I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere

Dear Mr. Gatiss

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"attracted admirers who occasionally hung about" [BERY] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYy1P1D71AllAB6WEkdzRgCg6t6eLoIYsKoKLYHggsnhlAQIsIkmFB-K7NRjip15tboWIvgRPItvMPog9SYDUUZ_JgSlWN5uxardEEfDbGmawQOjmlpAqeRuQZv7keYfHCGQzJ0zx_cNF_/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+chess.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYy1P1D71AllAB6WEkdzRgCg6t6eLoIYsKoKLYHggsnhlAQIsIkmFB-K7NRjip15tboWIvgRPItvMPog9SYDUUZ_JgSlWN5uxardEEfDbGmawQOjmlpAqeRuQZv7keYfHCGQzJ0zx_cNF_/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+chess.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the 12th is a <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/search/label/Series%204#.WIHVH_krLb0" target="_blank">series of reviews</a> of Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>. Minor spoilers ahead.]<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz-tv/hot-tv/578507/Sherlock-BBC-complicated-Benedict-Cumberbactch-show-creator-Mark-Gatiss" target="_blank">a recent interview</a>, Mark Gatiss — co-creator of and actor in BBC One's <i>Sherlock</i> — took a dig worthy Mycroft Holmes (well, <i>his </i>version of Mycroft Holmes, at least) at the show's critics:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"People ask if it's good to challenge the audience. Of course it f***ing is...Go and read a children's book with hard pages if you don't want to be challenged. We’re making the show we want to make. We don't make it a certain way because fans are pressuring us."</blockquote>
I hear it being said with a sneer. I hope it's out of context.<br />
<br />
I know better.<br />
<br />
And for that reason, I have a letter for Mark Gatiss.<br />
<br />
<br />
Dear Mr. Gatiss,<br />
<br />
I admire your work.<br />
<br />
Many of us here do.<br />
<br />
All of us, anyway, have decisively made room for Sherlock Holmes and his adventures in our brain attics. So the implication <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/search/label/Series%204#.WH90mhsrJPY" target="_blank">our near-universal condemnation of Series 4</a> is somehow due to a lack of understanding and appreciation for "challenging" art is, at the very least, tedious.<br />
<br />
You know there would be no <i>Sherlock</i> without its fans. You know there'd be no <i>Sherlock</i> without Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. And you know there'd be no <i>Sherlock</i> without ACD's formula:<br />
<ol>
<li>The tangle of impossible evidence.</li>
<li>The untangling.</li>
<li>The reveal.</li>
</ol>
<br />
The wonderful, sure arc you just derided. We bump along with Watson and Lestrade down the track — through the tunnel, 'round the bend, past the pirates — and we like it that way. We hang our deerstalker on the logic and sense of it all and the assurance that the cleverest of us will solve the mystery.<br />
<br />
Series 4 unfortunately did away with the gamut.<br />
<br />
Episode 1 served to write Mary out.<br />
<br />
Episode 2 felt a bit more familiar. (The delicious baddie. The bugged cane.)<br />
<br />
But Episode 3 completely got away from you. How did the chick from <i>The Ring</i> escape Alcatraz to pose as a flirt on a bus then as a tranquilizer-wielding shrink? Right right right. She's an evil genius I suppose I'm incapable of fathoming. Why the drone? How did John end up shackled in a well? And Redbeard was a kid? C'mon. Enough.<br />
<br />
If you and Mr. Moffat do write a fifth series, consider us for a Christmas treat: consider we deal with enough challenges outside the fandom that when we tune into you, <a href="http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/sherlocks-huge-ratings-confirm-its-status-as-one-of-uks-mostloved-shows-ahead-of-finale-a3440896.html" target="_blank">as we have in huge numbers</a>, we are the case in the chair. Craving reason in the unreasonable and, for me, cheekbones I could cut myself on.<br />
<br />
Looking forward,<br />
<br />
Jessica Levine<br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />

Dear Mr. Gatiss

"attracted admirers who occasionally hung about" [BERY] [ Editor's Note: this is the 12th is a series of reviews of Se...

+ Read more »

by Jessica Levine

The Dilemma of Interpretation, Pastiches, and Sherlock

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
<b>"thousands of other similar cases " [REDH] </b></h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdNOEzIvE3bvLck7izzGB9NYUXE-ne9PbX3l0cm99XAIdQumaNC2gWIeR6WChvNSVPSG_tY0iFWLJaMMr4Hs0ZjWSwRvUX5l9BISEpmKl66q5GqhpsVdEXSirsXuMMvZzYNpLUuFtMbRKg/s1600/FullSizeRender.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="464" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgdNOEzIvE3bvLck7izzGB9NYUXE-ne9PbX3l0cm99XAIdQumaNC2gWIeR6WChvNSVPSG_tY0iFWLJaMMr4Hs0ZjWSwRvUX5l9BISEpmKl66q5GqhpsVdEXSirsXuMMvZzYNpLUuFtMbRKg/s640/FullSizeRender.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
No one inhabiting the Sherlockian realm is unaware of the volcanic ire unleashed since the broadcast of <i>Sherlock</i> Series 4 “The Final Problem,” presumably the series' final episode.<br />
<br />
My goal is to remind my friends that the flowing lava will cool in time. In fact, many pastiches of the past were criticized or snubbed in their day, and now are generally regarded with intense affection.<br />
<br />
I've commented in other forums about the nature of pastiches and how we’ve come to regard them. The following is an updated version of an essay I offered in the early 2000s in the <a href="http://www.sherlockian.net/hounds/" target="_blank">Hounds-L listserv</a> -— I was known as “The Lurking Man” — with insertions pertinent to the <i>Sherlock</i> brouhaha, drawn from my comments in a recent Facebook thread.<br />
<br />
Let's admit at the onset that part of my soul is utterly mystified by the repeated references one comes across to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle having "conceived" the Canon. And yet another part of me understands the widespread delusion that, somehow, Dr. John H. Watson relinquished all control of his notes to Doyle and that the Literary Agent was in fact the Author.<br />
<br />
If we aren't reading chronicles related by Watson-as-Biographer, it goes a long way toward explaining why there are so many different Holmeses within the Canon itself. In fact, the premise helps us to understand why so many of the later "stories" actually appear to be pastiches flowing from the presumably mighty pen of Doyle-as-Author himself.<br />
<br />
Take, for example, the different Holmeses of <i>A Study in Scarlet </i>and<i> The Sign of Four</i>. In the first, Holmes is youthful, glib, friendly, chimerical, outgoing, arrogant, energetic, full of brightness and even fun. In the second, he is taking cocaine thrice a day, and when he is not occupied with the case he is moody, brooding and pessimistic. (I reiterated this point recently <span style="text-align: justify;">in an essay about</span> “The Speckled Band,” published in Christopher Redmond’s remarkable compilation <i><a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2016/10/about-sixty-eliminates-improbable.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">About Sixty</a></i>.)<br />
<br />
We see glimpses of these two Holmeses throughout other stories, and we reconcile them by claiming that, at times, Holmes must have been manic depressive or simply dual-natured. But perhaps Doyle-as-Author was dual-natured himself and this tendency emerged in his writings, based on his imagination-of-the-moment.<br />
<br />
A third Holmes often appears, and is neither of these other Holmeses — not the chemist / code-breaker / paralegal / actor / amateur anthropologist. This Holmes is a creative force who searches for things outside of the realm of crime — a varied mind that encompasses the multiple lives of a scholar, art lover, book collector, historian, musician, traveler and author.<br />
<br />
This is a consistent, almost pointed characterization that emerges in many of these separate chronicles/stories. Each new aspect reflects on the same notion that here is a brilliant, wide-ranging mind that embodies the expansiveness of the Victorian era and the increasing opportunities becoming available to the rising middle class of English society.<br />
<br />
In addition to fattening a cheque-book, either:<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Watson was well aware of what an astonishing human being Holmes was and sought to capture his character for the benefit and inspiration of others, while acknowledging his weaknesses and self-contradictions; or</li>
<li>Doyle was well aware of what a truly astonishing human being was capable of being, and sought to describe such a character for the benefit and inspiration of others, while recognizing that any human being would have to have drawbacks and inconsistencies.</li>
</ol>
<br />
<br />
In the characterization of these various Holmeses we find a curiously consistent thread — the flash of a scintillating genius, through a glimmer here and a sparkle there, all adding up to a collective blaze that illuminates the body of work we call the Canon, even if individual entries are pale and dull compared to the whole.<br />
<br />
When we read a <a href="http://www.sherlockian.net/pastiches/index.html" target="_blank">pastiche</a>, if we fail to note that spark, that glimmer, that slight jewel-shine that catches our eye and reminds us of that overall, highly personalized genius, then something is missing. Something is wrong. It doesn't ring true. The writer has failed to convince us that he is either Doyle-as-Author or Watson-as-Biographer. There's no subjective or objective reality on which we can suspend our disbelief.<br />
<br />
<h3>
"I fancy that this ally breaks fresh ground" [SIGN]</h3>
However, if the pastiche-wright shows us something new, something jewel-like, it awakens our own inner genius. We recognize Holmes (or some version of him) as the man we met before, and the Master walks among these pages once again. That's a rare event, and such a perfect fiction is hard to forge, but it's no less an accomplishment than what Doyle-as-Author might have set out to do when attempting himself to re-invent Holmes for the later stories. In fact, in some cases, the accomplishment probably is greater.<br />
<br />
For the purist, <i>The Seven Percent Solution</i> is a fabrication to be dismissed. But there's no doubt that <a href="http://ihose.co/ihose85" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Nicholas Meyer</a> re-awakened some very real conception of Holmes for many, many thousands of people who had forgotten (or never known) the delight of reading about this man of genius living in a time when genius could thrive. <i>This</i> Holmes looked like what <i>a</i> Holmes should look like. That's why Meyer's fiction ranks highly — very highly — when compared with, say, "The Veiled Lodger" or "The Mazarin Stone," both found among the Sacred Writings but neither conveying a well-realized sense of what a Holmes truly should resemble.<br />
<br />
Naturally, I hold a higher esteem for those works that I prize as having come from the pen of Watson-as-Biographer. I have enormous respect for all those that might even have come simply from the pen of Doyle-as-Author. However, if there exist new tales that provide a joy of sudden discovery, and convince me — however briefly — that another biographer has been located at last, so be it. A truly successful "Sherlock Holmes story" conveys to my judgment an appreciation of insightful genius, regardless of its source.<br />
<br />
Genius can and does thrive all around us, and isn't necessarily found only in the same old place, between the covers of only one set of 60 stories about this or that version of Holmes.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
"on which I would willingly dwell" [FINA]</h3>
This is why I came to enjoy rather deeply the Holmes I saw in several episodes of <i>Sherlock</i>, despite the show's obvious modernizations and manipulations of the Canon. When I noted the scripts' quirks and liberties, I reminded myself that I — with many other Sherlockians — had come to honor pastiches such as <i>The Seven Percent Solution </i>and<i> Without a Clue</i>, and view Nigel Bruce's childishness and Basil Rathbone's high-flying coifs with fond respect, even relish. Like many others, I gave <i>Sherlock</i> the same break.<br />
<br />
After all, many of us cackle to see Holmes and Watson dumped into Loch Ness by a monster submarine, because Billy Wilder made it happen in <i>The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes</i>. Some of us even have come to see the made-for-television film <i>Case of Evil </i>as innovative and daring, despite its uncomfortable obsessions about sex and drugs. (Gasp!)<br />
<br />
By canonical standards, all these interpretations and crazy dramatizations are heretical and loony, but time has allowed us to see these creations as <i>appreciations</i> rather than assaults. That means we can admire — even adore — what was offered, and what continues to be offered.<br />
<br />
Remember, my friends: We came to terms with Jeremy Brett's unexpected, eccentric tics and outbursts, which were so deeply criticized when he first appeared on the scene. Brett, now regarded widely as the most canonical of all Sherlockian actors, initially was scorned by many fans who'd been married to the notion that Holmes was Rathbone.<br />
<br />
That perception changed with time — and with the realization that it was all just an interpretation, and that the Canon still stood firmly in place, just as it does today.<br />
<br />
<i>Sherlock</i> hasn't had the gift of time to separate us from our expectations and umbrage, but I suggest we all revisit these amazing programs in, say, 2037. Then we can pass the bottle and discuss amiably just how much fun all these shows have been, despite their ups and downs, heresies, looniness and flaws. We even may discover new ways to appreciate them — ways that only time can develop and reveal.<br />
<br />
Perhaps then we also may look around the room and see how many of us have come to Holmes through <i>Sherlock</i>, and recognize what an astonishing service has been achieved on behalf of the Sherlockian world.<br />
<br />
There are many true chronicles yet to be written and many dramatic interpretations yet to illuminate the screen. Let them come.<br />
<br />
[<b style="font-style: italic;">Editor's Note: </b><i>This is John C. Sherwood's first contribution to I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere. He is from Marshall, Michigan, and has been a professional Sherlock Holmes impersonator since 1987. He was Gasogene XVI of <a href="http://www.watsonstinbox.org/" target="_blank">Watson's Tin Box</a> of Ellicott City, Md., and a recent recipient of the Beggar's Cup from the Amateur Mendicant Society of Detroit.</i>]<br />
<b><br /></b>
--<br />
<b><br /></b>

The Dilemma of Interpretation, Pastiches, and Sherlock

"thousands of other similar cases " [REDH] No one inhabiting the Sherlockian realm is unaware of the volcanic ire unleashed ...

+ Read more »

by John C. Sherwood

The Final Problem — Balancing Intellect and Emotion

<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
<o:p>"These are very deep waters" [SPEC] </o:p></h4>
<o:p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEVykxx-bF3nln0lMw67EYWXcyoTkzmJU4SDSaBpu0Rhbg5XKTFDbBNk4OfrSExPDDxFH4gJYhWXxLAn_aW1luj1J9LuHJQ1G0Fv0cuoQ9pOcMOj-IHjiZjBwbvBxZqTVwvKhitIl3l9U/s1600/sherlock+s+4+deep+waters.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEVykxx-bF3nln0lMw67EYWXcyoTkzmJU4SDSaBpu0Rhbg5XKTFDbBNk4OfrSExPDDxFH4gJYhWXxLAn_aW1luj1J9LuHJQ1G0Fv0cuoQ9pOcMOj-IHjiZjBwbvBxZqTVwvKhitIl3l9U/s640/sherlock+s+4+deep+waters.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the 11th in our <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/search/label/Series%204#.WH4nefkrLb0" target="_blank">series of reviews</a> of <i>Sherlock</i> Series 4. And if we have to tell you that there are <b>spoilers below</b>, you really need to spend more time with us.]<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dear readers, I may review books from time to time, but I am
not a media critic. The nuances of film, etc., slide right past me, unnoticed,
and I am remarkably unpicky. Basically, I want a good story and characters I
can care about. For the past six years, BBC's <i>Sherlock</i> has delivered that in big
heaping covered plattersful. Lest anyone think that I am completely uncritical
of Moffat and Gatiss’ creation, let me say that the first time I saw <i>Sherlock</i>,
I was unimpressed. I was a new Sherlockian, a zealous guardian of the Canon,
and when I happened onto the middle of “The Blind Banker” on PBS, I thought it
was really boring and possibly even stupid. Was Watson in love with that girl?
Sherlock Holmes doesn’t look like that. Dudes.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>*Click</b><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">*<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Perhaps a year
later, I decided to try the show again, this time starting at the beginning. By
this time, I had read dozens of pastiches. I had begun to look at the Canon in
a historical context, and had become more acquainted with Sir Arthur’s personal
life than he would think proper. I could slide in and out of 1895 at will, and
this time, I was enchanted by the time Benedict Cumberbatch said “Afghanistan
or Iraq?” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">And I stayed that
way. Friends, I was very loyal, very quickly. Did I love every single thing the
writers came up with?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course not. I
still think “The Blind Banker” is a little lame, but it has some wonderful lines.
I feel the same way about “The Hounds of Baskerville,” but as a Hoosier who has
actually <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">been </i>to Liberty, Indiana, I
can forgive the DEVI/HOUN fusion that deprived me of a giant, phosphorescent
hound (Plus, does anyone miss the whole icky “she’s my sister” bit? I thought not).
When Series 3 came along, however, I was bowled over, because this—this is what
I came for.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<h3>
"it is a matter of history" [BRUC]</h3>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">For most of my life,
I have been enthralled, not by fiction, but by <i><b>history</b></i>. So many people, so like, so different, separated from us only by ticking seconds. We “learn” about them,
or at least we think we do. You, and I, and most of the Sherlockians we know
can cite birth and death and publication dates. We can list the important
events in Arthur Conan Doyle’s life; we have one diary, a roman à clef,
letters, and an autobiography. But if I think of my life, and you think of
yours, I think we might agree that the most important moments in both are not
those we can plot on a calendar. Sir Arthur remembered March 15<sup>th</sup> as
the day he met his second wife, Jean Leckie, but at what moment did he finally
give himself permission to love her? When did he know that his father could no
longer be his father? When did he begin to replace his actual son with the “spirit”
he “spoke” with? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For me, there was the
moment my daughter was born, and the moment I became a mother. There are the
things we do, and the things we are, and they are not necessarily one and the
same.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">In the Canon, we read
quite a lot about the things Holmes and Watson do. They meet, they have
adventures, they solve crimes. Watson gets married twice. Holmes does the
occasional (legal!) drug and smokes a lot. There is excellent banter and fog. There
are puzzles and clever deductions, all in Conan Doyle’s pleasantly
stripped-down prose. For a lot of Sherlockians, I think, this is enough. We see
a man we admire (or with whom we identify), using science and logic to serve
the cause of Right. We see a friendship that never ends, mostly unencumbered by
jobs and spouses and family and even “death.” We know who the bad guys are. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">For me, however (and
for a lot of people—I am not unique here), the best parts of the Canon are the ones
Conan Doyle occasionally let slip. “It must tend to some end.” “…there still
remains the cocaine bottle.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“For years
I had gradually weaned….” “It was worth a wound….”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span></span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">Sir </span>Arthur was a romantic, passionate man in an
age of emotional repression. He gave us the things Holmes and Watson <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">did,</i> while the men they <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">were</i> remained largely hidden. I would argue
that, with a few exceptions (Jeremy Brett’s Holmes providing many of them) most
film adaptations pre-2009 have done the same, taking at face value Conan Doyle’s
view of his detective as “a calculating machine.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<h3>
"a new element has been introduced" [SILV]</h3>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moffat and Gatiss have never pretended that their Sherlock
Holmes is a machine, no matter what John shouts at him in frustration. A
sociopath, “high-functioning” or otherwise?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> 
</span>Please. Series 1 and 2 hint at this, somewhat canonically, but Series 3
decides to go deeper. How do you respond if you’re John Watson and your best
friend has just returned from the dead? What do you think, when you’re Sherlock
Holmes and your only friend punches you in the face when you gave up nearly
everything to save him and the family you’ve made for yourself?<br />
<br />
One of the
fascinating things about Cumberbatch’s Holmes is that a lot of people have been
able to identify with what may seem to be problematic aspects of his character.
For me, the portrayal of an introvert who is very sure he doesn’t fit in with “normal”
people, who wants to connect but overinvests and withdraws from friends in
turn, and who demands reassurance of their affection in subtle (or for
Sherlock, not so subtle) ways rang strikingly true. To see Sherlock gradually
begin to realize that he had friends who liked <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">him</i>, and that, while their lives changed in ways his did not, he
remained important to them, was touching. He grew during that season, arguably
in ways that the canonical Holmes did not.<br />
<br />
Because of this, I could look past the silly
“knife in the belt” thing and the really uncomfortable “let’s play murder” bit
in “The Sign of Three” to see the real event. If, as they often do in weddings,
someone read <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+13" target="_blank">1 Corinthians 13</a> for the Watsons, it was actually Sherlock, believing all
things and not self-seeking, and not Love, who kept them together in “His Last Vow,” again at
a<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> cost no one fully appreciates. </span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">In
fact, as we begin Season 4, John and Sherlock both seem to believe that
Sherlock has some sort of magical ability to keep everyone safe—which, of
course, he does not. The general takeaway from that episode is that Sherlock was humbled by the
realization that the deductions he used as bullets had unintentional ricochets, but I think the wider lesson is that no matter how clever we are, or how
much we love and are loved, we will all keep an appointment in Samara. Obviously this was most traumatic for John, and the fact that his
marriage was in a normal, post-baby rough patch before Mary’s sudden death didn’t
make it better. </span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">I know that many people were bothered by his beating Sherlock
in Episode 2, which is good, because frankly, that behavior is not okay. But at
the same time, I understood that even very good people, under particular sorts
of stress, can lose control. I’ve seen it happen. In the throes of new
emotional pain, people blame, they strike out, they anesthetize themselves with
all sorts of substances. None of this works, and it cannot continue. “It is
what it is” isn’t a platitude, or some sort of brush-off. It’s the
acknowledgement that some parts of life are horrible. They really, really are,
and they cannot be fixed. Sometimes, too, we do awful things that we cannot
ever take back. In each case, the only way to take away the power of either is not
to fight, and not to run: instead, only by looking at death and guilt straight
on can Sherlock and John start to clean up the emotional wreckage that damages
and separates them.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Which brings us to
"The Final Problem."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">I don’t avoid spoilers,
so having read the first batch of reactions, I felt some trepidation as the
show began. After all, I was one of the people who didn’t quite get “The
Abominable Bride” the first time through, and despite everything I wrote above,
there <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">were</i> bits of the season’s first
two episodes that I found underwhelming. I didn’t really buy that Mary, a new
mother, would sacrifice herself for Sherlock—however much I—er—<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">she</i>—loves him. I liked knowing that Mrs.
Hudson has a Secret Sports Car, but I felt that scene was a little silly—and I
certainly hope her funds come from an offshore account and not a side hustle. I
had also been excited each time Mofftiss announced that Magnussen and Culverton
Smith were Supremely Evil Villains—only to feel that they just didn’t have
enough time to develop either one. It was inevitable that the finale also had
its own hits and misses for me:</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">That was a lot of convenient DVD, Mary.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">Moriarty! I love you so much! Although the
ticking was annoying.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">I’m going to assume that at least a few people
ended up dead because Eurus could not manipulate them.</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -0.25in;">And speaking of Eurus—she was the villain I
expected in Magnussen and Culverton Smith. I hated her. I enjoyed hating her
and may have called her bad names out loud. I’m glad her own name is really hideous. Even
now, I want to pummel her into the ground. Well done, Mofftiss, well done.</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the end, we learn, the
Holmes family <i>did</i> produce a true sociopath (or, perhaps more correctly defined as a <a href="http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2015/02/12/differences-between-a-psychopath-vs-sociopath/" target="_blank">psychopath</a>). Not Mycroft, the man who knows good
from evil, and believes he is serving the greatest version of the former, even
if his methods are dubious and indirect. Not Sherlock, who has, for
self-preservation, sublimated his emotions and modeled himself after his older
brother, becoming, essentially, a Mycroft who <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">would </i>get his hands dirty when he believes it required.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<br />
No, of course it’s Eurus, at once the embodiment
of (seemingly) pure intellect and the repository of very primitive, child-like and
self-centered emotions. Her brother didn’t play with her, so she murdered his
friend. She kills and damages and manipulates for her own gain while insisting
on seeing herself as a scared little girl on an out-of-control plane. It may
seem to some that Eurus undergoes some character changes during this
episode—development, healing, whatever. No. She doesn’t. She’s just
manipulating you, too. Her brothers, however—now that’s different.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCw3G5LlhOw5JiyudDhw8yUkEsqv9NIKdsBBT0gQ7UTX8ramJ3NuySIHArbmKy-b6MrHW39Hfi8jgmG_7uJR7mZw7C5gjQM-diGU9CLh-UueSDBQwTqT07ObRPN0s-aa17f-3NjrYE4L2L/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Mycroft+Sherlock+portrait.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCw3G5LlhOw5JiyudDhw8yUkEsqv9NIKdsBBT0gQ7UTX8ramJ3NuySIHArbmKy-b6MrHW39Hfi8jgmG_7uJR7mZw7C5gjQM-diGU9CLh-UueSDBQwTqT07ObRPN0s-aa17f-3NjrYE4L2L/s400/Sherlock+-+Series+4+Mycroft+Sherlock+portrait.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<h3>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">"Mycroft Holmes struggled" [BRUC] </span></h3>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">My
best friends and I, all oldest children, agreed that the entire episode gave us
“eldest child feels.” Mycroft like many older siblings, is bossy, pretty sure
he knows best, and has an enormous sense of responsibility; for him, it extends
beyond his immediate family to the entire United Kingdom. He worries about
them. Constantly. And he’s made decisions for all of them, some of which he was
not really qualified to make. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">It wasn’t
okay to tell his younger brother that “caring is not an advantage.” It wasn’t
kinder to tell his parents their daughter had died. And it did not protect the
citizens of Britain, or the world at large, to give Eurus five unsupervised
minutes with Moriarty in order to have her predict terrorist plots. </span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">In episode
three, Mycroft is forced to see himself as he really is: someone who believes
the ends justifies the means—as long as they cannot be traced back to him; someone
who, for all of his intelligence, can’t predict the outcome of his actions; and
someone who, in trying to do the right thing, has, instead, hurt the people he
loves and serves. He is fully humbled, as he needed to be, and by the time
Sherlock is given the impossible choice, he has not only taken responsibility,
he is willing to pay the most loving price he can imagine. This was, to me, the
most powerful scene in the entire series.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">So, if you’re making
a list: with Eurus, we have pure intellect. With Mycroft, we have intellect
tempered by ethics (of a sort) and responsibility. And then we have Sherlock. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUZge7uUaDLY0C_FNd7jyUGL1R7eSiczYIuq1sExXrk5abntUxtL9IZdCieywTD3N5Bmk-fTjXJPcwXsltVrSx2NQIuXqQy7t6tvVFsVVegyrUYzwyFQaOrfQSYubvRQUl4f8t0iSR79H5/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUZge7uUaDLY0C_FNd7jyUGL1R7eSiczYIuq1sExXrk5abntUxtL9IZdCieywTD3N5Bmk-fTjXJPcwXsltVrSx2NQIuXqQy7t6tvVFsVVegyrUYzwyFQaOrfQSYubvRQUl4f8t0iSR79H5/s400/Sherlock+-+Series+4.PNG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
"with an evident effort he got a grip upon his own emotions" [VALL]</h3>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">There is a lot of
talk about how life with John “humanizes” Sherlock. I’m not so sure that’s
true, as much as John’s friendship allows Sherlock to feel safe enough to be
human. When Eurus killed Victor, she taught her brother that love was
dangerous, and in his reactions to this, he ensured that it also became
unattainable. </span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Gradually, however, through his interactions with the people
Mycroft considers “goldfish,” he’s learned a different lesson. He no longer has
to take refuge in a sense of superiority, as his brother does. He knows he can
fall, spectacularly, and still be loved. He’s feeling brave enough to venture
out into some sort of arrangement with Irene. </span>And he loves Molly.<br />
<br />
You can see
it dawn on him when she is about to hang up during that crucial phone call.
Molly loves Sherlock in ways in which he does not love her, but she also loves
him in that deep, permanent way which puts another’s interest ahead of one’s
own. At first, Sherlock feels guilty for seeming to toy with her affections—notice
that he doesn’t just give her what he knows might work—but, as she’s about to
end the call, he realizes that yes, he does <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">love</i>
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">her.</i> This won’t be the death of an
elderly blind woman he will feel the weight of being unable to prevent. This
won’t be Mary’s willing sacrifice. This will be a loss he won’t be able to
bear, and so, when he says he loves her like he means it, he means it. Utterly.
Just as he loves John, and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Greg</i>, Mrs.
Hudson, and his parents.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">And Eurus? I’ve
heard someone people say that Sherlock has forgiven her, but I don’t think it’s
quite that simple. I believe that Sherlock feels pity for her, but he also
knows exactly who he is dealing with. This is why he plays the violin with her, but doesn’t
speak, staying three feet away from the glass. The whole thing is sad. It’s incomprehensible.
Eurus used to be a little girl and perhaps she has diminished culpability. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But she is who she is. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The last episode of
Series 4 was, to me, the perfect mix of what Sherlock <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does,</i> as well as who he <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is.</i> </span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Having, in effect, solved the puzzle of his own life, the 21<sup>st</sup>
century Holmes can be who he was </span>always meant to be: a quirky genius whose
intellect and emotions are tempered with compassion, humanity, and love. It is
this integration, and not the identity of “the other one,” or even Redbeard,
which is the true solution to the final problem.<br />
<br />
Sherlock Holmes finally is who
he is, and whom we love: the Great (and Good) Detective.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
--<br />
<br /></div>

The Final Problem — Balancing Intellect and Emotion

"These are very deep waters" [SPEC] [ Editor's Note: this is the 11th in our series of reviews of Sherlock Series...

+ Read more »

by Leah Guinn

Missing from The Final Problem: Emotional Commitment

<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-weight: bold;">"Man ... has lost all enterprise and originality." [COPP]</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6RNdUSlnKR5F4oATuzmlG6Nv0pie5YLDrCkyaIYHnXGGGhXAoQDVWnXV_8WjbQmI3_JbYsRSestT_MeADVIPNmiSPSKN-zT5zMVRgceyw_7sQgs1MbxB9tzMMLU7UQUP5gYlo_CKGwzA_/s1600/Sherlock+-+Miss+Me.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="386" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6RNdUSlnKR5F4oATuzmlG6Nv0pie5YLDrCkyaIYHnXGGGhXAoQDVWnXV_8WjbQmI3_JbYsRSestT_MeADVIPNmiSPSKN-zT5zMVRgceyw_7sQgs1MbxB9tzMMLU7UQUP5gYlo_CKGwzA_/s640/Sherlock+-+Miss+Me.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the tenth in our <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/search/label/Series%204#.WH4nefkrLb0" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">series of reviews</a> of <i>Sherlock</i> Series 4. Spoilers...yada yada yada...spoilers.]<div>
<br /><div>
When the very first episode of Sherlock aired, I was beside myself with excitement. It was awesome. The whole first season had me hooked. I told my friends well in advance I would not be available for anything when the second season was announced, and I devoured the third, though with perhaps less relish than the others. I have always been ready and willing to forgive the writers of Sherlock for a lot of flaws, primarily because the chemistry between the leads and the acting of everyone involved is superb.<br /><br />And now, at the end of season four, I find myself curiously neutral as to whether or not a season five happens. Though each of the previous episodes had their good moments, I was not what you could describe as a fan of either. Frankly, “The Lying Detective” just made me angry by the end (you can read that review/rant <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2017/01/the-lying-detective-review-and-possibly.html#.WH2zEPkrLcs" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here</a>.) “The Final Problem,” by contrast, left me apathetic. I’m glad it worked out, in its way. I’m glad the boys are back in Baker Street of course, and it was a lovely little end montage that I wanted really hard to be satisfied with, but I was too numb by then to care much. Not even numb; numb indicates a sensation of not-feeling. This was just nothing.<br /><br />The episode started with such great promise. Mycroft Holmes watches noir films, enough to have memorized the dialogue. Sherlock scares the hell out of him just to make a point, and John has recovered from being shot with a tranquilizer (sure, I’ll buy it). The banter was back, and it was such a refreshing return to the atmosphere of previous seasons.<br /><br />Some people have complained about Sherlock becoming James Bond in the show, and while I think there’s recently been an overemphasis on action, this episode made me realize why sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t: It’s the dialogue. The massive CGI explosion of 221B didn't bother me at all, because of the banter before it. There were deductions, all three characters had a chance to make a contribution to the scene, it was funny and a touch tender, and you knew what was coming. It still fit in the atmosphere of the scene.<br /><br /><h3>
"the effect of the atmosphere" [DEVI]</h3>
Atmosphere is part of the problem with the rest of the episode. Eurus is psychopathic, but her puzzles provide no suspense (except the possibility of Mycroft dying), because it’s obvious that Sherlock and John are going to get out somehow. It’s made clear right away that there is no way to win her game. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The episode plays like it was made by someone who once saw a Hitchcock film and thought it wasn’t gritty enough. There's no dramatic pacing, just one room after another, watching characters suffer emotional turmoil. Molly Hooper is once again nothing but bait, a chance to make Sherlock feel really bad about himself. Lestrade shows up for… continuity? He doesn’t actually do anything, there’s no reason for him to be there in that last minute of the episode, he’s just a face we recognize. Mycroft actually has some good moments, becoming more human in this episode than ever, but even he gets shoved away at the end, trapped in a cell off-camera so Sherlock can have the anticlimactic climax to himself.<br /><br />The final problem was, ultimately, boring.<br /><br />Maybe it’s because Eurus seemed just an imitation Moriarty - all the psychosis, none of the charm. We’re supposed to feel sorry for her, the crazy girl left all alone with nobody to love her, her family frightened of her etc., but I just couldn’t. There was no room for me to care about the characters anymore. Sherlock and John went through hell already this season, Eurus was beating a dead horse trying to torture them. <br /><br />The revelations about Mycroft’s character are what kept my interest going. He locks away his sister, taking it upon himself to decide whether or not she is worth saving, because that’s his version of being kind. Kindness through overprotection and cruelty seems to be the only way he can interact with humans. He can order a hit on a subject in another country, but ask him to get his own hands dirty and he can’t do it. For all his talk of being logical, emotionless, and clever, he’s really just a softie willing to grant his psychotic sister the company of an equally psychotic criminal mastermind for five minutes unsupervised, because it will make her happy. The man’s an idiot, but an occasionally useful one, and one who is devoted to his family, in his own warped way. I enjoyed the performance, especially the scene where he prepares to die, and I was sorely disappointed to see him left offscreen for the ending.<br /><br />Sherlock ultimately decides to do what Mycroft couldn’t, and tries to save his sister. What should have been a touching and hopeful ending montage was subdued by the sheer lack of emotional commitment I had for the rest of the episode. I hope more episodes are made, I hope Rosie grows up to be precocious and a delightful terror, I hope Molly and Sherlock come to some sort of reconciliation, and I hope the Holmes family keep visiting Eurus, but most of all, I hope there are more adventures that don’t involve evil geniuses.<br /><br />“Miss me?” <br /><br />No, Jim, not really. After this season, I’d really like to see the boys of Baker Street go find a missing horse.<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>

Missing from The Final Problem: Emotional Commitment

"Man ... has lost all enterprise and originality." [COPP] [ Editor's Note: this is the tenth in our series of reviews...

+ Read more »

by Katie Magnusson

The Final Problem — Total Fail

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"Failure, sir; absolute failure." [BLAC]</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjk_WTrNjqHSInuBbAGrj04Qpg9MQLHC0Z68qQ24SYhIWHsLEMVTsKaf67rXU68jpfrhvLNYZ_v6OEz3ZGPO_VNAoqaMQgdlD0GdfP9i3HRWpAaqyvdyagVqOutKWgij1m1kvOcrxNDFDe/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+fail.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="332" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjk_WTrNjqHSInuBbAGrj04Qpg9MQLHC0Z68qQ24SYhIWHsLEMVTsKaf67rXU68jpfrhvLNYZ_v6OEz3ZGPO_VNAoqaMQgdlD0GdfP9i3HRWpAaqyvdyagVqOutKWgij1m1kvOcrxNDFDe/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+fail.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">[</span><b style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><i>Editor's Note:</i></b><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> this is the ninth in our series of reviews for Series 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>. There are </span><b style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><i>spoilers below</i></b><span style="background-color: white; color: #0e0e0e; font-family: "verdana" , "geneva" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">. Do we really need to keep reminding you at this point?]</span><br />
<h3>
<br />Total Fail</h3>
I'm gobsmacked at how bad "The Final Problem" was. No amount of rationalization or excuse-making can redeem “The Final Problem.” I'm embarrassed for them…all of them (well, except perhaps Molly Hooper).<br />
<br />
It was not only bad Sherlock Holmes (was it even Sherlock Holmes at all?), it was bad story-telling — preposterous, bloated, tedious, and utterly unbelievable ("She arranged all of this in 5 minutes?").<br />
<br />
I feared that the twist in the ending of "The Lying Detective" would portend something regrettable, but good God, who could have foreseen this? A mash-up of <i>The Bad Seed</i>, <i>Saw</i>, <i>Silence of the Lambs</i>, and James Bond...but no Sherlock Holmes at all.<br />
<h3>
<br />"We reach. We grasp. And what is left in our hands at the end? A shadow. Or worse than a shadow - misery." [RETI]</h3>
Perhaps some credit could be given for ambition — something the series has always had. But my goodness…talk about reach exceeding grasp. The eulogy by Mary at the end (and have no doubt that was a eulogy…almost an apology) was quite wonderful, even thrilling, but far too little and far too late to save this complete disaster.<br />
<br />
I've already read pathetically hopeful comments on Facebook that this last 5-minute epilogue points to a Season 5 that returns to the glory of Season 1. Don't fool yourself in your shocked, embarrassed grief. That was as clear a goodbye as could be. It's over (despite Moffat's and Gatiss's standard prevaricating), and as it turns out it was one episode too many.<br />
<br />
Moffat and Gatiss fell prey to "last episode syndrome," where many a long-running popular series felt it had to end with an over-top-finale (see Seinfeld for a spectacular last episode fail).  It's over, and now I say thank God it's over. Whew.<br />
<br />
When it was good it was truly great. But it's going to be a while before we all get the taste of that out of our mouths.<br />
<br />
I guess the race really does go to the tortoise.<br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />

The Final Problem — Total Fail

"Failure, sir; absolute failure." [BLAC] [ Editor's Note: this is the ninth in our series of reviews for Series 4 of She...

+ Read more »

by Steve Doyle

The Final Problem: Problems Abound

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"It is with a heavy heart that I take up my pen" [FINA] </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyYixB-BFqf8YyORR26F78OhpKq2O9UU5SPiIQlJLz7cAlxDl32yeXCufS-0tIonjMfX-iZm3C2eJtokYAscie8AGskheS93pbMW3xgKwNIogf5D1fjW_LnO8DnXQYm2NrL_ZwGF2-lrzP/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+table.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyYixB-BFqf8YyORR26F78OhpKq2O9UU5SPiIQlJLz7cAlxDl32yeXCufS-0tIonjMfX-iZm3C2eJtokYAscie8AGskheS93pbMW3xgKwNIogf5D1fjW_LnO8DnXQYm2NrL_ZwGF2-lrzP/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+table.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
[<b><i>Editor's Note:</i></b> this is the eighth in our series of reviews for Series 4 of Sherlock. There are <b><i>spoilers below</i></b>. Don't say we didn't warn you.]<div>
<br />Where to begin? How does one describe this beautiful mess, this sublimely ludicrous end to a season that has delighted and frustrated so many viewers? Well, I guess we have to start with the obligatory <b>spoiler warning</b>. I mean, for the love of all that is Sherlockian, don't think about reading any further until you've watched the final episode of Season 4 of <i>Sherlock</i>: "The Final Problem."<br />
<br />
Let's start with that title: despite the obvious reference to perhaps the most famous of all Holmes stories in the Canon, this episode has little to do with Doyle's story of the same name. Moffat and Gatiss had already plundered Doyle's "The Final Problem" back in Season 2, with "The Reichenbach Fall." So plot-wise, there's not much in the way of references to that source material, other than a certain air of finality at the end of the episode. But more on that point later...<br />
<br />
There are references to the Canon, of course, as we have come to expect from this series: the reference to "The Three Garridebs" (just their names—the plot point is completely different); the "Dancing Men" reference in the final montage. Perhaps other more eagle-eyed Sherlockians will detect other clues. And there was a delightful detail in the final shot, where a placard on a building clearly reads "Rathbone Place," a cheeky little extra-canonical tidbit. But I'm getting ahead of myself again.<br />
<br />
As a fan of comic books when I was younger, I can't help but think that the island fortress of Sherrinford was reminiscent of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkham_Asylum" target="_blank">Arkham Asylum</a> from the <i>Batman </i>series: a place where only the most brilliant of the criminally insane reside. Meanwhile, the writers made the parallel to <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU8jKn7sMwU" target="_blank">Silence of the Lambs</a></i> explicit in the scene where Sherlock first visits Eurus at her cell, and a guard refers to the famous film/novel. Eurus certainly brought Hannibal Lecter to mind right away.<br />
<br />
Perhaps one of the biggest laughs I got (maybe the only laugh, considering the dark tone of the episode) was when the camera panned down through the floor at 221B, to show Mrs. Hudson vacuuming her floor, while listening to Iron Maiden's "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxnN05vOuSM" target="_blank">Number of the Beast</a>" on her headphones. No, that's not right, I did laugh at one other spot: the great musical cue at the beginning of the flashback to Moriarty's visit to Sherrinford, wherein he's listening to Queen's "<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUOtCLOXgm8" target="_blank">I Want to Break Free</a>." Typical Moriarty flash and cheese, all in one delicious moment.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b>The Critical Question</b></h3>
At this point, though, I have to ask myself: canonical references and humorous musical cues aside, what about the rest of it? Did this episode, in fact, make any sense?<br />
<br />
No, I don't think it did. For all their attempts to really wow us, with all the suspense — will Sherlock shoot Watson or Mycroft? Will Mrs. Hudson perish in the explosion? Will Molly Hooper die because she won't say "I love you"? — for all that, much of the action felt horribly contrived to me. If anyone has watched any of the <i>Saw </i>films, there's often a point in those elaborately executed torture traps where the viewer thinks, "How could anyone possibly set all of this up?" In the case of Eurus Holmes, a woman who had been incarcerated for much of her adult life, I found myself thinking the same thing: even with the help of the guards that she had (almost magically) talked into doing her bidding, there was just too much planning and almost superhuman omniscience involved in setting up her elaborate test of brothers Sherlock and Mycroft.<br />
<br />
Speaking of superhuman, we're also forced to believe that Sherlock, John and Mycroft (not to mention Mrs. Hudson) all walked away from the huge explosion at 221B, with nary a scratch on them? For heaven's sake, Sherlock and John were blown <i>through a second story window</i>!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEij0q2GSSQKonYmmQ1oJbi5ByFxPFYzKiB2nHHgC2YDgBhOS5fUIFWphNfX2wSmjQ67NUGCaKsl1Yi1ppO9DRPXLxCh8zjGnlXKIsbQknxW2t7fIUO9_zx_5JURmd7jiTztRy1raYuOjehA/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+explosion.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="356" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEij0q2GSSQKonYmmQ1oJbi5ByFxPFYzKiB2nHHgC2YDgBhOS5fUIFWphNfX2wSmjQ67NUGCaKsl1Yi1ppO9DRPXLxCh8zjGnlXKIsbQknxW2t7fIUO9_zx_5JURmd7jiTztRy1raYuOjehA/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+explosion.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
But this same superhero-style Sherlock doesn't even realize that there is no glass between him and Eurus, the whole time he's talking to her? Nope, sorry, I don't buy it. I've stood in front of glass walls, and it's quite easy to tell the difference between glass and thin air. And it takes that long for Sherlock to figure out that the little girl on the plane is all a ruse? As they have in the past, Moffat and Gatiss seem to have thought we, as viewers, would simply accept their overly elaborate game (that's "not a game any more," according to the trailer), and not notice how far-fetched the whole thing was, or how lame Sherlock has gotten at figuring things out.<br />
<br />
Almost the entire length of the episode, I just kept thinking, "No, that wouldn't happen that way...no, that just isn't possible." Just as they did at the beginning of Season 3, when everyone wanted to know how Sherlock had survived his "Reichenbach Fall," the Sherlock writers simply said, "We don't need to explain it. Sherlock's just the cleverest man alive." Except for when he's not. Which leads me to the end...<br />
<br />
There has been much speculation, especially as Season 4 has progressed, as to whether this will be the last season of <i>Sherlock</i>. The final montage of this episode certainly seemed to lean that way: Mary's final words about her "Baker Street Boys...Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson!" had a definite air of finality about them. Are Moffat and Gatiss going to accomplish what Arthur Conan Doyle failed to do with his "Final Problem"? Will this be the end of the story? Doyle tried to kill off his detective, but ended up bringing him back to life. All of our favorite characters (well, most of them) are still alive and well at the end of <i>this</i> "Final Problem." So I guess the future of the series is still open.<br />
<br />
Of course, that leads me to my final dilemma: how do I view this episode as a series finale, rather than just a season finale, if that's what it turns out to be? I suppose, to a certain extent, this finale demonstrates what <i>Sherlock </i>has always been: entertaining, frustrating, impressed by its own cleverness, slick, modern, and completely in love with its source material. I mean, that's what's kept so many of us coming back, through the long hiatuses and all that, isn't it?<br />
<br />
It's always been clear (to me, at least) that Moffat and Gatiss absolutely adore the characters and stories created by Arthur Conan Doyle. In the end, if it is actually over, the whole series is kind of like a crazy, devoted fan fiction: they have always said, "What if?" What if Sherlock Holmes and John Watson were living in today's world? What stories could we tell about <i>that</i>?<br />
<br />
And they did.<br />
<br />
--<br />
<br />
<br /></div>

The Final Problem: Problems Abound

"It is with a heavy heart that I take up my pen" [FINA] [ Editor's Note: this is the eighth in our series of reviews f...

+ Read more »

by Cory Howell

Episode 112: Anno Holmes 130

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"their celebrated colleague" [VALL] </h4>
<div>
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<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/AVvXsEjH301QIbuhstmyWOvMqZPMqqQWpgDztNv5OAfE6Wruv2KEUc8sBaU1MmzzH3YnW_DG018y3S364nAuqhYcVCZ2vfYGfTa5f8vhtRZYL_UfJO2LekMaIcNULY5Aud0_BzEP7aCsk1JVcWRb/s1600/Rockwell+at+the+Society+of+Illustrators.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="350" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjH301QIbuhstmyWOvMqZPMqqQWpgDztNv5OAfE6Wruv2KEUc8sBaU1MmzzH3YnW_DG018y3S364nAuqhYcVCZ2vfYGfTa5f8vhtRZYL_UfJO2LekMaIcNULY5Aud0_BzEP7aCsk1JVcWRb/s640/Rockwell+at+the+Society+of+Illustrators.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" height="90" mozallowfullscreen="" msallowfullscreen="" oallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/4991631/height/90/width/600/theme/custom/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/autoplay/yes/preload/no/no_addthis/no/direction/backward/no-cache/true/render-playlist/no/custom-color/87A93A/" style="border: none;" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="600"></iframe><br /></div>
<br />
It's 2017 and we're back from the BSI Weekend, with tales of friends, listeners, authors and more. This year marks Sherlock Holmes's 130th year with the public and there is much to celebrate.<br />
<br />
Things we learned included Bonnie MacBird's next Sherlock Holmes novel that involves whisky; a future edition of a Sherlock Holmes companion from Cambridge University Press; the Society of Illustrators has a wonderful cafe, where we held the annual meeting of the Three Hours for Lunch Club, and subsequently, we'll be recommending Frederic Dorr Steele as a future Hall of Fame Member at the Society.<br />
<br />
We debate the possibility of or need for regular electronic updates of the eBSJ archives — or even a concurrent digital option of the Journal — leading to a broader discussion of print versus digital publications.<br />
<br />
And of course we touch on the latest goings-on with <i>Sherlock</i>.</div>
<div>
<br />
The Gas-Lamp this time is made up of the lyrics of the Harvey Officer song "On the Road to Baker Street," with abject apologies to Rudyard Kipling, Frank Sinatra, and anyone with a musical ear.<br />
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
 <img height="40" src="https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/widget-images/become-patron-widget-medium%402x.png" style="color: #0000ee;" width="204" /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
And please consider joining our <a href="http://patreon.com/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">Patreon community</a>. Your support helps us to ensure we can keep doing what we do, covering file hosting costs, production, and this year, transcription services.</div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
<h3>
Sponsors</h3>
This episode includes our two longtime sponsors. Please support our sponsors by visiting their sites:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.wessexpress.com/" target="_blank">Wessex Press</a>, with its latest edition of <i>Sherlock Holmes and Conan Doyle in the Newspapers</i> by Mattias Bostrom, BSI and Matt Laffey.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.bakerstreetjournal.com/" style="font-style: italic;" target="_blank">The Baker Street Journal</a>, where you can subscribe to the 2017 BSJ and pick up the latest from the BSI Manuscript Series and the BSI International Series. </li>
</ul>
<br />
Would you care to become a sponsor? You can find <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/p/contact.html#.Vc1Qx7JViko" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">more information here</a>.</div>
<div style="font-family: 'times new roman';">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<h4 style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://traffic.libsyn.com/ihearofsherlock/ihearofsherlock112.mp3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Download</a> [Save As] | File size 27 MB, 58:16</h4>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe frameborder="no" height="166" scrolling="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/302778372&color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false" width="100%"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<h3>
<b>Notes</b></h3>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
1:36 Hello, Happy New Year, and freshly returned<br />
4:07 Wessex Press </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
5:21 Recap and looking ahead<br />
6:57 The highlights from our latest Sherlockian event<br />
9:00 A view of Sherlock Holmes "from both sides"<br />
12:37 A fascinating tale of Frederic Dorr Steele illustrations<br />
14:30 On the importance of pausing to reflect — particularly in the absence of technology<br />
20:32 Cumulative anniversaries and an electronic future<br />
30:44 LISTENER PARTICIPATION: your favorite Sherlockian publication<br />
32:02 The Baker Street Journal<br />
36:23 Of hotels and reading materials from the BSI Weekend<br />
38:54 News: an update on <i>Sherlock</i><br />
46:10 The Gas-Lamp<br />
51:15 Stories, links, products and the like in our Flipboard magazine<br />
57:30 The game's afoot!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<h3>
</h3>
<h3>
Links</h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://bsiweekend.com/" target="_blank">The BSI Weekend</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.societyillustrators.org/" target="_blank">The Society of Illustrators</a></li>
<li>Glen Miranker on <a href="http://ihose.co/ihose79" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Episode 79</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Upm9LnuCBUM" target="_blank">A lesson from Mister Rogers</a> on reflecting on those who have impacted our lives</li>
<li>The old <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/wsmonty/4275180275" target="_blank">wallpaper from the Algonquin Hotel</a></li>
<li><a href="https://twitter.com/IHearofSherlock/status/815779123989774337" target="_blank">The Easter Egg boats</a> from "The Six Thatchers"</li>
<li><a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2017/01/to-sherlock-critics-discerning-and.html" target="_blank">To the undiscerning critic</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bs2_WxT9bI" target="_blank">On the Road to Mandalay</a></li>
<li><a href="http://ihose.co/flipsherlock" target="_blank">Our Flipboard Magazine</a>, featuring <a href="https://www.chiseledface.com/product/tallow-shave-soap-sherlock/" target="_blank">Sherlock Tallow Shave Soap</a> and news of the <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/ralph-fiennes-hugh-laurie-will-ferrell-holmes-and-watson-1201954176/" target="_blank">new Sherlock Holmes comedy film</a>.<br />
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
Many more links, articles and images are available in our Flipboard magazine at  <a href="http://ihose.co/flipsherlock" target="_blank">ihose.co/flipsherlock</a>, as well as on the <a href="https://plus.google.com/communities/114565123495685504221" target="_blank">The Sherlock Holmes Community</a> on Google+ (with over 4,000 members), as well as through our accounts on  <a href="http://facebook.com/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">Facebook</a>, <a href="http://instagram.com/ihearofsherlock">Instagram</a>, <a href="http://www.ihearofsherlock.com/2016/04/ihose-on-snapchat-just-in-time-for.html">Snapchat</a>, <a href="http://twitter.com/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">Twitter</a>  and <a href="http://ihearofsherlock.tumblr.com/" target="_blank">Tumblr</a>.</div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
Please <a href="http://bit.ly/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">subscribe to us on iTunes</a>, <a href="https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/I2nib4h55h3cz3yxmzovj6icbmi" target="_blank">Google Play</a>, <a href="https://soundcloud.com/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">Soundcloud</a>, <a href="http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/i-hear-of-sherlock-everywhere?refid=stpr" target="_blank">Stitcher</a> or <a href="http://www.spreaker.com/user/ihearofsherlock" target="_blank">Spreaker</a> and be kind enough to leave a rating or review for the show. And please tell a friend about us, in any fashion you feel comfortable.<br />
<br />
Your thoughts on the show? Leave a comment below, send us an email (comment AT ihearofsherlock DOT com), call us at (774) 221-READ (7323).<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="font-family: "times new roman"; margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman";">--</span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: "times new roman";"><br />
</span></div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Episode 112: Anno Holmes 130

"their celebrated colleague" [VALL] It's 2017 and we're back from the BSI Weekend, with tales of friends, ...

+ Read more »

by Scott Monty

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>