Five Orange Pips: Triptych
Nov. 3rd, 2012 03:18 pmCanon Story: The Five Orange Pips
Title: Triptych
Author:
azriona
Rating: G
Warnings: none
Author's Notes: The theory about the Baring-Gould chronology, if I understand correctly, is that Watson was deliberately skewering with the timelines in an effort to mask that fact that he was married several times; instead, he wanted the public to think he was married only the once, to Mary Morstan. (Was marrying that many times really so much of an issue in a time when dying in childbirth or of illness was more common? Or maybe Watson was killing off his wives one by one and didn’t want anyone to catch on? Hmm, there’s a plot bunny for you; feel free to run with that, anyone.) Anyway, I was all sorts of grumbly about the out-of-order dates of events, so I wrote this triptych of 60s. I blame
spacemutineer, since she’s the one who explained the theory behind the chronology. :)
1.
He changes years, makes false references, all for the sake of my “delicate” nature.
"My wife, my one love," he says. I smile, kiss his brow. He thinks I believe him.
I do not mind his previous marriages. My John loves me now.
But I wonder. When I die, will he forget me as readily as he has forgotten them?
2.
She smiles sadly when I say "wife.” I do not doubt her love; rather she must doubt mine, so freely given in the past.
A little slight of hand, masking of the true order of events, so that she can face the world as my one beloved wife, is not too much, if it brings her a scrap of comfort.
3.
Of course I know why he is lax with his dates, why events are referenced out of order, despite his careful note-taking. She knows, too, lets him play the charade. It does not harm either of them.
My friend is blind to so much, in her, in me, but none so much as what he is blind to within himself.
Title: Triptych
Author:
Rating: G
Warnings: none
Author's Notes: The theory about the Baring-Gould chronology, if I understand correctly, is that Watson was deliberately skewering with the timelines in an effort to mask that fact that he was married several times; instead, he wanted the public to think he was married only the once, to Mary Morstan. (Was marrying that many times really so much of an issue in a time when dying in childbirth or of illness was more common? Or maybe Watson was killing off his wives one by one and didn’t want anyone to catch on? Hmm, there’s a plot bunny for you; feel free to run with that, anyone.) Anyway, I was all sorts of grumbly about the out-of-order dates of events, so I wrote this triptych of 60s. I blame
1.
He changes years, makes false references, all for the sake of my “delicate” nature.
"My wife, my one love," he says. I smile, kiss his brow. He thinks I believe him.
I do not mind his previous marriages. My John loves me now.
But I wonder. When I die, will he forget me as readily as he has forgotten them?
2.
She smiles sadly when I say "wife.” I do not doubt her love; rather she must doubt mine, so freely given in the past.
A little slight of hand, masking of the true order of events, so that she can face the world as my one beloved wife, is not too much, if it brings her a scrap of comfort.
3.
Of course I know why he is lax with his dates, why events are referenced out of order, despite his careful note-taking. She knows, too, lets him play the charade. It does not harm either of them.
My friend is blind to so much, in her, in me, but none so much as what he is blind to within himself.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-03 02:23 pm (UTC)Although I do agree that marrying more than once must have been both common and accepted when the mortality rate was much higher.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-03 02:50 pm (UTC)And yeah, multiple marriages couldn't have been THAT uncommon. I have one great-great grandfather who married three separate times, and had kids by all three wives. He couldn't have been the only one.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-03 09:25 pm (UTC)Well done:-)
no subject
Date: 2012-11-04 02:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-04 07:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-04 08:04 am (UTC)