#*points* irene adler reference

[wyrtig]

"the woman"

[lowliest-manifestations]

Often when I am talking about Irene Adler I half-jokingly refer to her as a drag king but I was curious to see if drag/male impersonation would have actually been viable for her. (It's implied that she dressed as a man in an acting capacity but I'm talking about male impersonation as the focal point of a performance, something more akin to modern drag) And I found that it definitely could have been!

While there are a few documented male impersonators around the time that A Scandal in Bohemia was published (Ella Wesner, Florence Hines and Gowongo Mohawk were all active around the Victorian-Edwardian era) The best parallel I found to Adler, being British and predating Scandal in Bohemia, would be Vesta Tilley.

One of the most famous male impersonators of all time, Tilley was was active on stage from the age of three (1967) until her retirement in 1920. She was a singer by trade, and began wearing male costume very early on in her career (around five or six years old). Tilley performed as a variety of male characters (dandies, soldiers, messenger boys, etc.) usually in a comedic context. Wildly successful, and very highly paid, she would have been the standard for male impersonators at the time.

Adler very well could have done the kind of performance Tilley was known for. They were both singers, both would probably sung in music halls, and both were of a similar social class. (Tilley's husband was knighted a year before her retirement and she became Lady de Freece: she was quite wealthy and respectable).

Also of note: The vast majority of male impersonators at the time were straight (there were a couple exceptions but Tilley was insistently not one of them). Cross-dressing and homosexuality were just beginning to be associated with each other in the way we're more familiar with, and as a result it became less and less socially acceptable to be a male impersonator as we got into the 1920s (especially in wealthier white circles) and the art form was pushed underground.

But until that point it was entirely possible to be a male impersonator and and a well respected, heterosexual, high society victorian lady.

What fascinates me about Adler in comparison to Tilley, is that Adler regularly cross-dresses in a non-performance context, something that Tilley would not have done (or admitted to doing) as she wrote, "While my business is that of impersonating male characters, I heartily detest anything mannish in a woman’s private life."

SO. All that to say Irene Adler could absolutely have been a drag king, and could even have pushed the norms of the art form at the time, if you choose to read her that way.

[madworldmarvelareview]

my experience with extreme force shipping, anti lesbianism/sapphicism, and anti indigenous rhetoric on a roleplay server that claims not to perpetrate any of the above. 

i’m certain head mod summer will call this defamatory, as she did to the honest review (1 star) by my writing partner on disboard, so i’ve taken the time to include screenshots alongside my review below. any prospective members, current or past are welcome to message this account, or find me on discord @ dinahbabs.

marvelous mad world is a server that revolves around ass kissing the mod, summer, and her best friend, kelsey, while they berate you. the issues arise quickly when saying no, even nicely.. no is not an answer these two will accept, if they have their heart set on something.

to start us off, there was only 1 lesbian character on the server before i arrived, and i don't think they had any lesbian members. this will provide some context as we go along.

i first encountered lesbophobia when i didn’t want my lesbian (irene adler) in a throuple with a man (forge, married to mystique)— where the lesbian was treated as if she was an accoutrement to an m/f relationship, not a woman of her own. please note that i was never asked to be in this arrangement in any way, and i was also continuously told it wouldn't be an issue, i saw in character that two characters (raven and forge) were in a relationship (where raven says her heart has only room enough for him), leaving me open to do my own thing as the rules already state, and as one of the members confirmed in my dms. i was excited to go my own way and make something new.

the server's rules:

alt text: pressuring or manipulating others for ships or connections gets exactly 1 warning, and then a ban. absolutely no debate on this. you may ask, but do not under any circumstances pester, harass, or otherwise bug people about connections. no means no.

upon my exit, it was said that i “didn’t speak to the members in question” and went against server wishes. in the following screenshot you’ll see that i let moderators know i didn’t attempt to reach out yet because the person in question did not answer my past plotting dms, and the server policy clearly stated ships are free to create at your leisure as noted above.

before: pre acceptance screenshot.

after: summer lying about me asking to be told to speak to member kelsey, when i was accepted, knowing kelsey didn't answer. i reference here that i knew mystique was married, and made my other plans for a different ship.

member kelsey never answered my plotting dms, at which point i had made other plans, instead, she messaged me in character, which resulted in the following conversation between raven and irene:

irene telling raven she's moving on and did not have interest in a throuple.

when i conveyed my desire for my character to continue onto a new relationship, i was punished in and outside of character for doing so. 

where i make everyone clear i made other ship plans when i saw raven was married. (i would have told kelsey in dms, if she ever answered me, instead i noted their coparenting, that was shot down later.)

reaction from summer's forge: why would my lesbian character want a man in the first place?

reaction from summer's forge: irene never broke up a marriage, and sapphic characters are not property if you name a kid after them.

kelsey's raven and summer's forge reaction to irene not wanting to be their third?? i can't make this up.

mod summer's true intentions laid clear: irene never canonically said what was stated in the claremont run, raven hated forge after irene died, and raven/irene only recently defeating 40 years of homophobia to be together means nothing if summer can get m/f out of it.

the strangeness continues with anti indigenous behaviour, so much so that they named a child after my lesbian character (destiny), used a picture of an indigenous child, and coloured her pink/red, as if that isn’t added anti-indigeniety on display. 

indigenous child they coloured red.

later claiming to be purple after a review was posted.

hex coded proof, all red.

when i declined their ship, they said they were switching back to the child’s tribal name (the way it should have been!) “threatening” to refer to an indigenous child as her tribal name over a ship fallout feels so ugly. indigenous names are not a punishment. i replied to this blatant anti-indigenous and incel-like response with “my character would love that tribal name, actually!” to no response. 

proof of the change of name. after that, they only called this child "d".

that issue is further pressed with the demand of face claims, and yet mods use the wrong ethnicity or tribes for indigenous muses. it’s a shame with the amount of diversity, including a plethora of comic art, that they would not recognize that issue, and revert to art for characters that can’t be cast correctly. there is also a rule against problematic face claims but those with allegations of SA are still used as far as i can see. 

a few friends of mine were kicked the first day of pride, for a variety of things,

screenshot of the random group kick.

what i said back to it.

screenshot of the announcement after the group kick. two.

but the only ones i had anything to do was denying the mod and kelsey a ship, and asking for clarification about a comment made by another user. or maybe just being friends with them? who knows, since the ban message was for a group and not very specific. i remain not upset, since i stayed only to support my friends and am glad to be free of a place where female and non binary characters exist largely to be sexualized, but since there’s a one way narrative, it deserves to be cleared up as they beg their members for good reviews on disboard. 

the rules tell you not to only write ship things, but at least half of the server, if not more is all gratuitous and public (badly characterized, badly written) porn, or 2 line ship dialogue. all the conflict has been stripped away, and all that remains is love triangles, which the mod summer or member kelsey has placed herself at the center of for attention. thus, if your character if not in love with either’s roster, or are their “child”, you will be ignored and not privy to plots unless you invite yourselves to them. 

no villains are allowed, except the ones mod summer finds attractive, and then you have to stomach people writing rapists in group chats! lovely, and went dismissed when inquired about, since half of the villains on the ban list (like vulcan) have done less evil than the villains accepted (creed, canon rapist), or requested (like jason wyngarde, canon rapist). 

every other character by those two bears no resemblance to their canon iterations. 

mystique runs around calling her partner daddy, and is kelsey’s most sexualized character. she uses a black woman for raven while doing this, while her white roster is not treated the same. 

the server’s victor creed was said they removed SA from his history, but he threatens to seggsually assault mystique in a text thread. no action when this was brought up to staff, they said “raven wanting creed is a part of her marriage, so this (clearly worded SA threat while raven said no) was not actually SA. no offer to privatize the thread, or improvements on their tagging system to denote when there was blatant rape. 

server is also so low on lore knowledge they made jokes about scott summers and prof x having sex, as if prof didn’t meet scott as a minor aged child, and as if scott doesn’t see prof as a father figure! truly jarring to run a server without knowing base level info that results in grooming/incest jokes being made. 

when confronted with this triggering content, mods promised to implement a better spoilering and tagging system, and then never went ahead with it.  as of 6/19, has done nothing still.

the application demands a writing sample that showcases a lot of things, including dialogue, long introspection, but you won’t need it. the vast majority of what’s written here is 1 liner dms and smut. which really isn’t an issue, but if the average thread is two sentences, outside of their plot drabbles, which were admittedly nice by some members (when they made sense).

the server boasts two warnings, of which you will only receive none, if you nicely decline offers to ship with the mods. i would steer clear. the effort you have to put in to get approved is not worth putting up with the mods as they are. anyways big fuck you for trying to force me into a ship, expect my lesbian to be subsumed by your heterosexual pairing, and then be lesbophobic even after i left! lesbians aren’t side characters. you wouldn’t know that, or care, since i saw what you said after i left and it was heinous. as expected. 

as you can tell if you've been keeping up, i never had raven tell irene to fuck off. i was forced to say, in character, that irene was moving on, because member kelsey never answered dms.

lesbophobia post exit: one, two, three (discussing my writing partner's lesbian character).

so bad that they had to make an announcement about how lesbophobic their server was and how to behave. two.

classy party! on pride, to boot. no one in these screens is a lesbian, as you can guess, and the main perpetrators never apologized! not even to the server, who had to witness it all.

overall stop begging for server reviews, server likes, accept that you did things wrong, learn, private your server and enjoy your weird anti indigenous anti sapphic circlejerk! and never pressure people to ship again, you suck.

this next part is specifically for kelsey, who took it upon herself to be extra lesbophobic after my exit. no need to read unless you’re her. 

kelsey, you didn’t know i’d picked another ship because you never bothered to dm me back lol! not that i wanted to ship with you anyway after the way you treated me, and your atrocious characterizations, not just of mystique. i was also never demanded to contact you before apping, as evidenced below once more. 

link back to the conversation with gansey.

trying to accuse me of not reading irene comics (i have read all of her appearances over twice in their entirety), and that i didn’t “know her” feels nuts to come from a raven characterization with no depth except for her vaginal canal. maybe i just knew raven and irene well enough not to want to ship with a character written by you, whose most used words were “daddy” “fill me good” and who was so oversexualized as a black woman written by you, one as white as me, i felt so uncomfortable— and since i knew i’d read more raven than you ever will, would be wasting my time, and would derive no pleasure out of writing with a self insert. 

its bad when even your own friends joked about you killing your characters / banned you from doing it for attention when you weren’t getting enough. i’d tell you to log off and get some friends but get the sense keeping them would be a problem for you, you don’t seem like someone who puts the work into anything. 

your research about meg and i, who has only been writing for two years, confusing one sapphic for another, no doubt comes from your friend and server co mod “esther” formerly jackie, who was run off tumblr at least three times for derailing black lives matter discussions with white / personal issues and being anti romani, which she was in her server i was in too! she did a great job of pretending to hold herself accountable, but it all was told to us by a friend after. she’s now banned from a bunch of communities because of it. bet you didn’t know that, she’s tried to hide it quite well, but we all know who she is, and her life is largely a lie to rebrand after being run off multiple writing communities within the last 10 years. like you, she sexualized her characters that have been survivors of sexual abuse. i’m happy to be disliked by a person like that, and by you. 

i suspect you’ll continue to be friends with her because you’re twins, hiding behind online attention and praise because you’ll never have it in real life the way you dream of so badly, compensating by getting angry when someone doesn’t worship you. you crave the attention, and so i’ll make this the last time you ever get it from me. i’ll forget about you tomorrow, but you’ll always remember, won’t you? people like you always do. 

nothing but the best ahead,

liv

[asoulwithadream]

hear me out here because i have this idea, and i've been thinking about it for only hour now, and it's almost midnight and i have two major assignments due tomorrow morning but this takes precedence

so buckle up guys, cos sherlock bbc......... but doctor who bbc (this will all make sense in a moment)

I. the characters are absolutely perfect for all the relevant roles, and im sure there are tons of others which i just haven't thought of yet:

sherlock as the doctor: he has the intelligence, the deduction, the spontaneity, the trauma, and some of the humour (current work in progress). i'll admit his charisma can be better but we've seen a few awkward reiterations of the doctor in the past, so i'll let it slide. it'll give him character. his little quirk of knowing the most useless stuff about the most useless things to solve the most important cases but in space could be such an interesting perspective to see, and look at what the writers come up with surrounding the details of the galactic environments. and to be honest, the doctor themselves are already essentially a consulting detective, the only difference being that they hire themselves. plus, i feel like he would be oddly extremely attached to his tardis, and maybe his screwdriver could have like a collapsable magnifying glass at the other end, just for shits and giggles. he'd also remind me of twelve a bit, and not just because of the cheekbones.dr

john watson as the companion: he has the morals which the doctor sometimes lacks, the rational thinking, he's the emotional support for the over-the-top doctor, he essentially fulfils every role of a companion. we can see how it fits in with his sherlock bbc character too: as many of the doctor's companions, he learns over time and actually becomes higher-than-averagely adept at working out solutions for problems. hes so wonderfully human, and it would fit well with the alien/human dynamic between the doctor and his companion. and i feel like john would have big rory energy. we haven't even taken in the consideration of the "the doctor. which one?" jokes.

jim moriarty as the master: don't tell me you can't see it, because you know deep down that i am right. both the master and moriarty are chaos loving antagonistic figures, charming and charismatic, full of ambition to control whatever they can and whoever they want, yet they focus on what they may consider their homoerotic arch-rival. plus, they're commonly referred to with a name beginning with the letter "m" (which is literally just bonus points!) and just imagine the possibilities of a female moriarty. like fuck off that's too much for my blood pressure. (eurus?????)

irene adler as river song: it's the vibe, it's the attitude, it's the intelligence. irene would be such a good river: she's independent, a borderline criminal, and witty beyond anyones comprehension. however, in this case irene would be a mix of both the irene from the book and from the show, since she's substantially smarter in terms of "who has the biggest brains" in the books rather than the tv series. nevertheless, i would still like to have her as not a love-interest but a love possibility, edging on that with the maximum being flirts, and obviously john in the background going full rory mode (as mentioned earlier). i just think it would be so neat.

greg lestrade as kate stewart: police/chief officer on earth, usually the one to contact the doctor when the planet is in danger? has some form of kind of stale yet wholesome but confusing friendship with the doctor, where they know both a lot and absolutely nothing about him? i think it fits the criteria for greg lestrade perfectly, and i love that it adds the possibility of banter between sherlock's doctor and chief greg of unit.

mycroft holmes as a member of the high gallifreyan council: what could the doctor consider to be the greatest nuisance, and what has recordedly tampered with his relationships and plans and life in the past? the council of his home planet, which could realistically allow for one of the doctor's brothers to be part of the council, and possibly even be it's leader. however, a cool dynamic which i think could be explored is that mycroft wouldn't be the head of the council but rather a side yet very important member, who can slightly interefere with the council's plan to assist his brother sometimes, only sticking by the rules if he disagrees entirely with the doctor. what his time-lord name could be? the officer, the official (something like that), though i'd appreciate name ideas

mrs hudson as sarah jane smith: this was a bit hard to decide on, but i think this is by far the most interesting idea i've had for mrs hudson after a solid 5 minutes of looking up characters. i can see mrs hudson, or martha as she'd be called then, act as a companion for the doctor in a previous reincarnation many years ago, like in the 70s or 80s, otherwise staying at home at 221a baker street, working on a computer and serving cuppas should the doctor and john ever stop by. could give a more alien context to her drug dealing husband; maybe he was caught up in an otherwordly drug scandal, and that's how the doctor and mrs hudson ended up meeting. additionally, i think that she'd also have k9, but he'd be shaped a bit like a bull-dog after the bull pup which john has in the books.

II. the tardis. there are so many ideas for the tardis itself, and i can imagine that she'd kind of resemble a hybrid child of eleven's tardis and the interior of the 221b flat. plus, she could have an address this time: 221b, anywhere. i know it sounds a bit corny, but i wanted to find a way to weave in the famous address into this narrative.

III. wholock.

i just think this is a super neat idea. do reblog with ideas

[twistedtummies2]

Top 5 Portrayals of Irene Adler

The past three lists I discussed some of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson’s most notable allies: Mrs. Hudson, Inspector Lestrade, and Sherlock’s brother, Mycroft. However, no detective and his sidekick would be able to function without cases to solve…without villains to conquer. While Professor Moriarty is the most famous and recurring Holmes antagonist, Holmes solved many, MANY other cases, and faced many other rogues, aside from the Napoleon of Crime. I think it’s time to give some of the more noteworthy criminals Holmes went after their fair due. Just to warn you, these lists will be simple, quick Top 5s rather than Top 10s, and once again, the descriptions will be brief. This is typically for one of three reasons: a.) there just aren’t that many versions of the character out there to begin with, b.) all the versions after a certain point sort of gel together in terms of my personal preference, or c.) a bit of both. With that said, let’s start with arguably Holmes’ second greatest adversary: Irene Adler, the Mistress of Disguise. In the original story “A Scandal in Bohemia,” Adler is actually one of the few criminals to escape and thoroughly outwit Sherlock Holmes. Notably, she is the only woman to outsmart the Master Detective, which is one of the reasons Holmes refers to her as “The Woman”: a sign that she is, in his eyes, the finest of her gender. It’s heavily implied in the original stories that Holmes is in love with Irene, or, at the very least, she is the first lady he has come truly close to loving. He loves Irene not so much in a sensual or physical way, but more for her incredible wit, daring, and mystique. While Adler is an antagonist in the story, on that note, she’s not by any means the worst of Holmes’ opponents. In short, Adler is the original Femme Fatale: the alluring, morally ambiguous, dangerous female who both entrances and hinders her hero. The Catwoman to Sherlock Holmes’ Batman, if you will. Various adaptations and reimaginings since have toyed with this idea, and especially latched onto the romantic overtones, ever since. There are lots of versions of Irene Adler; she’s one of those characters who falls into Point B, as I mentioned earlier: after a certain point, a lot of them just sort of gel together for me. However, picking my Top 5 was fairly easy; it’s just harder to do any number beyond that. With that said, let’s waste no more time: The Woman is waiting. Here are My Top 5 Portrayals of Irene Adler!

5. Anne Baxter, from Masks of Death.

In this made-for-TV movie, Peter Cushing and John Mills play an aging Holmes and Watson on their final case before retirement. Anne Baxter appears as an equally “advanced” Irene Adler, in a relatively small but important role in the story. It’s primarily the uniqueness of this Adler that gets her in my top five: Baxter was a great choice in casting, her interactions with Cushing as Holmes are fantastic, and the idea of these old adversaries re-encountering one another in their twilight years is an interesting one indeed.

4. Gayle Hunnicutt, from the Granada Series.

It’s largely due to Hunnicutt’s “scene partner” as Holmes - the unmatchable Jeremy Brett - that nails her placement on the countdown. Granada’s adaptation of “A Scandal in Bohemia” was actually the very first episode of the Brett series, and it serves as an excellent first impression for the show as a whole, with Hunnicutt playing a very book-accurate take on the character. (Albeit with a different pronunciation of the name from the usual, with an accent at the end of “Irene,” so that it is pronounced “Ee-Rain-uh” instead of “Eye-Reen”...unusual.) While Hunnicutt’s calculating, cunning Adler is phenomenal, I personally feel other versions that go “beyond the books” make her even more interesting.

3. Rachel McAdams, from the Guy Ritchie Films.

Conan Doyle fans seem polarized about McAdams’ take on Irene Adler. For me, I personally think she’s an excellent, albeit somewhat different, interpretation of the character. This version heavily ups the romantic side of her relationship with Holmes, and really plays up the moral ambiguity, as she helps Sherlock out almost as often as she gets him in trouble. Using the earlier analogy, she’s at her most “Catwoman-esque” here. It’s eventually revealed - SPOILER ALERT - that Irene is working for Moriarty, although it’s not altogether clear why. She is seemingly killed off early in the second movie, when Moriarty feels she has become a liability. Sad.

2. The Version from Moriarty the Patriot.

This is a rather weird one, to be honest. It’s hard to talk about this version of the character without giving away some MAJOR spoilers for the series as a whole, but I will do my best. Irene first appears in an adaptation of “A Scandal in Bohemia,” entitled “A Scandal in the British Empire” (which borrows some minor influence from “The Bruce Partington Plans”). Weirdly enough, she’s actually EXTREMELY book-accurate here, and the way Holmes’ relationship with her is showcased is equally so: the two aren’t depicted as being romantically involved so much as being, I suppose, “flirtatious best friends.” This is fitting, since the strong romantic overtones in THIS series go between Holmes and Moriarty…but that’s another story. Speaking of, after this initial story arc, Irene’s character goes into some…UNEXPECTED territory, but it does nothing to make her character any less interesting.

1. Lara Pulver, from Sherlock.

Once again, much like the Guy Ritchie version, Pulver’s incarnation heavily emphasizes the romantic tension between Adler and Holmes. Also like the Ritchie version, this take on Adler ends up embroiled with Moriarty, although things end rather differently in this interpretation. This Adler, I felt, hit a good balance between a proper villainess - and a very fine one, at that, able to prove a solid match for Holmes - and the more sympathetic love interest at the same time. 

[no-side-us]

Letters From Watson Liveblog - Mar. 6

The Five Orange Pips, Part 1 of 3

A bark (or rather barque) in this scenario is presumably referring to a type of ship, but I like to think it's actually about a missing dog that Holmes and Watson had to go find.

Mr. Russell was apparently well-known at the time for his sea stories, and was even admired by Herman Melville! They each dedicated one of their books to the other, which I find really cute.

Oh, Mary. I know that Watson needs to be at Baker Street so he can be there and write about whatever case occurs, so it's always interesting to see what excuse there is for him to be able to do so.

Oh, Holmes. It's a bit of a sad line, but it at least speaks a lot to Watson and Holmes' relationship with one another.

The woman obviously referring to Irene Norton, née Adler. Though evidently there is a contradiction because this story happened in 1887, as Watson mentioned earlier, and The Scandal in Bohemia takes place in 1888. So minus one point to Doyle for poor continuity.

This threw me for a loop. Apparently the first bicycle of a kind was invented in 1817, so yeah I guess this is a believable scenario. It also kind of dates this story in a fun way.

Let's see. Plantation owner, confederate soldier, and a racist, though that last part probably goes without saying. Well, this is as bad as a guy can be in Doyle's time, so hopefully he's not like, a good person in this story.

Elias is evidently not on good terms with the KKK, which is funny considering his history would make you think he's a shoo-in for being their friend.

On one hand, it's nice that Elias is dead. On the other hand, it's not nice to see the KKK have this much reach and power. But on the other, other hand, they are being shown as the villains in this story so far.

This story sure is contemporary for Doyle's time. I wonder what the audience back then thought about all this, or rather, I wonder what the American audience back then thought about all this.

My heart is full of forebodings as well, though for other reasons than John here.

A very, dare I use the term, political Sherlock Holmes mystery so far, and one in which I eagerly await the next letter.

Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3

[ohifonlyx33]

Sooo, i have been sick for the past week during the peak of my sherlolly renaissance, and I may or may not have gotten it stuck in my head that I absolutely HAD to make a vid of them with a specific song (coming soon to a YouTube near you). Like it would not stand. My mind would not rest. I have thought of nothing else.

So I decided to download all 4 seasons of Sherlock and go through the episodes clipping every sherlolly scene or minor reference, as well as looking for more context clues and applicable character moments or themes.

And the one that I picked up on was the invitations to join one another for food or drink. This theory wouldn't work in every case, or necessarily mean the same thing in every case... however it works with Molly.

John and Sherlock have dinner to establish their friendship. And Irene Adler clearly doesn't want to just "have dinner" when she texts Sherlock... in fact I don't think she wants food at all. But in Molly's case it's love she's hoping for... a relationship.

It starts when Molly innocently asks Sherlock if he'd like a coffee. This sets up the theory, because "going for coffee" is Molly obviously asking Sherlock out for a date. Nothing untoward, but also not a platonic request.

But although this is clearly meant as a romantic invitation, Sherlock dismisses the subtext, and takes a coffee with 2 sugars. He also tells Molly in season 1 that digestion slows him down. Neither food nor romance are acceptable distractions... at this point he only barely tolerates friendship, and even then it's got to be useful to him.

Cut to Moriarty being "back" and Sherlock bringing Molly snacks and stealing her from her lunch date so she can help him.

Then Molly tells Sherlock he looks sad when he thinks no one can see and that she doesn't count. He looks surprised that she sees all this, but admits to nothing and denies nothing.

Anyway, she offers to help Sherlock if he ever needs anything at all... ("but what could I need from you?")

At the end of that conversation, she declares she is getting chips... and asks Sherlock if he wants anything before remembering that of course he doesn't.

Subtext in that scene seems clear to me that shes talking about more than just the chips she offered... Molly is offering him her help, loyalty, and compassion... And even her love. Even though she knows he won't reciprocate, she offers. Just as she's offering him chips she knows he won't eat.

And Sherlock starts to say something, but Molly turns heel and leaves, because of course Sherlock doesn't want anything from her. She insists that he doesn't, even when he starts to interject. She's convinced herself that Sherlock won't accept food... or anything more.

But it's interesting because he was thinking about it. Sherlock actually tries to stop her from leaving with "well, actually, I-" ...even though he's on a case! Molly's invitaton to him appealed.

And of course, later we know he takes her up on the REAL offer for help... and what he needs from her is simply her. ;)

Now cut to Molly and Sherlock working together in season 3 when John is out. Sherlock invites Molly to 221B and asks if she would like to solve crime, while Molly thinks he's going to ask her to dinner. Again she's still looking at their interactions in the context of romantic possibility. He's still prioritizing the case, but sees her as someone he can turn to.

Well, at the end of the day, Sherlock actively asks if she wants to get chips with him. Does he mean it as a romantic invitation? Maybe not fully... But the impression is still there because it's then that she finally confesses, and he knows that she can't do this because she's engaged (and if it's just chips with your old platonic friend, why would that matter?)

So yeah. They've been in this dance for a while.

[strangestcase]

Actually wait I have more questions! (Concerning the lxg au you have) (if you want to answer)

-how does Jekyll’s potion work in this? What are the other League member’s perception of the whole thing?

-is Jekyll usually Hyde or himself? Or is it more of a 50/50 split? Or just a whatever the situation calls for thing?

-do other gothic lit sources exist in the world despite not actually being in the League? If so, will they ever serve a story purpose?

-character pronouns/identities?

-do you have any fun facts about the characters that don’t really serve a purpose other than just being fun facts? (Ex: favorite foods, how they take their coffee, just little things like that)

-the potion alters the prefrontal cortex’s functions, triggering an altered state in which Jekyll loses his inhibitions, self control, and moral compass. Hyde has become the dominant form at this point, so while the potion is used to transform into either form, it is basically what keeps Jekyll as himself, and if he doesn’t take it regularly, he turns into Hyde- and Hyde doesn’t really like turning into Jekyll, so…

-it depends! Around the main team, who knows the secret, Hyde spends most of the time as himself, but if they have to go anywhere hyde would be too much of a nuisance they take the potion and only turn into them during the mission proper. The League is more comfortable around Jekyll, for obvious reasons, but as they get to meet Hyde they begin to treat him more as a person and less as a trained animal. He does hold it against them but honestly, they do like having people who don’t care about the thing.

-yeah! Most of them, in fact. Hyde personally knows a few, and has a bone to pick with Erik the Phantom. I have decided Adam and Carmilla will be part of the League, anyway, though not as part of the main group lead by Mina. And Dorian used to be a member of Mina’s team, but… well, he was a double agent, so it doesn’t really count. Dorian is also Mina and Ed’s ex boyfriend (awkward!). I think that it’s easier to list the gothic stories that aren’t “real” in Candyverse so: Sweeney Todd (fictional character, and a franchise at this point with theatre adaptations galore), Varney the Vampire (fictional character, liked ironically by teenagers), the whole Beetle thing (fictional character, popular but in the way the James Cameron Avatar movies are popular)

-giggles

Mina Murray Harker: bisexual, trans woman, she/they

Irene Adler: lesbian, trans woman, she/her

Captain Nemo: gay, agender, no pronouns

Henry Jekyll/Edward Hyde: bisexual, trans man, he/they/(it)

Harlow Griffin: aroace, trans man, he/him

Alice L. Byrd: pan aro, non-binary woman, she/fae

-Mina prefers non-fiction books to fiction books; Jekyll/Hyde hates anything peppermint flavored; Nemo is an excellent cook and humblebrags so much about it it’s insane; Irene is divorced; Griffin doesn’t like being referred to as his first name; Alice keeps three rabbits as pets.

[bakerstreetbabble]

Some thoughts on Sherlock vs. Elementary

I will be the first to admit, when I first saw Elementary on CBS, I wasn't impressed.  The BBC's Sherlock had captivated me from its very first scenes, and Elementary didn't compare...at least on my first viewing.  However, after the second season of Elementary was almost halfway done (and I was still waiting for the third series of Sherlock to begin), I decided to give the show another chance.  And I'm glad I did.  After I took the time to "live with" the characters of Holmes and Watson as they are portrayed on the American show, I found myself really enjoying it, albeit in a completely different way from how I enjoyed the British show.  So here are some of my thoughts on the differences and similarities between Sherlock and Elementary.

 The most obvious similarity between the two shows is, obviously, that on both shows Holmes and Watson (and some of Doyle's other characters) have been brought into the 21st century.  While this may seem to some Holmes fans to be a bold move, it is certainly not unprecedented.  The famous series of films starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce as Holmes and Watson also placed the characters in what was then a modern setting: the era of World War II.  Indeed, Holmes and Watson ended up pitted against Nazis and German spies, as well as the infamous Professor Moriarty.  So updating the setting from Victorian England is not as innovative as it may seem.

Sherlock does, I suppose, have a stronger link to the quintessentially English flavor of Doyle's work, as Holmes and Watson still work in London.  Elementary's New York setting is a bit more divorced from the source material, and having Sherlock be the only British character among a mostly American cast gives the stories a more American "flavor."  Meanwhile, the choice of Elementary's creators to transform Dr. John Watson into former Dr. Joan Watson lends a completely new dynamic to the duo. Perhaps that's why I initially preferred Sherlock to Elementary: the Holmes/Watson relationship in the British show is far more similar to Doyle's characters. 

Then there's the structure of the shows: each episode of Sherlock is like a feature film, while Elementary is structured more like an American CSI drama.  The episodes of Elementary are quite clearly structured with an eye towards commercial breaks happening at certain points in the story.  Sherlock has a more sustained dramatic flow.  Overall, the feel of Sherlock is more like a feature film, while the feel of Elementary is more like a typical American CSI show.  

Finally, there's the matter of how each show makes use of "canonical material."  Sherlock is loaded with references to Doyle's characters and plots; most of the episodes of the show thus far have paid some sort of tribute to stories from the Holmes canon.  Elementary gives the occasional nod to characters or situations from the canon (Captain Tommy Gregson, Charles Augustus Milverton, and Silver Blaze leap to mind), but for the most part, the plots are all original material, with Holmes and Watson as the protagonists.  Most interesting in this regard is probably how Elementary handles the characters of Moriarty and Irene Adler.  (SPOILER ALERT!)  Combining the two characters into one woman is a clever idea, and just as the dynamic between Holmes and Watson is changed by making Watson female, so is the dynamic between Holmes and his archenemy drastically altered.  Having Moriarty turn out to be Holmes's former lover whom he believed dead adds new layers to the relationship.  It will be interesting to see if the Moriarty plot is developed further.

Summing it all up, we have in Elementary and Sherlock two modernized Sherlock Holmes series, that approach the source material in very different ways. In my opinion, the British show is a bit more sophisticated in its style and writing, but the American show has much to recommend it to the Holmes fan.   I will attempt in later posts to discuss the differences between Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller's approaches to the character of Holmes, and the differences between Martin Freeman and Lucy Liu's handling of Watson.

[tiger-moran]

Where did I get to with these, uh...

A Problem of Numbers

What I liked about it: Moriarty appearing to be a potential victim and then turning it round and revealing he's the one in control. Him actually planning and carrying out some sort of criminal scheme. Him pointing out the rather screwed up nature of society where essentially some have huge amounts of wealth which they haven't earned while others who should have earned more get very little or just die. That his plan succeeds and does so without killing anyone.

What I didn't like about it: too much focus on the OCs. Moran seems to have been totally forgotten about. The scheme did seem rather silly and not something that would have actually succeeded or even supposing it did surely the victims would have been able to pursue them afterwards to get their money back or get revenge on them at least, nor do I see how those wealthy people were meant to have SO MUCH wealth on them (much of it in cash) yet they could fit all of it in a satchel. And Moriarty saving the supposedly sunken ship and slapping his own name onto it is really stupid sorry (way to make it glaringly obvious to everyone what really happened to the ship).

Was Moran in it: no, he didn't even get mentioned

Would I read it again: maybe but I can't say I liked more than little bits of it

-

The Fulham Strangler

What I liked about it: Moriarty having an 'urchin' who goes with Holmes's Irregulars and feeds information back to Moriarty which I think too is something that happens. Moriarty disguising himself and manipulating and getting the better of Holmes

What I didn't like about it: Moriarty getting the better of Holmes shouldn't come at the expense of making Holmes look stupid. Sure Holmes might be taken in by Moriarty but I cannot buy him reacting the way he does in this when he finds out the truth and then still having to have Moriarty explain something pretty obvious. Also while it's nice to have the Greuze referenced that isn't the right painting. In the canon Holmes never said that Moriarty owned La Jeune Fille a l’Agneau and that isn't the picture that MacDonald refers to as being in Moriarty's study but that's named as Moriarty's painting here.

Was Moran in it: no, he wasn't even mentioned

Would I read it again: not unless I was really desperate

-

The Adventure of the Lost Theorem

What I liked about it: Moriarty has a sword-stick (amongst other weapons). The implication that Moriarty is capable of killing if he has to. Him being very self-controlled but not totally emotionless. The link between mathematics and crime. Him seeing Faust and a young Irene Adler being in the performance and her voice catching his attention. Him disguising himself.

What I didn't like about it: he seems rather too passionless, about anything other than mathematics (and mathematics and its relation to crime) and too... self-contained. I mean I agree that he is a largely very independent person and he is young here but I think this overplays that idea of him being very independent to the point where it doesn't seem like there's any possibility of any meaningful relationship with anyone else (like Moran) in the future.

Was Moran in it: no, it seems to be set before Moriarty meets Moran, but then it is very difficult to see this take on him ever being close to Moran even once he has met him so...

Would I read it again: I didn't love this take on him but, yes

[thebaconsandwichofregret]

This is the fundamental difference between Elementary and Sherlock.

Elementary looked at the actual novels and how the time and place where they were written impacted them and then considered how things were different (or the same) in 21st century New York city and made sympathetic changes that led to a story that was true to the spirit of the original tales.

Sherlock took 150 years of fanon (seriously, watch the behind the scenes stuff, they reference the Rathbone films far more often than they do the actual books and the Rathbone films are nothing like the stories) and then did a find and replace setting to insert taxis and mobile phones and called it a day. Which led to a forward thinking, boundary pushing, emotionally intuitive man sounding like a bigoted, small minded arsehole.

Unfortunately for Elementary the narrative they were stuck with was being a gimmicky lesser imitation of Sherlock, when in fact Sherlock is a gimmicky lesser imitation of the Basil Rathbone films and Elementary is a shockingly well thought out modernisation that avoids almost all of the common traps that Holmes adaptations fall into (they do, as everyone except Jeremy Brett does, fail on the Irene Adler front, but I do have to give them points for originality with how they chose to do it!)

Rewatching Elementary, one of the things I absolutely love is how it recontextulises the Sherlock Holmes canon. Take the second episode of Season 1. Attic theory is brought up. That Sherlock’s brain is like an attic that has a limited amount of space, and therefore must only be filled with useful facts that will help his deductions. It’s one of the more famous quotes from the Sherlock books. It’s also, scientifically speaking, utter bollocks. So naturally the BBC show just copied it verbatim because it was written by two morons who think smart people are indistinguishable from wizards. At least Arthur Conan Doyle had the excuse that he lived in the 1800s. They still believed in fairies for God sake. But Elementary was different. Elementary was written by good writers. Writers that respect the audience’s intelligence.

So how does Elementary handle it? Sherlock mentions his attic theory. Watson, being a woman of science, laughs it off because it sounds stupid. Then as the episode goes along, we learn more about Sherlock and discover the real reason for why he doesn’t have close relationships with people and buries himself in his work. He’s punishing himself for his addiction, and using attic theory as an excuse to justify it, claiming it makes him a better detective, when in truth it’s because he feels he doesn’t deserve to be happy. That the only value he possibly has is as an investigator and nothing else. It’s deeply sad and, speaking from my own personal experience, completely relatable.

The second episode of a show is often more important than the pilot because it provides an indication of what the show will be like going forward. In Elementary, it indicates the show will be about an intelligent, but broken man learning to open up to people. That labelling the great Sherlock Holmes as a super-genius is actually detrimental to his character and self esteem. That he can be so much more than just a detective, but also a mentor and a friend. And when he starts playing the violin again at the end of the episode, it indicates that, with time and patience, one day he can actually be happy.

[no-side-us]

Letters From Watson Liveblog - Feb. 20

A Scandal in Bohemia, Part 1 of 3

Many Sherlock Holmes adaptations would have you convinced otherwise, however, running wild with the idea that they're in love despite this line being one of the first sentences you read in her story.

I've seen two explanations for why she's referred to as "the late Irene Adler." The first being that she's since died, which is sad. The other being that Adler is simply no longer her name. I just wanted to ask if the latter is a common interpretation when using "late" to describe someone, cause I haven't seen it used like that elsewhere before.

An interesting way to refer to your first mystery with Holmes, Watson, truly.

Holmes just got a new case and Watson just so happened to stop by, so by God he is not going to let this opportunity go to waste.

You know, it's a bit weird reading this story and seeing Holmes and Watson talking after having not seen each other in a while, when we just read some stories of them working together on some cases.

I never thought about it before, but I guess Holmes had at one point in the past looked up Irene Adler and wrote down what he knew of her in his index.

I imagine that Holmes gets a lot of cases where a bunch of high-brow nobles come to him to look for their scandalous letters or other such minutiae and this exact exchange happens each time. I also imagine that Holmes only takes these cases because they pay the bills.

We later find out this is untrue (unsurprisingly), but it says a lot about ol' Von Ormstein here that this is what he thinks she's trying to do.

And Watson's a part of the case! Holmes must be happy.

An actual pancake recipe was included in the letter, so if anybody wants to make some pancakes go take a look. I wonder if Watson ever made pancakes for Holmes.

Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3

[devoursjohnlock]

hi! do you happen to have a list of must-watch holmes adaptations? can we see it pleasee

Hi anon! This is a great question; the short answer is no I don't keep such a list because I'd like to see everything eventually and haven't yet. But can I make such a list? I can try.

Since your follow-up ask mentioned that you’re watching from a tjlc/BBC Sherlock perspective, I’ve added explanations for why many of these adaptations made the cut. Personally, I love the earlier black and white films; if this is less your glass of tea, the first ones to cut out are Barrymore and Wontner.

Oh! Edited to add: there are so many Sherlock Holmes adaptations I haven’t seen, and I’m aware that I’m dramatically under-representing those not performed in English. Please feel free to recommend your favourites if you don’t see them here.

ACTION!

1. Sherlock Holmes Baffled (1900) Why wouldn’t you start here? It was the first, has nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes whatsoever, and runs just under 1 minute.

2. Sherlock Holmes (1916). William Gillette as Holmes. Historically very important. This is the film version of an original play first written by Doyle, then destroyed in a fire, then rewritten by Gillette with Doyle’s permission. Remember “Marry him, kill him, do what you like with him”? That was about this play (1899). Gillette was the model for Collier’s illustrator Frederic Dorr Steele’s Sherlock Holmes (1903 onward). This film was thought lost for many years; the Hartswood gang partly funded its restoration when it was rediscovered. Holmes has a love interest in this, Alice Faulkner, who is I guess modelled on Irene Adler; IIRC, they share a dream or vision at some point, which got my attention. There are some nice Holmes & Watson bits, too, although Watson is barely in it.

3. Sherlock Holmes (1922) John Barrymore as Holmes. I like this one! Again, Watson is not much in it, which leads to some odd choices like Holmes sitting down and listing his own limits (why???), but we do see their rooms in... Cambridge (sure, why not)... so they’re young, which is rare enough, and there’s a bit of nice camaraderie there. The Moriarty special effects are hilarious.

4. Sherlock Jr. (1924) Buster Keaton as a bungling Holmes wannabe. It’s Buster Keaton, so it’s action-packed and funny, with the added bonus of an extended mind palace sequence and fourth wall breaks. I just think it’s neat.

5. Wontner films (1931-1937) Arthur Wontner as Holmes. At long last, sound! Wontner did several films as Sherlock Holmes, partnered with Ian Fleming (not that one) as Watson. I like these, too. The Sign of Four is often laughed at for the speedboat chase, but have you read The Sign of the Four? Of course there should be a speedboat chase. Also: hairline.

6. Rathbone/Bruce films (1939-1946) Basil Rathbone as Holmes. These are obviously essential. The first two are set in Victorian England; after they moved from 20th Century Fox to Universal, they ditched the fog and deerstalker to fight the Nazis. Sherlock references these films often. For example, the Golem in TGG is based on the Creeper from The Pearl of Death; the play in the aluminium crutch case on John’s blog is named for Terror by Night; Moriarty’s stair pause in TRF is based on that in The Woman in Green; Irene teasing Sherlock in disguise in ASIB is based on Adria Spedding doing the same in The Spider Woman. That’s off the top of my head; lots of people have written about these references on tumblr over the years. Oh right, Holmes nearly leaps off a building in The Woman in Green because Moriarty tells him to, so there’s that.

7. The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959) Peter Cushing as Holmes. This is the Hammer Films version, so it’s pulpy and lurid. Is it Sherlock Holmes or is it Dracula? I’m not sure even Cushing knows. Mark Gatiss is a huge Hammer fan; ‘nuff said. Meant to be enjoyed for its faults, rather than despite them.

8. The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (1970) Robert Stephens as Holmes. Surely I don’t need to explain this one. The first on-screen gay Holmes (some would say this is arguable; I’m not going to bother arguing).

9. The Seven-Per-Cent Solution (1976) Nicol Williamson as Holmes. This is not a great film, but I’m giving it a mention because the pastiche it was based on (by Nicholas Meyer, who also wrote Star Trek: Wrath of Khan, with all its Sherlockian vibes) is a pretty big deal. It’s got Freud! It’s got cocaine! The film has some good moments in it, though the book is better; the ending was changed from book to screen and a het romance was tacked on, because of course it was.

10. Murder by Decree (1979) Christopher Plummer as Holmes. Does a thing with peas.

11. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson, aka Lenfilm Holmes (1980-1988) Vasily Livanov as Holmes. This Soviet-era Russian series is so well done; really a must-see. I linked the first playlist I found with subtitles, but it’s probably worth hunting around a bit for good ones. Vitaly Solomin is wonderful as Watson in this. Tea?

12. Sherlock Holmes, aka Granada Holmes (1984-1994) Jeremy Brett as Holmes. Again, essential viewing. Don’t underestimate the film-length episodes at the end of the series; Sherlock references these more than most because it’s where the original contributions are. A huge caveat here: Granada’s approach was to usually remove Watson’s narration, and show the viewer events that are only told in the stories, and often filtered through multiple people. So, when you’re watching the episodes, you pretty much can’t help but accept all events as factual, whereas the same cannot be assumed in the stories at all. In my opinion, this is the biggest limitation of the Granada series. They do make up for this with creative framing and lighting; pay attention to mirrors, for example, which are used to great effect throughout the series. And when they choose to diverge from the original story, it’s often to do something quite interesting. But I’d strongly recommend reading the story before watching the episode, so that you can see how they changed it every time; there is a real tendency for people (and like... the Granada fans are quite zealous about this) to just assume that everything Granada did was exactly canonical, and it’s simply not. I’ll also point out that the series was mainly produced by Michael Cox, who also commissioned the Oxford World’s Classics editions of the Holmes stories, which were annotated by a team of very smart people, including Richard Lancelyn Green. Cox also wrote a biography of MR James. Anyway, he knew his stuff, and it shows in the non-canonical places, in the divergences from canon.

13. The Great Mouse Detective (1986) Barrie Ingham voicing Basil of Baker Street. No explanation needed.

14. Without a Clue (1988) Michael Caine as Holmes. This is mostly here for Amy! It’s revealed early in this film that Watson is the brains behind the operation. Personally, I prefer The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes’s Smarter Brother (1975) in the “Holmes isn’t smart actually” genre, but only because I think Gene Wilder is funnier than Michael Caine.

15. A Case of Evil (2002) James D’Arcy as Holmes. I’m sorry, this has no place on a must-watch list, but it’s one of two so-bad-it’s-somehow-something films that I’m including (yes, you know what the other one is). It’s all repressed trauma and spooky dreams, I can’t leave it out.

18. The Hound of the Baskervilles (2002) Richard Roxburgh as Holmes. Ok, again, I apologize, but this is the only Hound film among over 30 to nail the tone of the book as far as Holmes and Watson are concerned—to recognize that the point of the book is that Holmes deserted Watson and now he’s back (yes, I’m aware the novel is backdated, it doesn’t matter). The only one! The casting is not great, it’s got some other issues, but it deserves more credit than it gets.

17. Reichenbach Falls (2007) Alec Newman as Detective Inspector John Buchan, who is somehow both a Holmes and a Watson. Required viewing; if you haven’t seen it, then hell mend you. I wrote an enormous meta on this film a few years ago.

18. Sherlock Holmes and Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2009/2011) Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes. I said what I said.

19. Sherlock Holmes, aka Asylum Holmes (2010) Ben Syder as Holmes. Awful. Frankly appalling. But may I also submit: Dinosaurs. And robots. It’s a fun time, especially with friends, and by now I really have convinced myself that Steven Moffat based the Doctor Who episode Deep Breath on it.

20. Sherlock (2010-) Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes. Eyyyyyy.

21. Sherlock Holmes, aka New Russian Holmes (2013) Igor Petrenko as Holmes. Full disclosure, I haven’t watched this yet. I need to rectify that soon.

22. Miss Sherlock (2018) Yûko Takeuchi as Holmes. What a tragic loss; this was a wonderful series and she was brilliant in it. Saw what BBC Sherlock was doing and tried to beat it to the punch. I have to respect that.

[inevitably-johnlocked]

Hiiii do you have any meta on Irene Adler? I just finished watching A Scandal In Belgravia and I would love to read some more on her character and what people thought of her

Hey Lovely!

Ah, I have my own personal meta about her, all VERY old so take that with a grain of salt. Here's what I've got, from my offline masterlist. Apologies for the mess, Tumblr doesn’t let me do sub-bullets anymore so I had to improvise.

MY META

MASTERLISTS

MASTERLIST FROM FEB 2022 (contains meta about her sexuality)

Masterlist, April 2016 (has a few other peoples’ meta)

Are Sherlock and Irene Mirrors? (Masterpost, December 2017)

BATTERSEA META (JAN 2019) 

BATTERSEA META (SEPT 2020)

ASiB META

The Interrupted Phone Call

Is it Ever Stated Who Irene is Blackmailing?

How is ASiB So Gloriously Gay?!

Did Mycroft Know About Irene?

The Parallels of Mary/Irene and John/Sherlock

Irene’s Nakedness was for John, Not Sherlock

Why Were They Uncomfortable With Her Nakedness

Irene’s Theme is About John

How did Sherlock find Irene at the End?

Why Didn’t John Lie to Irene?

Irene’s Death: Why Did it Affect Sherlock?

Food Equals Sex 

The Phones of ASiB

Isn’t it Significant He Kept Her Phone?

Sherlock Has No Interest in Irene

Mofftiss gets the idea for Irene from TPLoSH?

GENERAL IRENE ADLER META

- Why Was Sherlock Mourning Irene?

Sherlock Wasn’t Upset About Irene, But About Something Completely Different

Irene’s Death: Why Did it Affect Sherlock?

- Of Thatcher and Adler - Is Irene’s Purpose to Make John Jealous? - A Different Interpretation of Irene from ACD - Irene Is Gay.

Was She in Love / What’s Her Relationship With Kate

Straight With An Exception?

- Was The Rose and Card From Irene? - Why Does She Get to Wear Sherlock’s Coat? - Irene in the Pocket Watch in TAB - Why Does Sherlock Refer to Her as “The Woman”? - What is Kate’s Relationship with The Woman - Why Did She Text at the End of TFP?

Irene as a Love Interest

Canon Irene Was Respected

Any Adaptations That Treat Her Right?

It’s Mostly About Sherlock’s Feelings for Her, not Her for Him

Sherlock vs Irene

Texting Behind Their Backs

Wasn’t Sherlock Attracted to Her Nakedness?

THE Woman

Does She Know Sherlock is Gay?

I Don’t Think She Was in Love With Sherlock

Has He Fallen for Her? Will She Return in S4?

Irene in Sherlock’s Mind Palace in TSo3

She was set up as a Sherlock parallel, when did she switch to a John Mirror?

Sexuality

Wasn’t She Bisexual?

Why Is She In Sherlock’s MP in TSo3?

If Mofftiss’ Intention was to Make Her Bi, Why Would They Allow Criticism

Is She Bi?

Did Irene mean she was a lesbian or something else?

OTHERS’ META

ACD Irene Adler vs Everyone Else’s

On Irene Adler and why do Modern Adaptations Keep Making her a Love Interest

ASIB: For People Who Still Think Sherlock Loves Irene

ASIB: John’s Face is that Pikachu Meme

ASiB: The Battersea Scene - John’s Facial Expressions

ASiB: Pining Idiots

ASiB: Glass Doors

ASiB: Exposing Heteronormativity

ASiB: What drug did Irene Give Sherlock

ASiB: The Reunion Moment After Battersea

ASIB: Mr Archer, on the count of three, shoot John Watson

ASIB: What was the point of making Irene a lesbian?

I’ve also a blog tag “irene adler” you can check out too :)

-----

Feel free, friends, to add your Irene meta to this post too! As I said, mine are all OOOOOOLD so if anyone has any more recent ones, please add them!

[22ndnervousbreakdown]

You do have some really fun ideas, and usually I'm all up to inventing modern aus, but the way I see this concept, I don't think it really works with anything but the canon Victorian setting.

As is, it would be a Sherlock Holmes adaptation that makes a point of not really resembling the canon, to the point of intentionally being unrecognisable as a Sherlock Holmes adaptation at first. Stacking a modern setting on top of it would, in my opinion, make it one too many layers of separation, very possibly putting it into the realm of not really being Sherlock Holmes anymore. Yes, that way the reveal would be less predictable — but I don't think it's necesseraly a good thing. The way I see it, the reveal should be predictable to a certain point — not 100% and not from the start, but enough to (let's imagine this show has a fandom) make it a popular theory a couple episodes before it happens, that sort of thing.

It shouldn't be that hard to do with Victorian setting: you'd just need to reference canon Sherlock Holmes events (probably slightly tweaked for the sake of continuity, logic, etc) with enough vagueness so it can plausably be a coincidence, especially to wider audience not thoroughly familiar with the Sherlock Holmes canon. If you move it to modern times, you wouldn't have canon events to go off from — you'd have adapted canon events. Which would already inevetably make them quite far from what happened in canon, and any degree of vagueness would probably make that separation too big for it to... Make sense as an adaptation? Not sure how to phrase it better, but I hope you get what I mean x)

And, again, I don't think it's hard to keep references to canon plausibly random or looking like regular easter eggs in the Victorian setting. 221B mention and suchlike is absolutely plausible as an eastern egg, Sherlock Holmes is a famous enough character in the 1890s, it's also not unreasonable for a Totally Random Show Set In That Times to just have some references for him being an actual public figure, and those mentions of him bein not connected to the main character (not immideately, at least) is kinda the point of him being in hiding. That said, while this show should definetly have some easter egg-type references of this kind, and they would function as hints, they're also very easy to avoid when not needed, because, again, he's in hiding. He's not telling his story to anyone and no one he meets knows him — well, again, up to a certain point. Or maybe later in the series someone even does (some politician and a former client of his, for example, to whom Holmes turns for help... Btw I can very well imagine it being either Irene Adler or the king of Bohemia, not named, or probably just someone close to him who knows the story and probably works as a messenger here), but Holmes is quick enough to indicate he can't blow his cover even for a second and this person never adresses him by his name and references the circumstances of their previous meeting vaguely enough so, again, it can be recognised as something from Sherlock Holmes canon if you know it well enough, but leaves room for plausible deniability.

I also imagine this show as being really episodic at first, so in the first episodes it's only slightly hinted that there even is a major plot arch, then it gradually takes more screen time and eventually — just in time for the reveal — becomes the main focus. So for that first half I think it wouldn't be hard to make the main character's backstory be revealed really gradually and only growing more recognisable when we're closer to the reveal, as most of the screen time would be dedicated to each individual episode's plot anyway, not to the backstory. (Btw! I also imagine there being a brief subplot of us learning that the reason he's on the run is definitely because he killed someone, and he doesn't seem at all remorseful about it, cue some moral dillemas all the while it's revealed, first, that he's not followed by the police or something similar but by the killed person's associates, then, that they're certainly not the good guys, and eventually, obviously, that the killed person is Moriarty). So it's only after the reveal, in the 2nd half of the show, that the plot arch — of Holmes finally breaking away from the Moriarty's henchmen for good, getting ready for his return and, well, returning — would be concentrated on the most, and by then there wouldn't be any need to make actual plot points vague anymore.

Anyway, yeah, while I strongly disagree about the modern setting, thanks for the opportunity to talk about the concept in more detail I guess, because apparently there's a lot that I've come up with but hadn't seen an opportunity to add it here x)

Guys listen up I have a banger concept:

TV show (called "The Hiatus" or something like that), set in the late 19th century. It starts with us meeting the Mysterious Enigmatic MC, who's traveling through Europe, obviously on the run from someone or something. Every episode starts with him arriving in a new town under a brand new alias in hopes to quietly spend a couple of nights there, but then he accidentally encounters some random person (usually a child or a woman who's been wronged somehow) in a difficult situation and can't help but help them. He doesn't actually want to even briefly speak to anyone, he's all Mysterious and Enigmatic and secretive and EcCeNtRiC and On The Run and very obviously in huge distress but somehow he just always can't leave a situation as it is (and also visibly very curious to resolve it). The people he helped are usually amazed by how clever and observant and also Mysterious and Enigmatic he is and want to get to know him better, but after helping them he always has to leave the town even earlier and more hastily than he planned to.

As the show progresses we gradually learn more of his backstory, including that there's this Certain Person that our Mysterious Enigmatic MC had to leave and now misses dearly and can't contact, (and the more time passes, the harder it gets for him to stop himself from writing to him).

Only about halfway through the show, after N episodes and some amount of increasingly obvious hints it's finally officially revealed that our Mysterious Enigmatic MC is post-Reichenbach Sherlock Holmes.

The very last episode is, obviously, The Empty House.