I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere

The Lying Detective — or, Wait, WHAT?

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">"Of all ruins, that of a noble mind is the most deplorable." [DYIN] </span></h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2rHpNHOxgQLiqKdVuEIouSDnNmvrO_aTmmgvEpgbnuIrsDgdMuMjVTKNG3ysy_li2n14LodjNSewSbzegk-2LLmncXK8SbfQ4cPgkWJimYU-8g_Dy0rHGclvTkYJna78FUIJOAQSR1v_a/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Sherlock+Mycroft+landscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2rHpNHOxgQLiqKdVuEIouSDnNmvrO_aTmmgvEpgbnuIrsDgdMuMjVTKNG3ysy_li2n14LodjNSewSbzegk-2LLmncXK8SbfQ4cPgkWJimYU-8g_Dy0rHGclvTkYJna78FUIJOAQSR1v_a/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Sherlock+Mycroft+landscape.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<i><span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></i><span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the seventh in our series of reviews for Series 4 of Sherlock. There are <b>spoilers below</b>. Consider yourself forewarned.]</span><br />
<i><span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">“We
often say it’s a show about a detective, not a detective show.”</span></i><span style="color: #231f20; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">
– <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/12/sherlock-abominable-bride-interview" target="_blank">Mark Gatiss, Vanity Fair</a> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><i>“I worry that we’re sort of getting into a world where people
just want warm paste fed to them. Why can’t things be challenging?</i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i>” </i></span></span><span style="color: #231f20;">– </span><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03f3lzx" style="background-color: white;" target="_blank">Mark Gatiss, BBC</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">The above quotes are from show runner Mark Gatiss in regards to complaints that “The
Abominable Bride” was too confusing, and it’s what I’m clinging to right now, because
I have to quite frankly admit that I have no idea what is going on. In fact, I’m
feeling a bit like the poor Sherlock Holmes in "The Hounds of Baskerville," wherein he was dosed with a mind-altering drug and <i>could not tell what was
real. </i>Moffat and Gatiss seem to have slipped us a bit of <i>radix pedis diaboli</i>,
and the ensuing fog is deeply disconcerting. <o:p></o:p></span></span><br />
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">That’s not necessarily a bad thing, though. I’m
fully on the side of Moffat and Gatiss in believing that television should not
be warm paste, and not knowing what the hell is going on is refreshing. It’s
challenging, and it’s exciting. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">In the previous episode of <i>Sherlock</i>, “The Six
Thatchers,” we saw reality and narrative structure break down, mostly because
(as far as we could tell) we saw it all from Sherlock’s perspective, and
something was very wrong with Sherlock. I speculated that the episode was
intentionally nonsensical, a reflection of Sherlock’s disintegrating state of
mind. In “The Lying Detective,” that theory seems to have been confirmed, as
Sherlock has indeed descended into the depths of a drug-fueled madness. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">And yet, that doesn’t seem to quite explain what’s
going on. After all, the story has shifted from the first-person of Sherlock’s
point of view – gone, for example, are his voiceovers from the last episode –
to the usual third person, <i>and it still doesn’t make any sense. </i>It’s
furthermore disconcerting because the very nature of Sherlock Holmes, the very
heart of what he stands for, is reason itself. The very premise of Sherlock
Holmes – as a person, as a character, as a set of stories – is that there’s an
inherent coherency and logic to the world ("This agency stands flat-footed on the ground." [SUSS]). Things make sense, and if you just
look at them in the right way and think everything through, the pieces will
fall into place. There’s always clues to read and signs to interpret, and by
the end, the crime is solved, order is restored, and Sherlock explains<i> </i>how
he does it. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">The same is usually true of <i>Sherlock </i>(well,
except for some questionable narrative choices in “The Empty Hearse”), which
has always, for the most part, had narrative coherency, consistency, and a
certain logic in its fictional reality. The viewer could know that a clue was
indeed a clue, that a hint or sign we saw had meaning, that a scene we saw <i>actually
happened. </i>If there was a narrative thread left untied, or a detail left unexplained,
there’s usually enough clues and possibilities to go on to construct one’s own
potential explanation. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">All that’s out the window this season. Since the previous episode, it’s been very difficult to tell what is going on, if any of it is
even real, and, most importantly, if any of it <i>means anything </i>in the
first place. The world of <i>Sherlock </i>has fundamentally transformed: it’s
gone from a world where questions have answers, clues lead to conclusions, words
have meaning, and signs refer to things, to a world where they….don’t. The
world in which a drop of water leads inevitably to the Niagara has
disintegrated, and the chain of reasoning that takes us there is broken.  <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">In this world, the meanings of words are arbitrary
and unverifiable (as the semioticians would happily remind us). Any clue could
lead in any direction. Any word could mean anything. Mary’s “Go to Hell,” which
seemed so telling and obvious last episode, has (rather predictably, I must
admit) acquired an entirely different meaning of “go to Hell and back for John
Watson.” The iconic phrase from “His Last Bow,” “there’s an east wind
coming,” has suddenly turned into a reference to Sherlock’s long-lost sibling,
Sherrinford. Molly’s statement from last episode that John would rather have “anyone”
suddenly, nonsensically, morphs into the solution of who Culverton has murdered
– “anyone” and everyone, it seems. The game’s either on, or it’s afoot, or
both, but it’s impossible to tell which, and why. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">From the reasonable, logical world of Sherlock
Holmes, we seem to have gone to the very deconstruction of it. Deduction
has made way for the means of lesser men: it’s telling that for the second
episode in a row, Sherlock overwhelmingly eschews deductions and probability in
favor of trackers and listening devices. Cumberbatch’s monologues of
Sherlockian deduction are conspicuously absent from the narrative (a fact
that’s difficult to miss, since they’re such a highlight of the show). <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">Sherlock Holmes isn’t going mad; rather, the very
foundation of his existence seems to be evaporating. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">To be quite frank, I’m not sure how I feel about
this. On an intellectual level, I quite enjoyed the episode. There is artistic
merit (and intellectual interest) in taking the world of Sherlock Holmes apart
at the seams and digging into its foundations, as Moffat and Gatiss have done. The
promotions for this season have claimed that “It’s not a game anymore,” and
perhaps that can be taken quite literally: it’s not a game anymore, because the
game is no longer afoot, or on. Moffat and Gatiss have not shied away from
stating that this is their darkest season yet, and it really is. The darkness creeps in as the very foundation
of the Sherlockian world – the guiding light of logic and reason, the coherency
of reality – is pulled out from under us, and we’re left stumbling. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">I loved the fact that the very foundations of the
fiction I have come to love were taken away, so that I had to question
everything I knew and watch actively rather than passively. Moffat and Gatiss
have suggested <i>Sherlock </i>isn’t about the cases, but about the characters
and their world (stating that it’s not a detective show, but a show about a
detective) and quite frankly, I can’t disagree. Granada’s already faithfully,
and practically to the letter, adapted most of the Canon – why do it again? <i>Sherlock
</i>has focused instead on exploring the very nature of the Sherlockian world
and the Canon, and for a mind that rebels at stagnation, it’s much more stimulating
to watch a show that rocks the foundations of a world we’ve come to love rather
than adapting it word-for-word.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">On the other hand, even with everything this
episode gives me to think about, I do miss the Holmes-Watson partnership, and I
recall with fond nostalgia seasons one and two, where there was mystery-solving
and the partnership of Holmes and Watson, where, though the world explode,
these two survive. The comfortable pattern of solving mysteries together and
then returning to 221B is familiar and missed. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">Admittedly, there are character moments that shine
through in this episode. Martin “I can do that with a blink” Freeman delivered
his usual BAFTA-worthy performance, but I found my heart breaking for Sherlock
Holmes, who, without his John Watson, is falling apart. Cumberbatch delivered a
heart wrenching performance of a seemingly emotionless man willing to go to Hell
and back for John Watson, and every nuance, every subtle emotion behind
Sherlock’s veneer, every tear skillfully shed by Freeman, tore at my
heartstrings. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">And yet…it wasn’t enough. There were moments of a
partnership I’ve grown to love, glimpses of the trials and tribulations of an
immortal friendship, but they were overshadowed by the narrative derring-do and
the meta-fictional deconstruction of literary reality. My mind, rebelling at
stagnation, was intrigued, but my heart yearned for the warmer, more poignant
episodes of the past. </span></span><br />
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span>
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">Heart and mind: it’s a dilemma I’m sure Holmes is more
familiar with than he’d like to admit. </span></span><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span>
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;">--</span></span><br />
<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white; color: #333333;"><br /></span></span></div>
</div>

The Lying Detective — or, Wait, WHAT?

"Of all ruins, that of a noble mind is the most deplorable." [DYIN] [ Editor's Note: this is the seventh in our series...

+ Read more »

by Anastasia Klimchynskaya

The Lying Detective — It Is What It Is

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"what it is worth" [THOR] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggLP8V7BmrWjUjtlKyUt_EnLWbTjJJHEZIMYJXx3S-ONVzo2PubBLzANoNxhNMqhHz6ax7TUzlehf0zEoP6x6GJ-9qfIkvC6SYTQlGA4TIY48icqTpLrrpeBwXQsfNYcJQFte5VkVqI1OQ/s1600/CumberbatchbyMacBird.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="490" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggLP8V7BmrWjUjtlKyUt_EnLWbTjJJHEZIMYJXx3S-ONVzo2PubBLzANoNxhNMqhHz6ax7TUzlehf0zEoP6x6GJ-9qfIkvC6SYTQlGA4TIY48icqTpLrrpeBwXQsfNYcJQFte5VkVqI1OQ/s640/CumberbatchbyMacBird.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
[<b><i>Editor's Note</i></b>: this is the sixth in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>. And as is our custom, there are <b>spoilers</b> ahead.]<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">And I love what it is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That sums up <i>Sherlock</i> for me. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Before I begin, I respect your right to
“not like” some creative work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s
your prerogative and criticism is the risk that any creative person takes when
putting their work out. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">But if you happen to be one of the vocal types hurling vitriol about <i>Sherlock</i>, exclaiming how violated and disappointed you are, may I
offer some thoughts to consider. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">As many of you know, I love <i>Sherlock</i> for
exactly what it is <i>— </i>a very
creative riff on canon, written and performed by some immensely talented guys.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I will never tire of watching the innately
likable Martin Freeman as John Watson struggle with his decency, his desire to
be a good man, his<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>bravery,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>his addiction to adrenaline, and his very
debilitating PTSD </span><i>—</i> not to mention the love he feels for his friend.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Which is from time to time tried to the
limits due to his own, and especially to Sherlock’s flaws.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Many found John to have crossed some line
in "The Lying Detective" in a supposed affair and his attack on Sherlock. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I was very sympathetic to John’s struggle
with his attraction to the girl on the bus.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So very human, so very poignant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>An army surgeon married with a baby and craving adrenalin… well, of
course.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My heart ached for him watching
this. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">John is a man who examines his actions
regularly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And suffers<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>tremendous guilt for his mistakes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>To me that is human and heroic.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">There is, by the way, canonical inspiration
to be found in the way Watson describes women with more than a touch of
longing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>And of course, a parallel
exists with ACD who enjoyed many social occasions with Jeanne Leckie while
still married to the ailing Touie. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>A
human being, yet still worthy of our admiration.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Would Dr. John Watson of the original Sherlock Holmes stories have had an
affair?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Not likely.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But would he </span><i>—</i> if he were alive now <i>— </i>perhaps
flirt a bit via text?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I buy it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Three continents, folks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> He didn't do more than text. That showed restraint. I love him for it.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-US"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Are you so above such a thought, such a
desire, such a gesture?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If so, I do not
find the world so black and white as you do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> 
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Bigger question:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>would John Watson beat the up an
ailing canonical Holmes? That set off some of you. Not in the Canon, surely. But<i>
Sherlock </i> ratchets up both the rawness of these characters’ emotions and the
extremity of Sherlock’s hubris and John’s PTSD to a point that, to me, became 
believable and tragic and moving.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
brought me to tears.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I could understand
both points of view so well.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yes, both.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Those characters, those vulnerabilities, have
been carefully constructed, consistently built throughout the series.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s not the Canon, it’s a version of these
characters which is consistent within the longer arc of the <i>Sherlock</i> series. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">And Sherlock himself.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Like his canonical counterpart, this Sherlock
is damaged goods with a fragile and inflated ego (it’s all in the stories),
manic behavior and the propensity<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>to self
medicate to alleviate depression and boredom.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Except </span></span><i>— </i>Sherlock goes farther than the canonical Holmes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Much, much farther, and suffers all the more
from it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Again, I feel sympathy, not
derision. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is an extreme man living in
extreme times.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I will never tire of watching Benedict
Cumberbatch play the genius of immense intellect and emotion – and yes, Mrs.
Hudson was dead on right about this – for all his reasoned brilliance and passion for
the scientific method, Sherlock is primarily an emotional man, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">and I hold him to be so in the Canon as well.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Though in the spirit of the Victorian era, this
element is very much understated on the page.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> 
</span>But it peeks through the words, most definitely.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">In both Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original stories and <i>Sherlock</i> this character
is hurting, alone, somewhat of a tragic figure, and all the more heroic for
it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The world applauds his achievements
while he privately collapses. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">In the show, for John and Sherlock, bad
stuff happens when their lesser natures briefly overcome them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To me, that is the stuff of powerful
storytelling. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I think some haters, particularly those who
have only recently switched sides to Camp Vitriol where </span><br />
<span lang="EN-US"><i>Sherlock</i> is concerned, come to the show with
expectations <i>—</i> expectations that it cleave more closely to the Canon, that it
show John and Sherlock as very much who Watson and Holmes were in the original stories, that
it mimic the Conan Doyle formula they think they remember (and are almost always wrong) concerning the amount of deductions, how accurate was the logic, how active/ inactive, physical/emotional, etc.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Several problems come with that expectation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">First, many get these breakdowns,
percentages, perceptions wrong (though granted, fewer of you who are reading IHOSE).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I love <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2017/01/to-sherlock-critics-discerning-and.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Gatiss’s recent rhyming rebuttal</a> to
“there’s too much action” in <i>Sherlock</i>.  Hell, no, it's quite canonical. Just depicted in the style of its current medium. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Second: recreating the Canon is not what the creators set
out to do, or ever promised. This is a
riff, not an adaptation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> A pastiche, not a faithful retelling. </span>They are
creative, imaginative, inspired, and did what they wanted to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why is so much ego ascribed to their work by
the haters?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They are artists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">   </span>This is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">their
</i>portrait.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I went into an exhibit of Expressionist
painting recently in London.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t
much care for this genre; it does not speak to me.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My companion was riveted and spent an hour
and a half studying these while I did a quick tour and sat down to write.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>She had a fascinating takeaway and couldn’t wait
to try some things in her own painting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I was unimpressed but I can assure you that I did not find myself
thinking – what an utter a^*hole for using that much yellow in the corner of
the painting, how is <b><i>that</i></b> a bridge, and how dare he call that f%^-ing  blob a human
being?</span><br />
<br />
<span lang="EN-US">No. This painting is that artist’s take.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We can partake, admire, savor, or move
on to what we like better.  </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I will never paint in this style.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t hate or deride these artists for
doing so. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">To punitively ascribe "ego" to an artist for
daring to disagree with you by virtue of their choices is just plain wrong.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The act of writing, performing, any art form
requires ego, requires a point of view, and requires the creator <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>to reveal him/herself by<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>appearing on the page or canvas or screen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The work itself <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>also <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">has
a form – to a greater or lesser degree – imposed upon it.</i> That’s the challenge of art.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-US"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Putting out your "take" on an idea, an image, a story — that is what artists do, and it is the height
of vulnerability.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Many of you know
this.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You put your work out there and
then stand naked before the crowd.</span><br />
<span lang="EN-US"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></span>
<span lang="EN-US"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">All creative art forms have rules and guidelines. Some tight, some loose. </span>A
classical sonnet is a tight form, an expressionist painting a loose one, but
both are forms.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As you put yourself and
your ideas and your story and what it is you want to say into this form, you
also help define the form. And you speak your piece. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">It's a leap of faith to do this. </span>That’s not ego, that’s what creating is. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">A long form drama series is long
form film.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A novel is long form print.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They require very different things in terms
of plotting and character development than short form. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moffat and Gatiss took a pass at their creative riff on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">longform </i><i>filmed</i> Sherlock Holmes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Conan Doyle wrote <i>short form print</i> Sherlock Holmes. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I frankly love <i>Sherlock </i>though not every minute
of it. Sometimes there is a little too much yellow in the corner of the
painting: dialogue too fast, and less inventive villains than I’d like.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But do I need to write angrily about this,
detailing with outrage what they woulda, shoulda, coulda done? </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">I’ve been a screenwriter and a producer and
a development executive for 30 years in Hollywood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have written one movie that’s been made and sold many scripts and won Emmys
for TV writing. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am published in longform print
Holmes. (<i>Art in the Blood,</i> and the upcoming <i>Unquiet Spirits</i>)  <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span>So maybe I’m somewhat “qualified” as a
critic, but I will not take the bait and second guess Moffatt and Gatiss and
Cumberbatch and Freeman.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">   </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">This is an artwork.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>And I have too much respect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span></span><br />
<br />
<span lang="EN-US">Let me reiterate: you don’t have to like any
given artwork, I’m not saying that. But
don’t be like that nurse in "The Lying Detective," casually dissing John’s blog in passing, almost as an
afterthought. Maybe she glanced at it on the Tube.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Maybe she would have written it differently. Please. Don't be that woman.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">A final word on the phrase “it is what it
is ”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> which tags this episode.This was derided as a platitude by some critics. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">This is not a platitude. “Everything happens for a
reason”is a platitude.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Say that to me and don't stand too close. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">"It is what it is" …<i>is </i><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><i>zen.  </i>It is the hard won lesson of the adult</span>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is the serenity prayer<i>,</i> the part about <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>knowing what “things you cannot change” and
understanding and accepting those things.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Mary is dead.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sherlock and John are flawed human
beings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Horrible people who kill others
exist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is what it is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sadly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But it is.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Now, that being said, the other part of the
serenity prayer about knowing the difference between what you can and cannot change is crucial.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> At this precise moment there is a rising panic about what is happening in our country, a malaise that is difficult to endure. </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">We are hoping and praying that "what it is" can be changed. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">Some things  require action. They require battle gear and courage
and resilience.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Despots and liars must
be confronted. Murders must be investigated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Criminals brought to justice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Children
must be taught.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Babies must be
nurtured.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Art must be created to shine
lights into dark corners and open us to beauty and truth.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is hard, scary work.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">And some things require acceptance and
accommodation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Like illness. Like death.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They are what they are.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US">When friends join hands and agree on these
painful things, there is love. And understanding. I love these two men, this particular John
and Sherlock,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and their expression in
this crazy form in our crazy times.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>I
can’t wait for "The Final Problem."  </span><br />
<span lang="EN-US"><br /></span>
<span lang="EN-US"><br /></span>
<i><b>Editor's Note:</b> Bonnie MacBird recently received her investiture "Art in the Blood" in the Baker Street Irregulars. The watercolor portrait above is her work.</i><br />
<br />
--<br />
<br /></div>
<o:p></o:p>

The Lying Detective — It Is What It Is

"what it is worth" [THOR] [ Editor's Note : this is the sixth in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 ...

+ Read more »

by Bonnie MacBird

Let Us Reflect on The Lying Detective

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"But why would you not let me near you, since there was in truth no infection?" [DYIN] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjksfcdUEoGQZTVhKbgHeWWnR9qYP7ZhR6CJIaFNepyZMnklkFMlmdQyxBWlgffeCV85zhiN4OX67Qcsf3gB0CzACC1hS1mnk7W_gInvSb6PspMIYRN4iOaBClBMHXEZOBW-gPn2IEVnuo5/s1600/dyin-51.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjksfcdUEoGQZTVhKbgHeWWnR9qYP7ZhR6CJIaFNepyZMnklkFMlmdQyxBWlgffeCV85zhiN4OX67Qcsf3gB0CzACC1hS1mnk7W_gInvSb6PspMIYRN4iOaBClBMHXEZOBW-gPn2IEVnuo5/s1600/dyin-51.gif" /></a></div>
<br />
<div>
[<b><i>Editor's Note</i></b>: this is the fifth in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>. And in case you haven't been following, we have spoilers.]<br />
<br />
I’m not one for dream sequences.  The psychedelic when portrayed in television tends to often muddy the context behind the story and focus more on the fact that what you’re seeing on the screen is what it may be like to be high. Well, if this episode of <i>Sherlock </i>is accurate in its depiction of being under the influence I’ll continue to live a life away from it.  Far, far away.<br />
<br />
<i>Sherlock</i>’s fourth season has stepped up in a big way and I think that’s in part due to the evolving fame of Cumberbatch and Freeman.  The production value of the show has improved year by year, season by season and episode by episode but if anything has been evident so far it’s that the show finds itself as intelligent as it’s subject.  Has our beloved PBS/BBC <i>Sherlock</i> gotten a little too <i>avant garde</i>?<br />
<h3>
<b><br /></b><b>SPOILERS AHEAD</b></h3>
Don’t you do it!  If you keep reading, all will be lost.  The mystery, the fun.  Or you probably watched it and in that case, enjoy my friends!<br />
<br />
Quickly we see again that Dr. Watson has taken the company of a new psychiatrist, this one almost as forgettable as the first couple or maybe not (we’ll get to that) and he’s been having visions of his beautiful wife Mary carrying him through his days acting as his conscience. I don’t want to like this John Watson.  All I could think about while watching this fractured relationship between Sherlock and John was the recent article from a couple issues ago in the <i><a href="http://bakerstreetjournal.com/" target="_blank">Baker Street Journal</a></i> regarding what we want from Watson and Holmes.  For me, I want them doing what captured a younger me many years ago, wowing me as the best crime solving duo ever assembled.  I’d be more angry if Martin Freeman wasn’t such a fantastic actor.<br />
<br />
Honestly, I loved the parallels between "The Lying Detective" and "The Adventure of the Dying Detective" and how intricately woven the plot was to mirror its source material.  The “Miss Me?” video left behind by Mary to ensure that John needs some help from his own demons, his own personal illness and Sherlock needed to put him onto it by essentially making a sacrifice.  The play on that as it relates to Holmes in the actual written story, Holmes starving himself for days and claiming the disease infectious, was modernized and quite well in fact.  The cane left behind signifying the hiding Watson of the prose was a nice touch.   Let’s talk a bit about Sherlock’s spiral.  I did not care for the trippy drug induced part of the episode mainly for its convoluted nature and wildness.  The scene in the middle of the road with Sherr—I mean Faith, wait the psychia— no, well the girl in the red dress, was just too much.  For me the fan of the show I said to myself, okay guys, we get it.  You’re creative.<br />
<br />
We can’t get this far into the review without at least mentioning Toby Jones as Culverton Smith.  To this villain I say, you sir are a run of the mill crime drama almost prime time serial killer.  Nothing compelling there for me and this really didn’t translate from prose to screen as well as some other elements have.  Smith isn’t a villain of say Magnussen or Moriarty but I was expecting something a bit more with him given the publicity we’ve got with the new season.  Don’t get me wrong, Jones was creepy as Culverton but the cereal killer story beat?  Nope.  No thanks.  His line, “What’s the worst thing you could do to your best friend?”  There we go,  that gave me the willies.  I may have not been the biggest fan of him as a character but he definitely upped the creepiness needed for the episode.  For all you Marvel fans and Harry Potter fans out there I will only ever be able to see or hear Toby Jones as Arnim Zola or the voice of Dobby the elf.<br />
<br />
I have a confession to make.  Most people reading this will know more about Sherlock Holmes as a whole than me.  Having said that, who the heck is Sherrinford Holmes?  I did my research and I found a copy a couple years ago of Baring-Gould’s <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Caldecott-Greenaway-Historical-Baring-Gould/dp/B0014YL4WY/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VSFKVM2PNKYDJPBQJMEM" target="_blank">Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street</a></i> (how dare someone get rid of that at a garage sale?) and I’m aware of the inclusion of Sherrinford in that text but just why?  Why in the show?  This would be a good time to point out what I think may be obvious, I recognized the impostor that met with Sherlock at Baker Street and I recognized her as the psychiatrist.  I’m not that clever (I think it was that obvious) and I figured something sinister was coming with her, especially given the fact we were going to spend time with that character in the closing minutes of the show when clearly we could’ve spent it elsewhere (did anyone else want the episode to end with Sherlock and Watson’s embrace?)<br />
<br />
Some things I loved:<br />
<ul>
<li>“I’m Sherlock Holmes I wear the damn hat” </li>
<li>H.H. Holmes, murder castle done right” (any other Erik Larson fans out there?  Please read Devil in the White City if you haven’t already) </li>
<li>"The game’s afoot!" as opposed to the oft-used "the game is on!"</li>
<li>John cheating?  I’m looking at you, borderline sexting! </li>
<li>Mrs. Hudson doing her best <i>Fast and Furious</i> impression </li>
<li>Mrs. Hudson calling Mycroft a reptile (I always thought he looked more like a dinosaur or a weird exotic bird) </li>
<li>Mrs. Hudson in all matters and scenes of this episode </li>
</ul>
<br />
A few things I didn’t care for:<br />
<ul>
<li>Trippy scenes </li>
<li>85% of Culverton Smith </li>
<li>New psychiatrists </li>
<li>Needles </li>
</ul>
<br />
I had three family members watch the episode with me tonight that had not seen the show before and have minor knowledge of our shared interest and they all had different responses.  I think we’ll end with those:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Why’s that guy playing with the dead woman's mouth?”</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“Wow, that guy plays Doctor Strange and Sherlock Holmes?”</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“I wish I had one friend like Dr. Watson.  I just hope they don’t punch me in the face that many times.”</blockquote>
<br />
Now, everyone picture the hug between Holmes and Watson from late in the episode.  Let’s call it a night.  Bring on Sherrinford?  Also, I do indeed, miss him. I didn't hate it, I didn't love it.<br />
<br />
It simply is what it is.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>

Let Us Reflect on The Lying Detective

"But why would you not let me near you, since there was in truth no infection?" [DYIN] [ Editor's Note : this is the fi...

+ Read more »

by Mike Freveletti

The Lying Detective — A Review (and Possibly a Rant)

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"It will be cold and bitter" [LAST] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXG4dQsc52AeViYhLTv32bVFw7sVZtbmiXGMLmaUUd_ISLb1-D9ZOAOhKW70ceFBivmtOoCsZb5TK4np6bJ11OacJI43RZAyp5o7Yn0wBR1u6clHnd2Gu3e4nsNHc1PDXDx77RrvOveeRG/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Smith+landscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXG4dQsc52AeViYhLTv32bVFw7sVZtbmiXGMLmaUUd_ISLb1-D9ZOAOhKW70ceFBivmtOoCsZb5TK4np6bJ11OacJI43RZAyp5o7Yn0wBR1u6clHnd2Gu3e4nsNHc1PDXDx77RrvOveeRG/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Smith+landscape.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
[Editor's Note: <span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">this is the fourth in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of </span><i style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Sherlock</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">.]</span><br />
<br />
If you type “Sherrinford” while looking at England in Google Maps, nothing appears (except the <a href="http://www.sherlock-holmes.co.uk/" target="_blank">Sherlock Holmes Museum</a>, but that’s not the point.) I mention this because I’m the sort of person who thinks it would be delightfully maddening if there were an asylum or prison with that name associated with it in real life.<br />
<br />
Yes, consider that your warning that there will be significant <b>spoilers</b> in this review of the Sherlock episode, “The Lying Detective.” I presume you have watched the episode, and that you saw the one before it, “The Six Thatchers.” If you haven’t seen either of them, I recommend you stop reading and do so. I’ll be here when you’re back. <br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD</b></h3>
So. Miss me?<br />
<br />
The creators warned that this would be a dark season, and this one time it turns out they weren’t lying. “The Lying Detective” begins with John in a self-loathing cycle and hallucinating his dead wife, while Sherlock is high out of his mind on a self-destructive streak the size of Texas. Both performances are excellent, from Martin Freeman’s subtle intense numb anger to Benedict Cumberbatch’s rapid descent into physical and psychological ruin.<br />
<br />
<div>
My favorite character of the episode, however, has to be Mrs. Hudson. Mrs. Hudson is the most formidable landlady in London, and a national — nay, global — treasure. Una Stubbs does more for that character in this episode than what the writers gave her to work with for the entire series. I will watch Mrs. Hudson call Mycroft Holmes a reptile any day, any time. I also have to mention Toby Jones’s skin-crawlingly creepy Culverton Smith. Moriarty was an insane genius, but Culverton Smith is evil, and not so shockingly corporate/materialist based. Jones provides a wonderful performance, switching between celebrity hugs and deadly menace with ease.<br />
<br />
With such good performances from the primary cast, it is a bit disheartening to see Louise Brealey wasted. Honestly, if all Molly Hooper is going to do is show up for a scene to weepily scold Sherlock for using drugs, she might as well just not show up. We’ve seen that before. Give the woman, that sweet, complicated, misused, inexplicably loyal, woman, something to do!<br />
<br />
Though the performances are great, the characters are not in a good place, particularly John. Culverton Smith, of all people, voices what should have been the audience’s main concern when he asks John, “What kind of a doctor are you?” It’s an excellent question. John doesn’t seem to actually care that his friend is destroying himself, which is not how John, or anyone for that matter, should react. In his very brief talk with Lestrade later, John blames it all on the fun, on being distracted by the adventure, when really it’s his grief and anger overwhelming him. Sherlock knows it. He hopes that his self-flagellation in the form of nearly killing himself, of letting John beat him, will trigger some sort of desire for reconciliation, or possibly act as simple catharsis. It’s disturbing to watch, and makes Mrs. Hudson’s earlier declaration that Sherlock is the emotional one so much more poignant. He’s always the one doing something impulsive and emotional - he stabs things to the mantle for crying out loud - while John’s anger and frustration is bottled up until it explodes into physical violence.<br />
<br />
As a brief aside, screw you, Mary Watson, for telling Sherlock to go to hell for John. Was there ever any doubt that he would? All she did was exacerbate the situation, making Sherlock feel even worse, going to far greater lengths than he needed to to get John back. I had the impression that up until the moment where Culverton Smith makes him say he doesn’t want to die, that Sherlock might actually have wanted to. Mary’s death was already a blow he didn’t know how to cope with. Seeing her tell him to ‘save John’ when he couldn’t save her was just an additional reason for him to hurt himself, and entirely superfluous. <br />
<br />
John decides to save Sherlock after seeing Mary’s message to Sherlock to save John, and that also rings false. Yes, John’s angry, and hurt, and all sorts of things, but, to echo Culverton Smith, what the hell kind of a doctor is he? More than that, what sort of person sees their friend clearly hurting themselves, and brushes it off as a cry for attention, or worse, as just being a jerk?<br />
<br />
John admits he’s not the person Sherlock, or Mary, or the audience apparently, thought he was. A text from Irene Adler (why not, I guess) spurs John into urging Sherlock to find someone to bring out the best in him, to make him be the person the one he loves wants him to be, and this soon turns into a heartfelt confession to Mary. This is by far the best scene in the season so far. It’s a moment of quiet emotion, necessary in the storm that comprised the rest of the episode, and much of the previous as well. Sherlock’s expression as John begins talking to the woman who isn’t there is a perfect realization of just how broken they both are. He puts aside everything for the moment to do the only thing he can to try to help his friend, and holds him. They aren’t ok, and probably won’t be for a long time, but it is what it is.<br />
<br />
This scene alone is the reason the episode works. Culverton Smith’s plot is deftly woven, the acting is superb all around, and we even get to see Sherlock make deductions instead of being a globe-trotting action hero, but it would all have been for naught if this scene hadn’t worked. If there is a message in the episode, it is that everyone is human. When Sherlock says this, and John parries with a sly, “even you,” Sherlock’s response is perfect, and sums up their relationship in two words — “Even you.” Forget <i>the</i> woman, Sherlock already has someone he cares about to show him who the person he wants to be is, to make him want to be the sort of person he should be, and his name is John Watson. He’s far from perfect, they both are, but they can do the best they can to be what the people they love see in them.<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
And then Eurus blows in from nowhere, ties up a few loose ends with half a minute of monologue and making you wonder just how many skeletons in the Holmes family closet are there, and then shoots a gun in John’s direction. <br />
<br />
I can’t use the kind of language I want to use to describe my reaction at this development. One more twist, because really, it’s so much more entertaining to shove an episode’s worth of deduction and slow character reveal into a cliffhanger moment. If you weren’t sure, the previous sentence should be read as dripping with sarcasm.<br />
<br />
I knew the ‘affair woman’ was going to be a big figure, because that’s how TV show formulas work. I knew Culverton’s daughter looked different between the beginning of the episode and showing up at 221B, but I put it down to the passage of time. I thought the therapist looked familiar, but put it down to actors being reused in minor parts. And, no, at no point was it explicitly stated the Holmes sibling was male. It still seemed like a whole lot of data was shoved into a very short time frame, and felt a little bit like cheating. I don’t think I’m just being bitter, either. To invent a character out of whole cloth is their prerogative, but to bring the villain of the piece forth out of the blue and pretend she was really there the whole time is something else entirely. It worked once for Doyle. No one else has ever pulled it off well.<br />
<br />
While I’m on the subject: Eurus? Really? I appreciate an oblique Canon reference as much as the next Sherlockian, but the Holmes parents are simply awful people if they named their daughter after the bad-luck bringing east wind of Greek myth.<br />
<br />
At any rate, Eurus has arrived, and I have no doubt that the next, and final, episode of the season will see our heroes and their friends “wither before its blast,” but I hope beyond hope that they will “lie in the sunshine when the storm has cleared.”<br />
<br />
Otherwise, this whole season might not have been worth it.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--</div>
<div>
<br /></div>

The Lying Detective — A Review (and Possibly a Rant)

"It will be cold and bitter" [LAST] [Editor's Note: this is the fourth in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on S...

+ Read more »

by Katie Magnusson

To Sherlock Critics Discerning and Undiscerning

<div class="tr_bq" dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"volumes of poetry" [ENGR]</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK5MiiQElT0O-kyda-am3YIyNWv6Un05KAjz2wR__njq9jHqQviefRzRzUwYfa7E3LjFNWjtYFPgCVdQMOi-BtN0pXSKULoPXJdvRol-w3kDXC78bTe7Y_fq16sKon2rmY-A5qy83JifYf/s1600/Sherlock+Series+3+Screening+BFI.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="466" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiK5MiiQElT0O-kyda-am3YIyNWv6Un05KAjz2wR__njq9jHqQviefRzRzUwYfa7E3LjFNWjtYFPgCVdQMOi-BtN0pXSKULoPXJdvRol-w3kDXC78bTe7Y_fq16sKon2rmY-A5qy83JifYf/s640/Sherlock+Series+3+Screening+BFI.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The influence of Edgar Allen Poe's Dupin on Sherlock Holmes has been much discussed; it is generally agreed that, though Holmes himself professes to be little inspired by Dupin, Poe was indeed an influence on Conan Doyle. Unhappy with this state of affairs, in 1915 critic Arthur Guiterman addressed a poem "To Sir Arthur Conan Doyle," placing into question the originality of his most famous creation: </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Holmes is your hero of drama and serial;<br />
All of us know where you dug the material<br />
Whence he was moulded — ’tis almost a platitude;<br />
Yet your detective, in shameless ingratitude —<br />
Sherlock your sleuthhound with motives ulterior<br />
Sneers at Poe’s “Dupin” as “very inferior!”<br />
Labels Gaboriau’s clever “Lecoq”, indeed,<br />
Merely “a bungler”, a creature to mock, indeed!<br />
This, when your plots and your methods in story owe<br />
More than a trifle to Poe and Gaboriau,<br />
Sets all the Muses of Helicon sorrowing.<br />
Borrow, Sir Knight, but be decent in borrowing!</blockquote>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "georgia" , serif; font-size: 14px;"><br />
</span> <br />
The gauntlet was thrown down, and Doyle, a gentleman, could do nothing but protect his honor, and so he responded - with pen rather than sword- by penning "To the Undiscerning Critic":</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sure there are times when one cries with acidity,<br />
“Where are the limits of human stupidity?”<br />
Here is a critic who says as a platitude<br />
That I am guilty because “in ingratitude<br />
Sherlock, the sleuth-hound, with motives ulterior,<br />
Sneers at Poe’s Dupin as very ‘inferior’.”<br />
Have you not learned, my esteemed commentator,<br />
That the created is not the creator?<br />
As the creator I’ve praised to satiety<br />
Poe’s Monsieur Dupin, his skill and variety,<br />
And have admitted that in my detective work<br />
I owe to my model a deal of selective work.<br />
But is it not on the verge of inanity<br />
To put down to me my creation’s crude vanity?<br />
He, the created, would scoff and would sneer,<br />
Where I, the creator, would bow and revere.<br />
So please grip this fact with your cerebral tentacle:<br />
The doll and its maker are never identical.</blockquote>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
The last line, in particular, has been oft-quoted in discussions about the similarities between Doyle and his creation. <br />
<br />
<br />
Well, it sounds like a feud between another undiscerning critic and another Sherlock Holmes creator continues in verse. As you may be aware, there are a variety of opinions swirling around the Internet regarding Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>. And it seems no one is showing any restraint in sharing those opinions.<br />
<br />
In <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/03/sherlock-slowly-perversely-morphing-into-james-bond-benedict-cumberbatch">a recent Guardian article</a>, Ralph Jones threw down the gauntlet, lamenting that Sherlock Holmes is turning into James Bond, and Gatiss, not to be outdone by Doyle, similarly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/04/to-an-undiscerning-critic-from-mark-gatiss">responded</a> to the accusation in verse, titling it "To an Undiscerning Critic (With Apologies to AC Doyle): <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Here is a critic who says with low blow<br />
Sherlock’s no brain-box but become double-O.<br />
Says the Baker St boy is no man of action –<br />
whilst ignoring the stories that could have put him in traction.<br />
<br />
The Solitary Cyclist sees boxing on show,<br />
The Gloria Scott and The Sign of the Fo’<br />
The Empty House too sees a mention, in time, of Mathews,<br />
who knocked out poor Sherlock’s canine.<br />
<br />
As for arts martial, there’s surely a clue<br />
in the misspelled wrestle Doyle called baritsu.<br />
In hurling Moriarty over the torrent<br />
did <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/sherlock">Sherlock</a> find violence strange and abhorrent?<br />
<br />
In shooting down pygmies and Hounds from hell<br />
Did Sherlock on Victorian niceties dwell?<br />
When Gruner’s men got him was Holmes quite compliant<br />
Or did he give good account for The Illustrious Client?<br />
<br />
There’s no need to invoke in yarns that still thrill,<br />
Her Majesty’s Secret Servant with licence to kill<br />
From Rathbone through Brett to Cumberbatch dandy<br />
With his fists Mr Holmes has always been handy.<br />
<br /></blockquote>
</div>
Then <i>The New York Times</i> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/arts/television/sherlock-bbc-creator-responds-to-critic-in-verse-season-4.html?_r=0">joined in the fray</a>, penning its own summary-in-verse of the ongoing feud: <blockquote>
Mark Gatiss is a clever chap;<br />
He always has a line.<br />
So when a Guardian critic wrote<br />
To say all was not fine<br />
<br />
With Sherlock (who in Season 4<br />
Is rather keen on action;<br />
Dispatches villains and much more<br />
With the quickest of reaction)<br />
<br />
Mark G. thought it was time<br />
To offer reasons why<br />
— in perfect, scannèd rhyme —<br />
Sherlock’s really a tough guy.<br />
<br />
We’re worried, wrote the critic,<br />
That Sherlock is now James Bond.<br />
His mental feats are all we need;<br />
He shouldn’t go beyond.<br />
<br />
Not so! Mark G. replied,<br />
With a list of action tales:<br />
“The Solitary Cyclist” (with boxing on side),<br />
“The Sign of the Fo,” and much more that hails<br />
<br />
The detective as pretty fit:<br />
As quick with his fists as with his wit.<br />
Mr. Gatiss wrote with usual skill<br />
Of Sherlock’s sang-froid at the kill.<br />
<br />
Here Mr. Gatiss was rather kinder<br />
Than Sir Arthur Conan Doyle,<br />
Who in 1912 fired off a <a href="https://www.arthur-conan-doyle.com/index.php?title=To_An_Undiscerning_Critic">reminder<br />
</a>At one who critiqued his toil:<br />
“Sure there are times when one cries with acidity,<br />
‘Where are the limits of human stupidity?’”</blockquote>
<br />
<div>
Not to be outdone, Jones penned a rejoinder to Gatiss that smacked of the Rex Stout / Julian Wolff literary feud from the 1940s (see <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2014/02/watson-actually-was-woman.html#.WHUTFvkrLb0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">"Watson Actually Was a Woman"</a>). It was titled "<a href="http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/tv/read-mark-gatiss-ralph-jones-poem-sherlock-bond-letter" target="_blank">The Second Letter</a>" and it appeared on Shortlist - complete with a puzzle to solve (how Sherlockian!):<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Kind though it was for you to pen a reply,<br />
<br />
Swelling with righteousness I think that I<br />
Would like to respond to your words if I may<br />
But only because you so brightened my day.<br />
Alarming, beguiling, it couldn’t get better;<br />
Addressing a poem to <i><b>me</b></i> in a letter?<br />
<br />
Thank you, Mark Gatiss, but let me be frank:<br />
Sadly the content was a big load of<br />
Splendidly written but baffling verse;<br />
Speaking directly now, I will be terse.<br />
Fisticuffs, yes, Sherlock scuffles a bit;<br />
Clearly he’s a man who can dish out a hit.<br />
By paragraph four (you can pop back and read it),<br />
<br />
I’d said that his muscle is there should he need it.<br />
Holmes is unlike Bond in that he is mortal;<br />
<br />
It’s difficult not to explode in a chortle<br />
When he lands countless blows on a dude paid to kill.<br />
Simply and plainly: that is way too much skill.<br />
Is there some violence in Conan Doyle’s prose?<br />
<br />
Of course there is, as I think everyone knows.<br />
So when I beseech that you show some restraint<br />
I really don’t mean that the programme be quaint.<br />
<br />
I’m saying that Holmes and his love of a mystery<br />
Look terribly close to being BBC history.<br />
Enough on this point though, I think I might bore you.<br />
It’s time I unveiled the code I wrote for you.<br />
Why not go back and check the first word on each line?<br />
Using the title, tell me what you divine.</blockquote>
<div>
<br />
Did you catch Jones's code?<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Who knows what feat of metrical valor and poetic derring-do will come next? In the meantime, it is refreshing to know that old traditions are being kept alive.<br />
<br />
<i>Image credit: <a href="http://sherlockology.com/" target="_blank">Sherlockology</a></i><br />
--<br />
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>

To Sherlock Critics Discerning and Undiscerning

"volumes of poetry" [ENGR] The influence of Edgar Allen Poe's Dupin on Sherlock Holmes has been much discussed; it is g...

+ Read more »

by Anastasia Klimchynskaya

The 2017 BSI Weekend Ended in Friendship

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"I'll keep my eye on the parties, Mr. Holmes" [LADY]</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYFEEeQuuQt6Cubu7y7hrBYwzik3FcHeeQe37MVVTl0n442oXAwkrOk6H9UBQKyqPnxEqXJclf0KF-5RX5Z4RevtBN-21CBgtiAB5viXYCD0yoT-wEuw2Bi5Ns32yyLcJKwoJIVINZ8n0a/s1600/BSI+2017.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="474" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYFEEeQuuQt6Cubu7y7hrBYwzik3FcHeeQe37MVVTl0n442oXAwkrOk6H9UBQKyqPnxEqXJclf0KF-5RX5Z4RevtBN-21CBgtiAB5viXYCD0yoT-wEuw2Bi5Ns32yyLcJKwoJIVINZ8n0a/s640/BSI+2017.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Another <a href="http://bsiweekend.com/" target="_blank">BSI Weekend</a> has come and gone, and it's safe to say that everyone there made some wonderful memories, both for themselves as well as for the organization at large.<br />
<br />
The Baker Street Irregulars is a literary society dedicated to preserving the memory of Sherlock Holmes, and the BSI Weekend is its annual signature event for Sherlockians worldwide. With the exception of the BSI Dinner, every event hosted by the BSI and the <a href="http://ash-nyc.com/" target="_blank">Adventuresses of Sherlock Holmes</a> is open to the public.Some of the events are higher end, and others are informal and pay-as-you go. but the message is clear: all are welcome.<br />
<br />
It's difficult to fully describe the Weekend for those who haven't attended, but at its core, it encapsulates the very reason that many of us continue to enjoy this hobby: it's about a gathering of like-minded people. Yes, we all enjoy the stories, films, shows, art and whatever other pursuit we associate with Sherlock Holmes, but the pure joy for many Sherlockians is about a shared experience.<br />
<br />
You may have heard Al and Julie Rosenblatt describe this phenomenon in <a href="http://ihose.co/ihose103" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Episode 103</a>:<br />
<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<b><i>"it began with Sherlock Holmes, but it ended in friendship."</i></b></h3>
<br />
Old friendships were revisited, new friendships were forged, and it was all centered around the 60 Sherlock Holmes stories that Christopher Morley very aptly observed were a textbook of friendship.<br />
<br />
And so it continues.<br />
<br />
This year, the Baker Street Irregulars stood on the terrace for 10 late members, and welcomed seven new members to the fold. The incoming class is in the photo above, and they are (L-R):<br />
<ul>
<li>Ross Davies ("The Temple")</li>
<li>Michael Quigley ("A Large Brass Bound Safe")</li>
<li><a href="http://ihose.co/ihose83" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Bonnie MacBird</a> ("Art In the Blood")</li>
<li>Charles Blanksteen ("Cavendish Square")</li>
<li>Tamar Zeffren ("The London Library")</li>
<li><a href="http://ihose.co/ihose57" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Charles Prepolec</a> ("The Man with the Twisted Lip")</li>
<li>Christopher Zordan ("Bunsen Burner").</li>
</ul>
Not pictured: photographer Ben Vizoskie, upon whom the Two Shilling Award was bestowed.<br />
<br />
For our part, we managed to show up a few places and secure a number of interviews for the year ahead for our audio show, which we think you'll enjoy. We also were able to meet some of our listeners, who were very generous with their praise — this means more to us than you can ever know.<br />
<br />
And so we forge ahead for Anno Holmes 164. We hope you'll continue to enjoy Sherlock Holmes in the ways that you do.<br />
<br />
Can we ask you one favor? If you're on Facebook and have photos from the BSI Weekend, would you <a href="https://www.facebook.com/scottmonty/media_set?set=a.10154099768051625&type=3&pnref=story" target="_blank">share them to our album</a>? Just ask Scott for permission to post them.<br />
<br />
<br />
<i>Photo credit: The Baker Street Irregulars</i><br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />

The 2017 BSI Weekend Ended in Friendship

"I'll keep my eye on the parties, Mr. Holmes" [LADY] Another BSI Weekend has come and gone, and it's safe to say tha...

+ Read more »

by Scott Monty

Sherlock Holmes Turns 163 Today

<h4 style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Merriweather; font-size: 18.2px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-align: center;">
"your celebrated friend, Mr. Sherlock Holmes" [NAVA] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="background-color: white; clear: both; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBswa-9nTH9KKE3MCtl7JSrRNobfe8F0eiRuGpfMudg9U34RYe5eV3mTdwOvaNnKcStdtbyoT-Un4mpoO-edJQQXM0aSaAOrwKyl6Gbsvwh3nImjnylW6ouFVFHKhuX_0zb4sEgw5nWYNI/s1600/Sherlock+Holmes+cake.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBswa-9nTH9KKE3MCtl7JSrRNobfe8F0eiRuGpfMudg9U34RYe5eV3mTdwOvaNnKcStdtbyoT-Un4mpoO-edJQQXM0aSaAOrwKyl6Gbsvwh3nImjnylW6ouFVFHKhuX_0zb4sEgw5nWYNI/s640/Sherlock+Holmes+cake.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
January 6th is here and that marks the date on which we traditionally celebrate Sherlock Holmes's birthday.<br />
<br />
We say "traditionally," because there is no definitive statement of his actual date of birth in the Canon, but beginning with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Morley">Christopher Morley</a>, the date of January 6th has become the de facto accepted date for Holmes' birthday. Why? Well, there are a couple of reasons.<br />
<br />
Of all of the quotes in the Canon, William Shakespeare was the most oft-quoted author. There is but one Shakespearean play that Holmes quotes twice: <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743482778?ie=UTF8&tag=thebakerstree-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0743482778">Twelfth Night</a><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/proxy/AVvXsEjsc-CslxTjCdXUIIrP1JjtSbrOuVqbQY4wmPXHv0-mQ3lat6DMqDTNXzZPdvzHRXj-xozSLxUPcn8JI0-LUvaXIZGji9159DhTm6UHyjT4VCjdNIMgx7hzEWiMc_OPMDRgSPlp2TFuq5EU6lVl_Fc1lVuulrAZ1GMRBeizQJqv4VV5P60gdS7kIz4=" /></i>. In <i>The Sign of the Four</i>, Holmes concludes, "All is well that ends well." This is from from Act IV, Scene 4. And in "The Empty House," Holmes states "'Journeys end in lovers meetings,' as the old play says," from Act II, Scene 3.<br />
<br />
The reason the date was chosen is that in Christianity, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6">January 6th</a> is the Feast of the Epiphany, or officially the twelfth day of Christmas. I suppose if we were being truly technical about it, the twelfth night of Christmas would fall on January 5th...<br />
<br />
In addition, William S. Baring-Gould in his <a href="http://amzn.to/14hLF8i"><i>The Annotated Sherlock Holmes</i></a>, posited that because Holmes was a little cranky on the morning of January 7th - the date on which <i>The Valley of Fear</i> began - he had a hangover, induced by birthday celebrations the evening prior.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And why 163? Scholars have fixed the year of Sherlock Holmes's birth to 1854 by virtue of a line in "His Last Bow" when he was described as "a tall gaunt man of sixty."<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "merriweather"; font-size: 21px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<h3>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "merriweather"; font-size: 21px;">Opportunity</span></h3>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">If you happen to be in New York City this weekend, you can participate in some of the BSI Weekend activity, in which Sherlockians from around the world gather to hold various events where they connect and pay homage to the great detective. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><span style="line-height: 22.4px;"><br />
</span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><span style="line-height: 22.4px;">So, by all means, share the news that today is Sherlock Holmes's birthday. </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">But whatever you do, don't try to throw him a surprise party. It's an exercise in futility.</span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" class="b-hbp-video b-uploaded" frameborder="0" height="499" id="BLOGGER-video-c36e80bff7b7d8b2-6338" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" src="https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dw3aHcRN8EX1qTouXI0Foqt30X227p7epwSTwcydXUJcqLfRzLvksQBhlhjssPvkkWzuzZhOPTvzUwmgb01ynvhf_9ixbVSIS33A3fHAJX0ybzpiM7KL_D08IN5NnXnvH59Vsk" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" width="600"></iframe></div>
<a href="rtsp://v6.cache5.googlevideo.com/ChoLENy73wIaEQmy2Lf3v4BuwxMYDSANFEgDDA==/0/0/0/video.3gp" style="color: #006f85; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" type="video/3gpp"></a><br style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Of course, right now, Sherlockians from around the world are gathering to celebrate his birthday in style during the </span><a href="http://www.bsiweekend.com/" style="background-color: white; color: #006f85; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">BSI Weekend</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">. Check the official site for details and feel free to follow the activities of various attendees online via the </span><a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23BSIWeekend&src=typd" style="background-color: white; color: #006f85; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">#BSIWeekend</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> hashtag.</span><br />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;" />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">We hope you'll take a moment and wish Sherlock Holmes a happy birthday in your own way. If you'd like to join in here, please feel free to leave a birthday comment below.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Image credit: <a href="https://kitchenoverlord.com/2014/01/17/geek-cake-friday-14-non-bbc-sherlock-cakes/" target="_blank">Kitchen Overlord</a></span></div>

Sherlock Holmes Turns 163 Today

"your celebrated friend, Mr. Sherlock Holmes" [NAVA] January 6th is here and that marks the date on which we traditionally...

+ Read more »

by Scott Monty

The Six Thatchers Requires a Leap of Faith

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact" [BOSC] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhf-cNNK2TlTZXymDUTzCsVEv0S3QZs_HsGRMyeNDrTcIXA_WNrUNJLPWPLOdgrBijGFtxQbuCbOHvI7yEVhKkAWaqHL2JW6cOGh8Ceqv9da_T_V3jxwKLc3Tacgmom9O3_F3ri9cd1A2xK/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Mycroft+Sherlock+John+landscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhf-cNNK2TlTZXymDUTzCsVEv0S3QZs_HsGRMyeNDrTcIXA_WNrUNJLPWPLOdgrBijGFtxQbuCbOHvI7yEVhKkAWaqHL2JW6cOGh8Ceqv9da_T_V3jxwKLc3Tacgmom9O3_F3ri9cd1A2xK/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Mycroft+Sherlock+John+landscape.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i>
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the third in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>.]<i><br /></i>

<i>Sherlock </i>is like
an onion, and not just because it makes you cry. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
It’s always made up of layers. Moffat and Gatiss are supreme
fanboys, and <i>Sherlock </i>is the story
into which they pour both their love and expertise of the original, meaning
that it’s always packed full of meaning on multiple levels. Each episode has a
superficial story (or several), but beneath the surface is always an
overarching plot, clues and red herrings pointing towards (or away from) said
larger plot, subtext, hidden allusions to the Canon, and Easter Eggs. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
How much you enjoyed “The Six Thatchers” is entirely founded
on how much you believe Moffat and Gatiss know what they’re doing. It requires
an entirely un-Sherlockian thing: a leap of faith. Or perhaps a supremely
Sherlockian thing: the certainty, based on previous episodes, that they know
exactly what they’re doing. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<h3>
<b>SPOILERS AHEAD</b></h3>
That’s because, on the surface, “The Six Thatchers” a bit
lackluster. It skips disjointedly between Sherlock’s name being cleared of
Magnussen’s shooting, a comic interlude, the birth of Mary and John’s baby, and
its Christening in a hectic space of barely half an hour. Cases follow each
other at a similarly hectic pace, and one – an adaptation of "The Six Napoleons" – transforms suddenly into Mary’s backstory, which we finally
learn, and her seeming redemption (which is complicated by an after-credits
scene of Mary telling Sherlock to “go to Hell”). <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In a lot of ways, it’s also nonsensical. It starts with a
seeming flashback to “His Last Vow,” but the footage of it turns out to be
edited, belying the “previously on Sherlock” that the episode begins with. This
sets the stage for what’s to come: a story that should be taken with a grain of
salt, because it feels distinctly <i>off. </i> The layouts of 221B and the Watsons’ flat have
been reversed; the famous skull painting at 221B is distinctly different from
what it usually is and magically glowing. The flashbacks and flash-forwards are
seemingly random, as the story jumps from Sherlock’s point-of-view to John’s
unexpected reminiscences about a potential dalliance with a lady on the bus
(who, it seems, will turn out to be Culverton Smith’s daughter). [<b><i>Editor</i></b>: This is purely conjecture at this point, as we have not screened episodes 2 or 3.] Sherlock is obsessed with finding the Black Pearl of the Borgias, wanting to see
connections where none exist. It’s almost like reality and narrative structure
are falling apart.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the more you peel away the layers, the more you discover.
And what you discover can either make the story fall apart further and seem
nonsensical, or it can convince you that it’s indeed a layered tale, full of
hidden meanings, clues, and the seeds of a payoff that won’t become evident
until the end of the season. If you believe (or know) that Moffat and Gatiss
are knowledgeable fanboys, you’ll enjoy “The Six Thatchers,” with all the
possibilities it provides for taking a crack at being Sherlock Holmes and
trying to deduce the truth. If you don’t, then you won’t. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But that’s always been the best thing about <i>Sherlock</i>: it’s a show that refuses to be
watched passively. Like the Canon, it’s a fiction where the ostensible story is
just the tip of a very large iceberg.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The cinematography itself is also markedly different from
previous episodes: watery ripples overtake images on the screen, sound and
sight falls away at inopportune moments (such as when Sherlock hyper-focuses on
the Thatcher shrine), images double nonsensically and mirrors abound. It’s
almost as if the fabric of reality has been affected, and, more than that, compromised.
<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Of course, one could chalk all that up to a writing flub on
Gatiss’ part, but it’s just as plausible that it was the intentional product of
writers, directors, and cinematographers working together to give the episode a
distinctively different feel. Which of these two options it is will likely
become evident in a week (two at most), so with the possibility that I will
stand entirely corrected, I’d like to suggest that this was an excellent
episode because it skillfully represents the deliberate breakdown of reality
and narrative structure. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At a particular moment of the episode, a shattered bust of
Margaret Thatcher overlays Sherlock’s face, giving the sense that it is <i>Sherlock </i>that is being broken and
shattered, not the busts of a former prime minister. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That moment may very well be the key to the episode. Nothing
is what it seems – in particular if it’s told from Sherlock’s point of view,
which is hardly trustworthy considering the number of times his senses and
sanity have been compromised lately. It’s hard to tell what is happening in
Sherlock’s mind and what isn’t: water imagery abounds, appearing at the most
unexpected of places to create almost a sense of drowning, and often
accompanying Sherlock’s voiceovers (which are another new, unexpected addition
to the show – suggesting, perhaps, that we’ve moved from John’s point of view
to Sherlock’s). The episode happens right after his drug overdose on the plane
(where we saw even Sherlock’s dreamed-up reality fracture every time Moriarty
appeared); it’s full of dream-like sequences (one featuring Sherlock’s dog,
Redbeard, which we first saw in his Mind Palace last season), he gets drugged
by Mary halfway through, and admits at the end that he’s been having recurring
dreams. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This wouldn’t be the first or last time that <i>Sherlock </i>has misled the viewer in terms
of what’s real (the fake explanation sequences of “The Empty Hearse” come to
mind), and it’s entirely plausible that the disjointed, nonlinear structure of
this episode isn’t the failed product of a seasoned television writer and actor, but
rather an intentional reflection of either Sherlock’s state of mind, a
misleading narrative, or both. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That’s the best part about <i>Sherlock</i>: in it, details contain multitudes, obvious facts are
deceptive, and trifles are the most important things. Of course, I could be
wrong about this complex castle of theories I’ve constructed, but the best part
is that I’ll know how well I took a leaf from Sherlock’s book and spun my
theories soon enough. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I can’t wait until next week, if only just to be proven
right. And that’s one hell of a cliffhanger. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
--<br />
<br /></div>
</div>

The Six Thatchers Requires a Leap of Faith

"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact" [BOSC] [ Editor's Note: this is the third in a series of revie...

+ Read more »

by Anastasia Klimchynskaya

The Well-Read Sherlockian's 12th Night Giveaway

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
<b>"it was really not more than twelve." [WIST] </b></h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR2n3AQQzteXVkBlqMlCZqxqtL3e2PhXCjp77g2DuQ7dgXUgKmZCN7XSEZ5CmwbqrUSuZZiiE6r3DtwRJf1IqE-6E5sR91PGwSdLHVBOCr68fWGYHqqb2gHkdLzGN2FSOLhUiTMIEckKZv/s1600/IHOSE_Caption+59+CARD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Sidney Paget - The Cardboard Box interview" border="0" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR2n3AQQzteXVkBlqMlCZqxqtL3e2PhXCjp77g2DuQ7dgXUgKmZCN7XSEZ5CmwbqrUSuZZiiE6r3DtwRJf1IqE-6E5sR91PGwSdLHVBOCr68fWGYHqqb2gHkdLzGN2FSOLhUiTMIEckKZv/s640/IHOSE_Caption+59+CARD.jpg" title="Cardboard Box - interview with Miss Cushing" width="640" /></a></div>
<b><br />
</b> There are a few constants in the Sherlockian world at the end of the year: Blue Carbuncle Day, hoping to find new Sherlockian items under the tree, and Leah Guinn's 12th Night Giveaway on her blog, <a href="https://wellreadsherlockian.com/" target="_blank">The Well-Read Sherlockian</a>.<br />
<br />
For the past five years, Leah has posted daily Canonical questions to her readers and rewarded correct answers with prizes guaranteed to make Sherlockians smile. Leah was nice enough to let us peek behind the curtain at her process of creating the annual contest that runs from December 24 - January 6.<br />
<b><br />
</b> <br />
<h3>
<b>I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere: This is the fifth annual 12th Night Giveaway. What prompted you to start a twelve day contest? </b></h3>
<b>Leah Guinn:</b> I had seen various internet and blog giveaways, and I like giving presents, so I mentioned on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/The-Well-Read-Sherlockian-294187613961282/" target="_blank">the blog’s Facebook page</a> something about wishing I could do a giveaway for 12th Night, but that I was running out of time and didn’t have a ton of money. Carrie (and I can’t remember her last name, but she was one of the Stormy Petrels blogging team at the time) said that the prizes didn’t have to be expensive, and I realized that she was right. Of course, I like Christmas Eve, so I ended up adding a few days.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: On average, how many correct responses do you receive for a standard question and what is the biggest response you've had to a question?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>The Giveaway has been steadily growing, but I’d say that the average number of responses is about 7. So people really do have a good chance at winning on any given day. The largest number of responses was about 25, for last year’s grand prize—a bound copy of The Strand Magazine.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: What is your favorite item to give away and why?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>I really like giving away <a href="http://www.bakerstreetjournal.com/itemsforsale/subscriptions.html"><i>Baker Street Journal</i> subscriptions</a>. They’re hugely popular, and people try for them who don’t care about any of the other prizes. Plus, I like the idea that they can help people feel connected to the larger Sherlockian world, and be inspired to write their own articles.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: This year, your theme is literary allusions. What made you choose that theme?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>Themes make it easier to figure out questions, and to hopefully insure that I don’t repeat them very much. I just started skimming over the Canon for ideas, and I figured that “literary allusions” would give me a lot of question options, and that the answers would just challenging and interesting enough. I don’t want to insult people by asking them to answer easy questions, but I don’t want to make things so difficult that people give up, or that I risk not being able to answer them, either.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: How has the 12th Night Giveaway changed over the years?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>Well, I had to do some tweaking with the rules early on. I used to have the prizes grow bigger as the game went on, and if people could only win once, no one was going to try for the smaller items. Since those were often handcrafted by other Sherlockians, I didn’t want them to be passed by, so I changed things so that people could win twice, and then everyone could go for the grand prize. Now, too, the prizes vary in size and value throughout the Giveaway, although the Grand Prize is still pretty cool. I hope.  And the value of the prizes has been rising. Once I learned that I could find very nice Sherlockian collectibles at decent prices if I looked hard enough, and didn’t insist on mint condition, I found so much great stuff.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: How do you go about creating your questions for the contest and how far in advance do you start working on it?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>I think about it on and off all year, but I really start working on it after Thanksgiving. It takes time to make sure I have all of the prizes, to organize them, to come up with the questions, match the prize to the question and the question to the date. I have to write it all down, so I won’t forget.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: Each day’s question is prefaced by a short autobiographical story. Do you think of those first and then tie a question to it, or vice versa?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>It’s sad, but I tend to come up with those little posts on the fly. I was thinking today that I should actually write something educational for them, but to do that, I’d have to write them months in advance. In the rush of the holidays, I don’t have what it takes to do an in-depth article on Holmes every day.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIZhgzLGnVHPSEOm_HKYQDk6Eqej0-GWfecx0Wx9VbecrgSPQmOXqRV7P_6HA0riFobOA3yKJX2ucIwlsnU2-JGLrQV4zZIAFxI1ZoH1Wes3GDLQrH5JglpPPsZbST4hM3xnYPemevvisX/s1600/Leah+Guinn.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIZhgzLGnVHPSEOm_HKYQDk6Eqej0-GWfecx0Wx9VbecrgSPQmOXqRV7P_6HA0riFobOA3yKJX2ucIwlsnU2-JGLrQV4zZIAFxI1ZoH1Wes3GDLQrH5JglpPPsZbST4hM3xnYPemevvisX/s320/Leah+Guinn.jpg" width="301" /></a></div>
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: How do you choose each year’s prizes?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>I look for them allllll year round. Everywhere we travel, every antique store, old book store, flea market, conference….I am always looking. Sometimes I spend a few hours trawling around eBay or ABE books. It is seriously the best part of the entire thing. I get really excited when I find something truly nice, and in the end, I tend to find I’ve overbought. I don’t have any 2015 holdovers, but last year, some 2014 prizes finally came out of the closet. I do try to keep track of what generates enthusiasm and what does not. I’ve learned, for example, that stuffed animals are not a thing for many people. Old BSJs and vintage copies of the novels and short story collections are always loved.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: What is your favorite Canonical story?</b></h3>
<b>LG: "</b>The Illustrious Client."  I really like <i>A Study in Scarlet</i>, because it’s an origin story, but when I read ILLU, I was blown away by Conan Doyle’s ability to portray actual evil and perverted sensuality in such subtle ways. I have known people as sociopathic as the Baron. And we’ve all known people as foolish as Miss de Merville, if we haven’t been her ourselves. I feel that Conan Doyle is at the height of his powers in that story.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>IHOSE: Your blog is also a treasure trove of Sherlockian book reviews from over the years. What makes a good book?</b></h3>
<b>LG: </b>The characters. Your protagonist and antagonist in particular need to be living creatures. The reader has to care about them, otherwise your beautiful plotting won’t do you any good. For a good pastiche, you need to be able to show us who Holmes and Watson are, for example, and not just what they do. Also, pacing. Your story can’t move too quickly, or too slowly, and you need to keep the reader wondering what happens next. I once read a pastiche that needed so much improvement when it came to canonicity, etc., but the author was very, very good at pacing. It wasn’t a very good story, but it kept me turning pages.<br />
<br />
<br />
Leah Guinn has written a monograph on writing pastiche,<a href="http://johnhwatsonsociety.com/product/sherlock-holmes-challenge-blank-page"> "Sherlock Holmes and the Adventure of the Blank Page"</a> that is available through the John H. Watson Society. She has also co-authored <a href="http://www.wessexpress.com/html/curiouscollection.html"><i>A Curious Collection of Dates: Through the Year with Sherlock Holmes</i></a> with Jaime N. Mahoney, published by Wessex Press. She is also a member of <a href="https://www.facebook.com/The-Illustrious-Clients-of-Indianapolis-184841455301/">the Illustrious Clients of Indianapolis</a>, <a href="http://johnhwatsonsociety.com/">the John H Watson Society</a>, and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/StudiousScarletsSocietyPage/">The Studious Scarlets</a>. You can find her on Twitter as <a href="http://twitter.com/leahguinn" target="_blank">@LeahGuinn</a>.<br />
<br />
And you can listen to <a href="http://ihose.co/ihose95" target="_blank">Episode 95</a>, in which we interviewed Leah and Jaime about their book:<br />
<br />
<div>
<iframe frameborder="no" height="166" scrolling="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/261630101&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false" width="100%"></iframe><br />
<br />
--<br />
<br /></div>

The Well-Read Sherlockian's 12th Night Giveaway

"it was really not more than twelve." [WIST] There are a few constants in the Sherlockian world at the end of the year: B...

+ Read more »

by Rob Nunn

The Six Thatchers — A Critic's Review

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
''He begged me to return" [VALL]  </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF1icAq-d7XHBM3irDZlKWhx1HgJTdIh93zPHZTFhhizDCwQ45GZR52F6UM-Hxc8hi7m9x2vvMmuANKvO4ZMs_nx4JacIYcD1IBlGDXH0Ia-EhNklMGBaQSeHoTlM_ltMnSh2St3Kest98/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+group.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="478" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF1icAq-d7XHBM3irDZlKWhx1HgJTdIh93zPHZTFhhizDCwQ45GZR52F6UM-Hxc8hi7m9x2vvMmuANKvO4ZMs_nx4JacIYcD1IBlGDXH0Ia-EhNklMGBaQSeHoTlM_ltMnSh2St3Kest98/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+group.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the second in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>.]</div>
<br />
<h3>
<b>SPOILERS BELOW</b></h3>
Finally, after years of waiting, last night we saw the return of <i>Sherlock</i>. I know I've come to be seen as being down on the show, but that perception isn't correct. I am simply honest about it. Once again, for the record, the first two Series were a revelation, and its popularity and reputation were entirely deserved. Just tremendous.<br />
<br />
But then came Series 3.<br />
<br />
From that point on the show was a train wreck, full of self-conscious awareness of its success and cleverness, corrosive pandering to a frenzied fringe in its fan base, and a departure from modern-day adaptations of the Canon to just riffing on itself.<br />
<br />
Other critiques — particularly on Facebook —  have pointed out that the show isn't really an adaptation of the Canon, but is instead its own thing. But this is in direct contradiction of Moffat's and Gatiss's own stated intention for the show. Once its own mythos overwhelmed this intent in Series 3, the show lost its way. Badly.<br />
<br />
With Cumberbatch's and Freeman's exploding popularity — perfectly justified — and their clearly and repeatedly stated disenchantment with filming the show, it's been a long three years since we've seen <i>Sherlock</i> on TV (not including "The Abominable Bride"). As "The Six Thatchers" drew near, my attitude was one of "hope for the best, fear the worst."<br />
<br />
Having said all that, "The Six Thatchers" was a serious improvement on the series since its heyday. The creators obviously heard the criticism. We know they listen to fans (too much so in the past), but we know Moffat and Gatiss are real Sherlockians, and it appears they took some of the criticism to heart.<br />
<br />
<h3>
"The old gentleman corrected the mistake" [REIG]</h3>
Right out of the gate, they set about fixing many of the mistakes of Series 3: the cold-blooded murder of Charles Augustus Magnusson was an abomination, and so utterly wrong that no amount of tortured fan-rationalization could justify it. Within the first five minutes, they simply made it go away, "like it never happened." I'm sure they wish it really did never happen.<br />
<br />
They also did away with the disingenuous gay-baiting which fed a lunatic-fringe fan-base that I believe nearly drove the stars (especially Freeman) away from the show. This is no surprise as Gatiss explicitly stated in recent interviews that <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/parsec/sherlock-not-gay-steven-moffat-mark-gatiss/" target="_blank">"Johnlock" is never going to happen</a> and furthermore was never intended to happen — clearly distancing themselves from this fan fetish that undoubtedly helped make this the last season of the show.<br />
<br />
Finally <i>Sherlock</i> got back to brilliantly updating Canonical mysteries, and gave Sherlock Holmes real detecting to do. We see him actually having cases and clients again, something that shouldn't be a novelty.<br />
<br />
<h3>
"a pretty mess" [REIG]</h3>
This is not to say there weren't problems. They still had another mess from Series 3 to clean up: the Mary Morstan as international ninja assassin. Of course, Mary was always marked to eventually die (after all, in the Canon she did). Moffat and Gatiss certainly could have kept her around until the end of Series 4, but instead thankfully exercised their option to get the show back to basics.<br />
<br />
The first 45 minutes of "The Six Thatchers" is brilliant —  as good as anything in the first two seasons. But once it was compelled to deal with the Mary Morstan backstory, with the tortured international intrigue, etc., it bogged down. And then, once back in London, the show found its way again. Even in the novels, whenever the backstory has comes in, pacing and interest go down.<br />
<br />
And now, in a way I haven't felt for years, I am excited to see the next episode, and regret that this will undoubtedly be the last set of shows in the series. Having found its way again, will this series have the impact and influence it originally did?<br />
<br />
Alas, most of the air has gone out of that balloon, but to know that this series looks to end as well as it began (unlike the Granada series, for instance), my gratitude to Moffat and Gatiss is immense, and Sherlockians everywhere owe them a debt for what they brought to our hobby.<br />
<br />
Now, I only hope I get home from <a href="http://bsiweekend.com/" target="_blank">New York next weekend</a> in time to see the next episode!<br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />

The Six Thatchers — A Critic's Review

''He begged me to return" [VALL] [ Editor's Note: this is the second in a series of reviews we'll be sharing o...

+ Read more »

by Steve Doyle

Sherlock Returns to Form with The Six Thatchers — Review

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"I found myself in dream-land, with the sweet face of Mary Morstan looking down upon me." [SIGN] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPVCTEu6zlzB1APyueX4cyYwq3wFfwiwAV6IwEv_KB8FBCeG58-JAc3sQdHzLkGquergDhqfoYMzaWwi6-amuWDf60n6Wty3UiRrFQbMNEJpnxJXZVptHcwSP-oHKyFDCLhZzTDq1ZWm_h/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Sherlock+landscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPVCTEu6zlzB1APyueX4cyYwq3wFfwiwAV6IwEv_KB8FBCeG58-JAc3sQdHzLkGquergDhqfoYMzaWwi6-amuWDf60n6Wty3UiRrFQbMNEJpnxJXZVptHcwSP-oHKyFDCLhZzTDq1ZWm_h/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Sherlock+landscape.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
After 2014's filler episode of <i>Sherlock</i>, "The Abominable Bride" I was afraid that the Moffat and Gatiss may have painted themselves into a bit of a corner. As entertaining as it was to see Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman transported into a more traditional Victorian setting, the one-off episode didn't really advance the plot of the show at all. Besides, I've never been the kind of Holmes fan who really gets much of a charge out of the Victorian nostalgia aspect of Sherlockiana.<br />
<br />
I know many Sherlockians dwell on that whole period, and I get it, it can be a lot of fun. But I've always thought the great strength of the BBC's <i>Sherlock </i>was their ability to make Holmes and Watson so contemporary, while still always retaining so much of the flavor of Doyle's original stories. For me, then, "The Six Thatchers" was a stunning return to form.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>Spoiler Alert</b></h3>
I may as well take this chance to warn any readers who may be approaching this review without having seen the episode, that <b>MAJOR SPOILERS</b> lie ahead! If you read from this point on, I am assuming that you have seen "The Six Thatchers." So let's move along, shall we?<br />
<br />
<br />
For much of the first act of the episode, I wasn't certain that this episode was going to work: there was a lot of comedy in that first 20 minutes. I was beginning to think, "this is all very enjoyable, seeing Cumberbatch displaying his comedic side, but when does the story really begin?" As the story began to get more serious, however, and the plot began to reference "The Six Napoleons" (as we all thought it would), I really began to be drawn into the story. Looking back on the episode now, I feel as if the comedy towards the beginning really heightened the drama to follow.<br />
<br />
One thing I'd like to mention right off the bat is how much I enjoyed Amanda Abbington's work in "The Six Thatchers." Ever since they introduced her as Mary, I've thought the chemistry she shared with Martin Freeman's Watson has been spectacular, and the equal rapport with Cumberbatch's Sherlock was just as enjoyable.<br />
<br />
Most who have loved <i>Sherlock</i> from the beginning knew that the Holmes/Watson duo was one of the best in film and TV history; Mary changed the relationship into an intriguing equilateral triangle. Indeed, for a little while during this episode, I found myself wondering if the attention paid to Mary's role in the show might be working at cross purposes to the dynamic of Freeeman and Cumberbatch's perfect balance as Holmes and Watson. As the show progressed, though, all of those fears were put to rest as, in the end, Mary's presence (followed by her absence) made that Holmes/Watson relationship even more powerful for me.<br />
<br />
Anyway, back to the story... I continued to be fascinated by how skillfully the writers managed to combine elements of "The Six Napoleons" with some of the plot of <i>The Sign of Four</i>, a story that is, of course, inextricably linked with Mary as a canonical character. The four assassins who went by the acronym of A.G.R.A. would make any Holmes fan immediately think of Major Sholto and his associates.<br />
<br />
Another thing I've always admired about the writing on <i>Sherlock </i>is how they manage to refer to the Canon (as well as extra-canonical sources), without merely repeating them as reworked plots in a modern setting: in other words, "A Study in Pink" is not <i>A Study in Scarlet</i> in the 21st century, "The Hounds of Baskerville" is not an update of <i>The Hound of the Baskervilles</i>, and so on. (Did some fans catch the brief reference to Nicholas Meyer's pastiche, <i>The Canary Trainer</i>, in this episode? It made me smile.) [<b><i>Editor's note:</i></b> it could just as easily have been a reference to Wilson, the notorious canary trainer, mentioned in "The Adventure of Black Peter," where Meyer got his inspiration.]<br />
<br />
As Mary's story line grew, I found myself wondering if she would come out of it alive, but I never <i>really </i>thought they would kill her off! Yes, now we come to the biggest spoiler of all: the death of Mary Watson, taking a bullet for Sherlock. As the tears ran down my cheeks, I found myself thinking, "You fool, of course she had to die! We've always assumed that Watson ended up as a widower in the books!" Now, I don't know enough about ballistics and such to know whether it's even possible in real life to jump in front of a bullet, but we all know it's a trope that has shown up throughout film history. For a minute, I thought back to Sherlock being shot by Mary in "His Last Vow," and I thought, will they actually save her? At this point, I'm thinking she's really gone, and I hope there is no "resurrection," as there was for Sherlock. And so three have become two again.<br />
<br />
Before I'd even had the chance to recover from my shock at Mary's death, I had to deal with my sadness at the wedge that has now come between John and Sherlock, as a result of that death, and Mary's posthumous request that Sherlock "save John Watson." Which made me shed yet another tear or two...as well as wondering, what's in store for John Watson? So, as I look forward to the next two episodes of <i>Sherlock </i>Series 4, I find myself with many questions:<br />
<ul>
<li>Will John and Sherlock reconcile? (Of course they will. (<b><i>Ed.:</i></b> The question is <i>how</i>.))</li>
<li>What of the mysterious woman on the bus? Did she and John have a full-blown affair? Will she be back in another episode? (<b><i>Ed.: </i></b>Count on it.)</li>
<li>Is Moriarty indeed involved in the story arc of Series 4?</li>
<li>Is there a life for <i>Sherlock</i> beyond Series 4? (I guess that depends on what happens in the next two episodes.)</li>
<li>Is Mycroft really the kind of guy who would keep reminders stuck to his refrigerator?</li>
<li>Are we going to be introduced to the (mythical) Sherrinford Holmes?</li>
</ul>
So, wrapping up this review, I feel that, overall, "The Six Thatchers" was one of the best episodes of the entire series. (I don't know if anything can ever beat "A Study in Pink," which I re-watched just last night.) It certainly made me very anxious to see what else is in store for the rest of the season! After my mixed feelings on "The Abominable Bride," I felt as if I were home again: the story was gripping, the acting was top notch, the cinematography was beautiful (those sharks!), and the whole thing was powerful, emotionally and intellectually. I can't wait to see what twists and turns lie ahead.<br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />