminal responsibility or probably civil. It is by no means even the same degree of moral responsibility as the glass jaw. But he does bear at least some degree of moral responsibility. I think the writers are correct, and that this is NOT poor writing.
Hmm. I would say it's closer to getting someone all riled up and then
they
hit someone with a glass jaw.
