And I see your point. Without Mycroft, Sherlock is back in irritating and often dangerous position of not being able to take such big risks, having to think ahead and accept losses/unsolved cases in order to protect the people he cares about, and that's something that could move the show forward very much in s4 (WHICH WILL HAPPEN I ACCEPT NO OTHER OPTION), rather than letting his actual crime-solving stagnate into a comfortable job. We've grown to sort-of-love Mycroft, but also see hints of the dfepth Sherlock's real relationship with him, and the emotional effects on Sherlock would be devestating - and exactly what he did to John, just for poetic irony, and the writers would love that :(
Am with you with almost everything here; I don't know if Sherlock will have to choose or if Mycroft will take the decision out of his hands (as big brothers are want to do) but Mycroft will do anything to keep Sherlock safe, and that could so easily kill him.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-07 05:08 am (UTC)And I see your point. Without Mycroft, Sherlock is back in irritating and often dangerous position of not being able to take such big risks, having to think ahead and accept losses/unsolved cases in order to protect the people he cares about, and that's something that could move the show forward very much in s4 (WHICH WILL HAPPEN I ACCEPT NO OTHER OPTION), rather than letting his actual crime-solving stagnate into a comfortable job. We've grown to sort-of-love Mycroft, but also see hints of the dfepth Sherlock's real relationship with him, and the emotional effects on Sherlock would be devestating - and exactly what he did to John, just for poetic irony, and the writers would love that :(
Am with you with almost everything here; I don't know if Sherlock will have to choose or if Mycroft will take the decision out of his hands (as big brothers are want to do) but Mycroft will do anything to keep Sherlock safe, and that could so easily kill him.