# Sherlock and Watson... gay lovers? What????



## Feenix (Jan 14, 2012)

According to this bit from Fox News, it's already a done deal!

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1743646346001/

Ack!!


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Fans have been writing Sherlock/Watson fanfic for years. Hardly shocking.


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

Mary must be pissed.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Fans have been "juicing up" these classics for years. As to Holmes, there's been debate amongst scholars for years about his sexuality or lack of it. *shrug* 

Frankly, I'm tired of all things 50 Shades...


----------



## Greg Banks (May 2, 2009)

Why is this such an issue? In the Robert Downey, Jr. films Sherlock is a badass. In the upcoming television series Watson is an Asian girl and I think it's set in the US. It's an interpretation. More power to them.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Feenix said:


> According to this bit from Fox News, it's already a done deal!
> 
> http://video.foxnews.com/v/1743646346001/
> 
> Ack!!


This is news? And why would it be so shocking? *shrug*



Monique said:


> Frankly, I'm tired of all things 50 Shades...


No kidding! I have a new policy that any thread or headline that mentions "50 Shades of....". 

Talk about done.


----------



## BEAST (Mar 31, 2012)

Hmm, there always seemed to be some pent up sexual tension in that bromance, lol. Yea, I won't be reading that though. Sounds... different. Whatever floats ya boat.


----------



## 41413 (Apr 4, 2011)

Canonically, Holmes is most likely asexual, but possibly homoromantic, and definitely 100% badass. There are some good analyses if you look around.

As far as the movies go, I think anyone would be gay for Robert Downey, Jr.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

Movies have made Holmes into an action hero, which he isn't in the books. Making Watson and Holmes lovers isn't any more of a stretch.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

Cashing in on the phenomenal success of BBC's Sherlock, which has inspired a whole generation of steamy Sherlock/Watson fanfic. Cumberbitches will snap it up. That's a guaranteed bestseller.

(Are you a Cumberbitch? http://thedarksalon.blogspot.com/2012/05/are-you-cumberbitch.html)


----------



## Stephen T. Harper (Dec 20, 2010)

I think when you’re a character in the public domain and still popular, liberties will be taken to freshen things up.  For instance, characters like Achilles in the Iliad have been straight for centuries.  

@Alexandra - Cumberbitches?  that’s hilarious.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

The new norm for media: Everyone is gay or could become gay at any moment


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Chad Winters said:


> The new norm for media: Everyone is gay or could become gay at any moment


Great isn't it? So refreshing from the old: "Nobody is or ever could have been gay throughout recorded history."


----------



## 41413 (Apr 4, 2011)

Hmm... it's almost like being gay is totally normal and common or something...


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

smreine said:


> Hmm... it's almost like being gay is totally normal and common or something...


In the past, it wasn't exactly uncommon for two gay men to present an appearance of being simply very, very close friends.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Why don't we all have a seance and ask Conan Doyle for his thoughts on the matter?


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

If this shocks you I wonder what you'd say about some fan-fiction involving Frodo and Sam, Batman and Robin, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.  Back in the 1970s Billy Wilder's "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes" had a few homoerotic winks and nods.  In one scene Holmes tells some Russian ballet dancers that he and Watson are lovers.  Then when Watson confronts him about it he says: "I hope I'm not being presumptuous, but you have been with women, Holmes?"  To which Holmes responds: "Yes Watson.  You are being very presumptuous."

In other words, there's nothing new under the sun, even if Fox News is only just discovering it.


----------



## Lanesy (Jun 14, 2012)

Brokeback Mountain II?


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

@Stephen, not my term, but I'm happy to introduce it to you!


----------



## Aaron Scott (May 27, 2012)

That sure would have been original, edgy and groundbreaking 25 years ago.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

QuantumIguana said:


> Movies have made Holmes into an action hero, which he isn't in the books. Making Watson and Holmes lovers isn't any more of a stretch.


Actually in the books he was an expert boxer, so I'm not sure about the "he wasn't an action hero" thing. He was much more athletic in the books than in most of the movies/tv versions.



Stephen T. Harper said:


> I think when you're a character in the public domain and still popular, liberties will be taken to freshen things up. For instance, characters like Achilles in the Iliad have been straight for centuries.
> 
> @Alexandra - Cumberbitches? that's hilarious.


Achilles was straight? You forgot to tell the Greeks that.

You've never heard of Patroclus, I take it.


----------



## Audrey Finch (May 18, 2012)

Interesting concept, would never have been allowed at the time of writing though.


----------



## alawston (Jun 3, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Actually in the books he was an expert boxer, so I'm not sure about the "he wasn't an action hero" thing. He was much more athletic in the books than in most of the movies/tv versions.
> Achilles was straight? You forgot to tell the Greeks that.
> 
> You've never heard of Patroclus, I take it.


Indeed. A cursory reading of Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida might also prove instructive.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

The same group has added some content to _20,000 Leagues Under the Sea_ which implies a rather steamy romance. You'll recall that the characters are mostly men. . . . . . .

I say: whatever!


----------



## Stephen T. Harper (Dec 20, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> Achilles was straight? You forgot to tell the Greeks that.
> 
> You've never heard of Patroclus, I take it.


That was a joke, based on the notion that there is anything at all shocking about this. I thought it was pretty clever. Maybe too subtle?

I said: "I think when you're a character in the public domain and still popular, liberties will be taken to freshen things up. For instance, characters like Achilles in the Iliad have been straight for centuries."

See?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Stephen T. Harper said:


> That was a joke, based on the notion that there is anything at all shocking about this. I thought it was pretty clever. Maybe too subtle?
> 
> I said:  "I think when you're a character in the public domain and still popular, liberties will be taken to freshen things up. For instance, characters like Achilles in the Iliad have been straight for centuries."
> 
> See?


Sorry, Stephen. It obviously flew right over my head.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

Yeah, I've heard that for years and the new show Sherlock seems to play up on the idea a bit.  Of course, Batman and Robin are also accused of being gay...of course...there's costumes involved with that and all.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

balaspa said:


> Yeah, I've heard that for years and the new show Sherlock seems to play up on the idea a bit. Of course, Batman and Robin are also accused of being gay...of course...there's costumes involved with that and all.


Accused? Really?


----------



## philstern (Mar 14, 2011)

smreine said:


> Canonically, Holmes is most likely asexual, but possibly homoromantic, and definitely 100% bad*ss. There are some good analyses if you look around.


Speaking of homoromantic (or HomRom for short) anybody ever wonder about Batman and Robin? Older man, younger guy, tight colorful outfits...


----------



## StephenEngland (Nov 2, 2011)

Personally, I don't like the idea of tampering with another author's characters is any way, shape, or form. . .can you guess what my opinion of fanfic is? 
And JR is right, Holmes was a lot more forceful of a character in the books.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

philstern said:


> Speaking of homoromantic (or HomRom for short) anybody ever wonder about Batman and Robin? Older man, younger guy, tight colorful outfits...


Well, it happened like this:


----------



## kmgiven (Jul 3, 2012)

philstern said:


> Speaking of homoromantic (or HomRom for short) anybody ever wonder about Batman and Robin? Older man, younger guy, tight colorful outfits...


I believe the proper term is HoYay. 

Incidentally, there's an entire page about Sherlock and Watson. (Batman and Robin, too.)

Possibly I should warn people unfamiliar with the site that all three of those links will direct you to one of the biggest time sucking black holes on the internet...


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

kmgiven said:


> I believe the proper term is HoYay.
> 
> Incidentally, there's an entire page about Sherlock and Watson. (Batman and Robin, too.)
> 
> Possibly I should warn people unfamiliar with the site that all three of those links will direct you to one of the biggest time sucking black holes on the internet...


No it is most certainly not the "proper term".


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

Ok, here is my idea: Moses, Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed get placed into a story and become a four way gay orgy.  It will sell millions or earn a death threat.  Or both.

What surprises me is that some people want to read these books.  Aren't there enough other books out there?  

I thought the Austen and zombies book would be a one time gimmick but it seems like it turned into a cottage industry.


----------



## Pietro Reviglio (Jul 13, 2012)

What about Poirot and Hastings? 
And Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin?

I believe there's room for some gossip there too


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

Reviglio said:


> What about Poirot and Hastings?
> And Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin?
> 
> I believe there's room for some gossip there too


raffles and bunny? kirk and spock?

anywhere you have multiple male characters, someone somewhere is going to start matching them.

is that any different than the kirk/uhura stories or any other male/female match up that is not in the original?



Geemont said:


> Ok, here is my idea: Moses, Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed get placed into a story and become a four way gay orgy. It will sell millions or earn a death threat. Or both.
> 
> What surprises me is that some people want to read these books. Aren't there enough other books out there?
> 
> I thought the Austen and zombies book would be a one time gimmick but it seems like it turned into a cottage industry.


Why do people want to read these books? because they can be well written and some people like pastiche or homage stories. Is it any different than Sherlock Holmes meets Dracula?

No matter what you do, some people will like it, some people will condemn it, and some people will just want to be left alone.

To each his own.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

telracs, don't forget Wooster and Jeeves. 

Poirot and Hastings or Wolfe and Archie may have been done (probably have by someone) but generally they aren't considered sexy enough that anyone wants to think about it.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

JRTomlin said:


> telracs, don't forget Wooster and Jeeves.
> 
> Poirot and Hastings or Wolfe and Archie may have been done (probably have by someone) but generally they aren't considered sexy enough that anyone wants to think about it.


well, i thought that one was obvious! 
and i don't know, david suchet's poirot is plenty sexy to me!


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Why do they have to be fictional?
Why not a Sean Connery / Justin Bieber pairing?
This would amuse me.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Why do they have to be fictional?
> Why not a Sean Connery / Justin Bieber pairing?
> This would amuse me.


*snort*


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

telracs said:


> well, i thought that one was obvious!
> and i don't know, david suchet's poirot is plenty sexy to me!


David Suchet is sexy? Really? *boggle*

Ok, maybe that's my sexual orientation showing. I am truly astonished.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

JRTomlin said:


> David Suchet is sexy? Really? *boggle*
> 
> Ok, maybe that's my sexual orientation showing. I am truly astonished.


I don't think so, JRT, unless there's something about my sexual orientation that I don't know yet...  maybe one has to see the performance to get it:










Different strokes...I think Dr. Oz is kinda hot...

Betsy


----------



## Pietro Reviglio (Jul 13, 2012)

Peter Ustinov is my favorite Poirot...
I don't know if you would call him sexy, but he's such a good actor...


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Reviglio said:


> Peter Ustinov is my favorite Poirot...
> I don't know if you would call him sexy, but he's such a good actor...


Love Ustinov, but I'm not sure I'd ever call him a good actor as such. What he was was a marvellously unashamed ham who carried off his performances by sheer weight of his personality, gusto, and charisma. Where he really shone was as a raconteur, a teller of tall tales to large audiences ... how many people, other than Joel Grey, can manage that?


----------



## Lyndsay (Jul 25, 2012)

QuantumIguana said:


> Movies have made Holmes into an action hero, which he isn't in the books. Making Watson and Holmes lovers isn't any more of a stretch.


I agree, it's equally as silly though. It's an annoying change to classic literature that will eventually lead to future generations thinking that the modern version of these characters/books is the definite version. Just like everyone thinks that Frankenstein is the monster rather than the scientist since they made the inaccurate movie all those years ago! Fair enough the sexuality of characters in many books often comes into question but what keeps them interesting is the mystery of the answer, and the hinting and teasing is exciting but to go and just make them gay is, quite frankly, cheap and tacky!!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Well, as to Frankenstein, if you watch the movies they've held to the book in that it is the Doctor who's called Frankenstein and the monster is usually unnamed.  But because the movies -- like the book -- are called Frankenstein, we expect them to be about Frankenstein.  As they're really more about the monster, people assume the monster is Frankenstein.  So I'm not sure the confusion is the fault of movies, necessarily, though it is true that if you read the book, it is nearly as much about the scientist as it is his creation.  Much more sympathetic portrayal of his creation as well.  I like the Gene Wilder version the best.


----------



## Marc Davies (Aug 9, 2012)

Doesn't surprise me...and might make me more interested in reading some Holmes too.


----------



## CaitLondon (Oct 12, 2010)

Someone here said it: that's been speculated for years. One pt in the new TV series is that Watson definitely loves women and offputs any ref to that relationship with Holmes. Anyway, they deal w/that on the series.


----------

