I Believe in Mycroft Holmes

Anonymous asked you: Hey ! First of all your blog is my ultimate reference on the subject of this dear Mycroft, who is definitely one of my favorite character of all times ! So, I was having a discussion with a friend and she said that John was the only one in the show that was ready to kill in order to save or protect Sherlock, and I completely disagree with her : without even thinking about other characters, I’m positive Mycroft would do it too, if he hasn’t already. What is your opinion ?

Hello Anon. Sorry it’s taken me so long to get around to answering! I am undoubtedly on your side of your debate.

The depth and steadfastness of John’s loyalty was made clear in the very first episode when he shot and killed Jeff, the cabbie, in order to save Sherlock’s life. There is no debating that - John can and has killed for his friend, and, if his threat to the Golem in The Great Game is anything to go by, he is more than prepared to do so again.

Mycroft, however, is not the man of action that John Watson is, and so hasn’t the same chance to demonstrate where his allegiances lie or what he is capable of on-screen. We know very little about him and his shadowy, government job, that ties him to Whitehall, Westminster, the Palace and MI6. He is dangerous, to be sure, and, going from his indifferent expression when confronted with the “bashed up” body of a woman assumed to be Irene Adler, with facial damage so extensive it even makes Molly, a morgue technician, wince, he is no stranger to death. Whether Mycroft has ever fired a gun, though, or simply ends a traitor’s life with the swish of a fountain pen across an official warrant, is a matter for one’s own headcanon. But there is certainly more to Mycroft than his front of the genteel civil servant.

It is established fanon that Mycroft has, in the past, used his shadowy powers to help his younger brother out of trouble. I agree that this is likely - Sherlock may be a capable and brilliant detective, but he has an unstable personality and a history of drug-use, and Mycroft has demonstrated a consistent, albeit controlling, level of care throughout the series. Who can tell what it may have been necessary for him to do in the past? We will probably never quite know what has happened between them, and how far Mycroft has had to go for the sake of his brother.

What we do know, however, is what Mycroft was prepared to do when confronted by Irene Adler in the dénouement of Scandal. Irene had a phone full of scandalous secrets and a list of demands that elicited a look of alarm from Mycroft - but her real bargaining chip was Sherlock. When she first confronted him in the plane, he was staring her down, fury in his eyes and the machinations of his magnificent mind hard at work. It was when she mentioned that she had tricked Sherlock into implicating himself in the derailment of Bond Air that he wavered, and had to look away:

You have no idea how much havoc I can cause and exactly one way to stop me – unless you want to tell your masters that your biggest security leak is your own little brother.

One may presume that, had Irene not had that leverage over Sherlock, Mycroft would not have so quickly capitulated to her demands. He may have had a go letting his people attempt to extract the information from her - as he did when faced with Moriarty and his computer code. Because Sherlock was involved, he gave in far quicker than he otherwise would have done.

Giving up governmental assets and, in turn, potentially facing the ire of his masters, may not be quite the same as killing someone to save Sherlock, but there is a degree of self-sacrifice to this move that Mycroft was willing to make.

We’ve yet to see Mycroft at his most dangerous, his most deadly. We’ve yet to see him take a life, but I could envision him doing as much for Sherlock. He was prepared to sacrifice so much closer to him than a criminal’s life in order to protect his brother.

I am also of the opinion that Moriarty would have been swiftly disposed of on Mycroft’s orders, were it not for his his web and that Sherlock had other plans. But that’s only a theory. Time and Series Three will tell.

12th February 2013

The Rise and Fall of Mycroft Holmes: A Fanmix

All lives end, all hearts are broken. A mix about seizing power at the expense of all else.

01 - Let England Shake / PJ Harvey
02 - God’s Gonna Cut You Down / Johnny Cash
03 - Great Expectations / Cat Power
04 - Ballad of a Politican / Regina Spektor
05 - Adventure.exe / Owen Pallet
06 - Effigy / Andrew Bird
07 - O’ England / King Charles
08 - Blackdown / Patrick Wolf

Listen here: [x]

Mycroft/Anthea: Power Games

Know that I know how to play the game. And know that I failed. Because I rejected the game all together.

To be perfectly honest, I don’t really know. And nor does anyone else, it seems.

M: Tradition, John. Our traditions define us.
J: So total silence is traditional, is it? You can’t even say “Pass the sugar.”
M: Three-quarters of the diplomatic service and half the government front bench all sharing one tea trolley. It’s for the best, believe me.We don’t want a repeat of nineteen seventy-two.

From the context of what Mycroft is saying, it seems that idle gossiping in the Diogenes in 1972, between diplomats or politicians led to some huge scandal that must never be repeated. The problem is, there was no big scandal in British politics in 1972. Internationally, there was the Vietnam War, the Watergate Scandal and some quite terrible things in Northern Ireland, but none of these really fit with whatever it is Mycroft was alluding to.

Whatever this event was, it can not have been something Mycroft was directly involved in. In 1972, he would have been little more than a child. As precocious as Mycroft no doubt was, I really don’t think he was spending his time in London’s gentleman’s clubs whilst he was still in short trousers.

Based on what little information we have, then: something happened in the Diogenes Club in 1972, caused by senior political figures letting too many facts slip. Loose lips literally sinking ships. Whatever it was, the shadowy governmental manipulators of the day managed to keep it under wraps, but the event itself has passed into legend within the walls of the club.

From the way Mycroft talks about it, though, it seems something more notorious, and something more central to him personally. Depending on birth dates and his rather hazy past, it seems likely that Mycroft entered the civil service, in whatever shadowy capacity, some time in the early nineties, which is the earliest one can sensibly place him as a member of the Diogenes Club. Although, based on this, he couldn’t have been involved with the 1972 incident, he may have been involved with instituting the rule of absolute silence. Canonically, Mycroft is one of the founders of the Diogenes club and, although that is clearly an impossibility in this universe, I can still envision him having some influence over how the place is run.

He is the British Government, after all.

It’s a very plausible theory, Anon.

Mycroft is certainly a character very stuck in his ways - his pattern is so routine that, in The Greek Interpreter, Sherlock can predict where he will be at any given moment. He runs between the Diogenes Club, his Pall Mall lodgings opposite and his office in Whitehall round the corner. Indeed, canonically, he spends every evening, between the hours of 5pm-8pm, in the Diogenes Club. It’s hard to imagine someone who keeps their life so tidy and well-regulated being at all open to allowing it to be upset and thrown off course by messy romantic affairs.

He is the more sociable, at least on the surface, of the two Holmes Brothers, so could quite feasibly form these sorts of relationships for show. The sort of relationship you described seems quite likely, with dates arranged by PAs and dinners fitted in around office hours. Which is, perhaps, why, sometimes in my headcanon I just skip out the middleman and pair Mycroft with Anthea. I imagine their relationship to have a business-like efficiency to it. But, for Mycroft, the rigmarole of a real relationship, with all its heartache and unpredictability, would be something he would try to avoid.

I hesitate to say this, but I have the impression that this was learnt, at leas to some extent, from experience. “Caring is not an advantage,” after all. And the way that line was delivered, with quiet introspection, is quite suggestive.

I think, on the few occasions Mycroft has loved, he has loved very, very deeply. His relationship with his brother stands as testament to this. With Sherlock, Mycroft’s particular manner of affection has a protective, overbearing quality to it, but it is plain to see how much he cares about his brother, and what he is willing to sacrifice for him.

But, the fact remains, for a man like Mycroft, caring would put him at a disadvantage. Love could weaken and disarm him. I don’t think he lacks the ability to care - he’s not an Ice Man at heart - but he knows the risks involved with allowing people close to you. Which may be why he worries about Sherlock; who, despite his dictums, has cared for John Watson and Lestrade, for Molly and Mrs Hudson, and even for Irene Adler. Mycroft pushes everyone away and spends Christmas alone because it’s easier for him that way.

Hello dear! I had the exact same thought when Mycroft delivered that line. Oh Mycroft, you devil!

M: Don’t be alarmed. It’s to do with sex.
S: Sex doesn’t alarm me.
M: How would you know?

Sherlock had absolutely no comeback to Mycroft’s comment - he instead looked hurt, if not mortified. Evidentially, Sherlock knows that this is territory that his brother has explored, otherwise Mycroft’s snide remark would not have had this impact.

Some people have posited that Mycroft may use sex as a weapon or negotiating tool where the situation calls for it. While Mycroft can be a ruthless tactician, he is initially very dismissive of what Irene Adler does, which amounts to the same thing, so I’m not certain about that. Perhaps he does, perhaps he doesn’t. A more likely explanation would be that Mycroft has experimented with sex in order to fit in with his peers. Neither of the Holmes Brothers are particularly normal, but Mycroft is much better at sustaining the mask. Perhaps it was expected of him. However, the way that “How would you know?” was delivered hints at someone who is sexually experienced and is very comfortable with that side of himself.

The brothers do seem to know about each other’s sexual history - whether from deducing it about each other or whether they actually confide in each other. That this exchange comes right on the tail of the “Here to see the Queen?” jibe seems very telling. This may have been little more than an example of Sherlock’s quick, albeit cruel, wit, but the evidence seems to be mounting that Mycroft is indeed homosexual. Mycroft knows enough about Sherlock’s sexual experience (or lack thereof) to make unkind jokes about it - that Sherlock is able to do the same to Mycroft suggests to me that he has the same sort of knowledge about his brother.

Yet, as you point out, Mycroft does not seem to have any relationships to speak of, or any real ties to anyone, aside from his brother. In spite of what seems to be a long sexual history, it does not seem to have had any particular bearing on his personal life; his sexual relationships have not led to romantic ones.

And yet, Mycroft is prone to as much concealed sentiment as Sherlock. The brothers have a hard time with empathy, but that does not mean that they lack it. This is the troubling thing about Mycroft. Sometimes, especially when he is alone, he seems to be so like his brother - strange, vulnerable and very, very lonely. Though consistently even more brilliant than Sherlock, Mycroft also seems to lack his brother’s tacit ability to draw people towards him.The Christmas scene in Scandal was horribly illustrative of this - Sherlock was surrounded by people he considers his friends, in a room decorated with colourful Christmas lights, while Mycroft was alone in a dark house, staring into the fire. His genius doesn’t dazzle like Sherlock’s does, doesn’t draw people toward him. Instead, it thrums uncomfortably at the edge of a person’s consciousness, it chokes and intimidates, driving them away.

Mycroft does have relationships with a handful of people. I believe he is comparatively close to his brother, however complex that rivalry may be. He respects John. He is close enough to Anthea to muse aloud as to the dynamic of his brother’s new friendship with John. He is on first-name terms with Harry the Equerry. There is also his canonical friendship with his neighbour, Mr Melas, who may or may not show up in series. But, in spite of all that, Mycroft is still a man who is a member of (and, canonically, founder of) a club where the people not only are required to remain silent at all times, but are not permitted to take the slightest notice of one another. For a man who seems so lonely, he does elect to be alone a great deal.

In long and short, I really don’t know. It is one of the many unanswered questions about Mycroft. He knows more about people than Sherlock does - he understands their motivations and how to manipulate them - yet has far fewer people in his life. And I’m not entirely certain that this is by choice.

Fear is the most elegant weapon. Your hands are never messy. Threatening bodily harm is crude. Work instead on minds & beliefs; play insecurities like a piano. Be creative in approach. Force anxiety to excruciating levels or gently undermine the public confidence. Panic drives human herds over cliffs. An alternative is terror-induced immobilization. Fear feeds on fear. Put this efficient process in motion. Manipulation is not limited to people. Economic, social and democratic institutions can be shaken. It will be demonstrated that nothing is safe, sacred or sane. There is no respite from horror. Absolutes are quicksilver. Results are spectacular.
                                                                      - Jenny Holzer, Inflammatory Essays