#sherlockian studies

[sherlockianscholar]

through pure happenstance, i stumbled on this first edition (published 1940) of 221B: Studies in Sherlock Holmes at my local bookstore!! i am officially having the best birthday ever

[sherlockianscholar]

Honestly tho. I’m up at 4:30 AM cross referencing Baring-Gould’s Annotated Sherlock Holmes and Klinger’s New Annotated Sherlock Holmes 😅

the sherlock holmes brainrot is so real I say as I do none of the work I was supposed to catch up on during the weekend

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

Deduction Tips #16

The size of a bag is indicative of how much a person needs to carry, and usually we prefer to carry less things. When you see someone with a bag (be it a backpack, a purse, or anything else) think about why this person needs a bigger one rather than a smaller one, and what that says about the contents of the bag and the situation of the person carrying it

[motorghost]

asking the true academics while i languish in an airport... how long was watson's combat service? as in, how many years did he actually spend actively deployed?

[amateur-deductions]

When it comes to the observation weeks in the training program. Could you elaborate on why we shouldn’t deduce then? Is it only about the time when we are doing the exercises?

Hello! great question, i gotta say i didn't write that program, but i did follow it, so i can only give you an answer based on my experience with it and with deduction as a whole. Unfortunately L isn't available to give you the original reason, but if i get in contact with them i'll make a post with their answer.

So, there's this quote from Sherlock which sums up the reasoning behind this very clearly:

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

During this stage of the program it is assumed you're coming into deduction as a complete beginner, and therefore that you haven't honed your observation skills yet. This means you'll inevitably be at a point where if you try to deduce you'll be doing so while missing a large amount of information, and fall into the trap of not knowing you're missing information and trying to work with what you have, which leads to often taking big leaps in reasoning to reach conclusions, because you don't have enough data to work with.

This is also why when i teach people i make sure they're at an acceptable level in their observation skills before i move onto other stuff. Later on in the process you learn how to make the most out of a situation where you have little to no information to deduce from. But that's a bit too complicated for a beginner, so it's important that they don't try to deduce until they have a solid grasp on what information they can gather

Aditionally, the training program, as incomplete as it may be, attempts to separate the process of learning deduction into manageable chunks. That program was written during a time where the community was much bigger and everyone attempting to find some way of learning this skill. Everyone was coming up with solutions to their problems and sharing them in the community, and that program is an attempt to solve the overwhelming feeling that comes with trying to learn a massive skill with multiple possible points of entry. It segments it into manageable, organized chunks for people to have a neat way of getting started with deduction, and one of those chunks is just observation, since it's complex enough of a base skill to have its own section

[verycrazycazy]

Has Kä photoshopped himself with the tree? He looks way taller beside the tree. No way he’s that much taller than Hä 🤔

[reloha]

He has said “A Study in Emerald” is fanfic, if that helps.

This may be a slightly silly question, but I’m curious if you’ve ever been active in any fandoms, and if so, which ones? As in making/sharing fan art, reading fanfic, or even writing some. That’s all, thank you!

Sherlock Holmes Fandom, I guess. I was inducted into the Baker Street Irregulars. And I've written two Holmesian stories, A Study in Emerald and A Case of Death and Honey.

[ninasnakie]

New Fic! 😃🎉

Finally! I posted the first chapter of my FTH fic, A Study in Scale. The story lived for a year with me, everywhere I went, my traveling to the other side of the world, written in different sizes of notebooks, journals, and even napkins, speech-to-typed in Google doc, recorded on my phone whenever something came to my mind and I was in a weird place/ situation...

I had to do Tons of research, from geography and physiology to chemistry, history, and criminology, for this story, which is based on one of my lifelong dreams and fantasies. I went to sleep countless nights dreaming about having a companion like that, and now I wrote it in the form of a Sherlock fic.

I hope my Google history hasn't been checked during this time because they would be scared by the history, which includes things like "How long does it take to dissolve a body in sulfuric acid?"

I'd Love to share my journey with you Sherlockians, and grateful for reposts!

Let me know if you want to be deleted or added to the list. :)

@totallysilvergirl @lisbeth-kk @calaisreno @helloliriels @blogstandbygo @topsyturvy-turtely @starrla89 @sgam76 @friday411 @thegildedbee @meetinginsamarra @raina-at @7-percent @kitten-kin @major-trouble @a-victorian-girl @sherlockjohnblog @holmesianlove @inevitably-johnlocked @khorazir @petite-madame

[sherlockianscholar]

the solitary cyclist from the canon, in my opinion and acd's, is not the greatest work among doyle's repetoire. but i would like to call to your attention one point that has needled me since i first read this story.

violet (yes, one of the six violets in the canon) smith takes on a live-in music teaching position in the country for her un-married employers' (carruthers) ten year old daughter. the daughter is mentioned once in the entire story, during violet's exposition at 221b. violet goes back to the country with no further mention of the girl. after the ruckus and holmes/watson's intervention, carruthers and the others get arrested and taken to jail. off the father goes without making any inquiry into the fate of his daughter nor does violet comment on it.

now the granada episode (which i'm rather fond of) seals up this plot hole, simply and sweetly, by having violet and her soon-to-be husband look after the daughter while her father's in jail. but that doesn't happen in the story. which leads me to wonder...considering the lack of attention by violet or carruthers, did she run away or die (i say, very tongue in cheek)? did carruthers just say fuck them kids and abandon her?

or my personal favorite, did he hire a random 10 year old girl for this express purpose? given the absolute chaos and ever-unfolding half-baked schemes concocted by every member of carruthers and co, i can imagine those men coming up with something that ridiculous.

acd makes a lot of mistakes and slip-ups in the canon, but honestly, if i could ask him one question, this stupid pedantic detail would be high on the list.

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

Hi!!! How can deductions be used in day to day life, or like, usefully? And how have you made useful deductions? Sorry if that made little sense

Hi! I see you sent this question in the past two days, i'll gladly answer it, but in case you send any other questions in the future and i don't answer them as quickly i'll inform you that usually all the questions of the week are collected in my inbox and you'd get your answer on a Monday (this week i had some scheduling problems so i pushed it to Wednesday), so if you don't get as quick an answer next time just wait for Monday!

Now, regarding your question! There's many ways deduction can be used in daily life, sometimes it even depends on what you do for a living. For example i know psychologists and other healthcare profesionals have to rely on non verbal communication and information they gather from observation, along with what they're told, since patients can't be relied upon to be transparent and honest all the time, or even know what information is releant to share. In this case deduction can be massively useful.

On a more general note, it depends a lot on the type of relationships you have, i know people who use deduction to interact with their friends, it allows them to know when they're feeling upset or worried, and about what, and act accordingly, all without needing to do more than just glance at them. I know people who use deduction to navigate social situations because they're not good at interacting with people and having the extra information deduction provides helps. Personally i'm someone that introduces deduction into everything i do, from acquiring helpful knowledge when talking to superiors, to knowing what waiter is best to call over at my table cause they've gotten more hours of sleep.

I recommend you watch Sherlock, House M.D., The Mentalist, and all of these deduction heavy shows that sometimes showcase how these characters use their skills casually, it's really not much different than what you see there. If you want a blog that really goes into casual uses of dedduction i'd check out @froogboi 's blog, it's full of everyday life uses of deduction

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

There's actually a few mistakes in your conclusion, simply because you tried this with one (1) rubber that belongs to you.

If you want actual results you should try this experiment with at least a handful of them to test that you can actually identify the handedness of the individual based on the fingerprints found.

You already know how to acquire those fingerprints, so what you should do now is gather rubbers from people with different handedness and use this test to get their fingerprints and identify each person's handedness without knowing which fingerprint belongs to which individual.

You said you have a colleague, so maybe have them run it and give you the results for you to identify. You also should run a statistical analysis on the results you get to make sure your results are statistically significant, as the fact that most people are right handed is probably going to affect your guesses and your results.

As for the initial question, that being "will this allow me to know if someone was murdered or commited suicide?" do keep in mind this is only relevant if the murder or suicide in question has any connection to handedness, taking BBC Sherlock as an example, in a situation where the individual was shot specifically on the side of the head. So keep that in mind

Suicide or not? (experiment results)

This, dear readers, is the moment you've been eagerly anticipating: the results of the experiment. The path to the answer I've obtained, a curious journey devised by my own inquisitive mind.

Let me begin by explaining the purpose behind it all, followed by the details of the journey and the ultimate revelation.

So, what was the underlying objective of this experiment, and where did it originate? The rubber experiment was crafted to determine, when all that remains is a mere rubber, whether it was a case of suicide or murder. You might wonder, how is such a determination possible?

By discerning whether the deceased was right-handed or left-handed (or, in the most challenging scenario, ambidextrous, much like myself).

It all commenced when I found myself plagued by the wretched state of boredom; Then, a question arose within me.

 Initially, I believed it might be achievable simply by observing rubbers. Thus, I embarked upon collecting data. I 'borrowed' numerous rubbers from my fellow students, meticulously examining each one. Alas, no answer presented itself through such means. You see, it all hinged on how one scrutinizes the rubber, on the perspective (angle) from which it is observed. 

And so, I delved into my knowledge of chemistry, conducting a modest research to identify the appropriate substance for examining the rubbers. Initially, I experimented with the talc powder I possessed, acquired from a fingerprint identifier kit.

Alas, the talc powder proved ineffective in my pursuit. Undeterred, I intensified my research, delving deeper into my reservoir of knowledge and scouring through various books and trusted articles.

With perseverance, I managed to narrow down the options to two potential substances. The first contender was Lugol's iodine, while the second was low-sulphur graphite powder. 

So, armed with all the necessary materials and a collection of rubber covers, I embarked on my quest. Initially, I had grand aspirations of conducting these experiments within the confines of our humble kitchen. However, alas, it soon became apparent that such a choice would be far from environmentally friendly. Let us conveniently overlook the certain wrath that would befall me if I were to proceed, courtesy of my mother.

I was fortunate enough to discover a lab that would serve as the ideal setting for my experiments, a stroke of luck that ranks among the finest moments in my endeavours. From this point forward, with the newfound laboratory at my disposal, I shall be posting a series of intriguing experiments.

Accompanied by my colleague, I ventured into the lab to commence the iodine experiment. 

In its unaltered state, the experiment dictated the amalgamation of potassium iodide (KI) with copper(II) sulfate (CuSO4), resulting in the formation of iodine molecules (I2). However, as Lugol's iodine already encompasses iodine molecules, I deemed it unnecessary to follow that particular course. Iodine, known for its volatility, possesses a proclivity for evading solution boundaries with ease. Nevertheless, an ample array of surfaces exists upon which iodine molecules readily affix themselves.

One notable exemplar is fats, for iodine exhibits exceptional solubility within them. Considering that fingerprints predominantly consist of fats, even the meagre traces of fatty substances present on our fingertips possess the capacity to harbour a sufficient quantity of iodine molecules. Consequently, these otherwise imperceptible fingerprints transmute into a distinctive hue of dark brown, rendering them conspicuously visible.

Alas, it didn’t work. Failing is not the thing I just accept, and I had to find out why it happened. I actually expected this because rubber covers are made out of polyethylene. It is a type of thermoplastic polymer – and that thing, ruined the whole experiment. But I also did the experiment with a plain white paper, and it worked, as you can observe in this low-quality photo. 

In the midst of my investigation, I turned to my final recourse: the enigmatic graphite powder. Its application yielded captivating outcomes. As you can discern, the fingerprint loops have become discernible, and their inclination provides vital clues. From the tilt of these loops, I can deduce that the rubber in question was wielded by a right-handed individual. Curiously, though, this rubber belongs to me, and I am, in fact, ambidextrous. Nevertheless, it is evident that it has predominantly been employed by my right hand, the hand that I write with most of the time. 

As you can see, the loops are tilted to the side that I showed with the little red arrow. By that, I identified that I held it with my right hand.

You can’t deny the beauty of this experiment. So go on and try it. 

-ND

[amateur-deductions]

Greetings @amateur-deductions

What are your Go-to advice for for those who start becoming a deductionist and just finished learning body language?

Appreciate Your reply

Bless you all and have a good day.

Hello! Sorry for the delay, i've been on a hiatus since Christmas.

So if you're coming from having learned body language already you have a bit of a head start compared to people that are starting fresh, since you probably have already learned to be more observant, to be constantly aware of things like body movements and facial expressions, and to intepret these things and process them as you take them in. I would say this means you can put a bit less time into the observation practices beginners usually have to go through, and you can dedicate more time to practicing reasoning and logical thinking

I would also say you have the option to approach deduction using your body language background. Something you start to realize as you get better at deduction is that everyone has cultivated different skills they use to extract information, some people use raw logic reasoning, some use extensive psychology knowledge, and some use extensive knowledge in body language and facial expressions, and there's nothing wrong with any of these methods, they're simply what you could understand as different "specialties".

So i would advice that you don't try to learn deduction as a separate discipline than body language, but rather use your body language knowledge, coupled with anything you learn in the field of deduction, to enhance your conclusions

This does come with a disclaimer though. Make sure that you're not leaning into your body language knowledge so much that you're avoiding doing the exercises and learning the methods that are core to deduction simply because body language provides an easier path, since you're well versed in that already

[i-am-grell]

Daylight Savings Anime Poll

I have a movie and a few episodes of filler left and then I'm finished the first season of One Piece, so it's time to decide on a show to take a lil break with.

If you're new here, I love anime and am indecisive, so you get to pick what I watch next.

As always propaganda* (*rambling) below the poll. You can reblog if you want to. You do not have to know me, follow me, like me, or like/know any of the shows on here to vote.

Propaganda:

Free! - The deal: you can vote for this is you want to, and believe me I wouldn't mind finishing up Free!, but if you keep it in the polls, I get to keep putting 50% Off! quotes in the buttons. It's up to you, but I'm js

Fairy Tail - Break from long series with other long series? Up to you Fairy Tail gremlins on the Fairy Tail webbed site. This poll option covers Season 2 of Fairy Tail (episodes 49-72).

Horimiya: The Missing Pieces - Running out of stuff to put in the buttons for this option tbh. Might end up being the thing I watch in between whatever other show wins this poll and whatever show wins the next poll like I did with Tribe Nine

Moriarty the Patriot - You know, honestly? I'm just in the mood. Give me Victorian shit, give me mystery, give me homoerotic Sherlockian rivalry. (Tbh I think the only actual Sherlock Holmes tv adaptation I've actually seen is House MD and if this is even a fraction as phenomenal as that was-)

Wind Breaker - Fight Club but anime and I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong about that, right? From what I've heard that's the premise. I'm just curious, frankly.

The Case Study of Vanitas - Halloween might be over but I'm sure not, give me those vampires.

[asoulwithadream]

Sherlock & Co - The Sign of Four (#1)

From the diary of a soul with a dream…

Firstly: let’s address the elephant in the room. THEY’RE DOING THE BOOKS!!! I’m super excited for this—I thought they were only planning to go through the adventures! I felt like this week’s episode was dramatic, and though I shamefully zoned out through a bit of it, I think some of the most shocking bits kept me entertaining and excited for next week.

I’m not sure if I like 10 WEEKS of waiting but I’ll do it for you S&CO

WHAT THE FUCK

MARY? MARY? MARY?

Oh, never-mind, we’re fine.

“My mind rebels at stagnation, Watson! Give me problems, give me work, give me the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am in my own proper atmosphere.” (HE SAID THE THING, HE SAID THE THING, HE SAID-)

The picking on the watch plating is giving me flashbacks to the drunk BBC charging port.

Cheap, sentimental, and superstitious <3

“There’s always a crime scene, for those that are willing to look.”

“Doesn’t matter, it’s a culture reference that 8 listeners might get” that’s such a mood

Hooooly shiny diamond

WIGGINS! WIGGINS! WIGGINS MY BELOVED!

“H&M? Dunno, really.” You icon

I think Bernie’s the real Gollum here guys

SHERLOCK- I feel targeted (Astrophysics is the science I want to study)

“Gave him a wedgie, stole his diamond.”

No it isn’t

NO YOU DON’T KNOW HER

MARY MORSTAN OH MY FUCKING-

I don’t know whether to be super fucking happy or absolutely devastated

New Sherlockian figure unlocked (Did we just forget about Moriarty?)

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

Okay so, there are some fundamental misunderstandings here, and i have planned posts about Identity Claims, Feeling Regulators, and Behavioral residue for Amateur Deductions, but for the moment let me just address what's in this post.

(Quick Shelock GIF to break up a bit the massive wall of text that comes next)

So first things first, let's really quickly explain what identity claims are. Identity Claims are exactly what they sound like, things we use to make claims about who we are, they show people (including ourselves) how we want to be percieved. It's important to note that just because we want to be percieved a certain way, and we try to portray ourselves that way, it doesn't mean that's who we trully are as people, it's also important to note that a key part of something being an identity claim is intent, for something to be an identity claim there has to be some level of intent in its existence. By definition, an identiy claim is just that, a claim, and a claim comes with some understanding of the message you're trying to get across. Sometimes you don't realise that you're trying to get a message across, but you still do so, and you still have that intent, even if it's on a subconscious level

So keeping in mind that the existence of intent is so important, before we ask ourselves "what is this person trying to claim about themselves?" we must first ask "Is this person trying to claim something with this? is this a message the person wants to transmit?" and the answer can just be no

So going back to the picture, we look at this mouse, let's ask ourselves, is this person trying to claim something with it, to others or to themselves?

And we answer this question by simply noting the way this mouse is used as an object in this room. The mouse is, at the end of the day, a utility, it's not on display, it's not shoved in your face when you enter the room, it's not on an elevated surface on it's own, actually the only reason it's kinda isolated from the rest of the things on the desk is because it needs space to move. So no it doesn't seem that this person is eager to display this mouse as a claim of who they are to other people, but what about themselves?

This one's trickier, but again, let's keep in mind the intent. This person bought this mouse out of, pressumably, a large selection, so yes there was obviously some reason for them to acquire this specific mouse, there was some intent behind its adquisition, but was the intent to showcase some part of themselves? Well, you're saying the lights and design are flashy and colorful, i ask you, is that why they bought the mouse? how do you know they decided to buy this specific mouse because of the flashy colors? what if this happened to be the one with the best specs? or what if all of the ones he had to choose from had colors, and this one was the one with the least flashy ones? Point is, at the end of the day, tons of gaming mouses have flashy colors, and that doesn't have to be a deciding factor in buying one, it can just be a coincidence

To be able to treat something as an identity claim you have to know the person is trying to claim something with it, you're not saying the mouse is an identity claim, you're saying the lights are, and the lights might just come with the mouse by pure chance. Now, if you were saying that this is a gaming mouse and that's something this person considers to be a big part of their identity, they see themselves as a gamer, and they like to reinforce that notion, then i would agree with you, their whole desk is a claim of their gaming hobbies and identity, the setup itself is made specifically to be able to play games on that laptop, not to work, not to study, but to play

Now, the rock, that's a Himalayan Salt Lamp, it's literally a lamp, it lights up. So, same proceedure, is this person trying to claim something with it, to others or to themselves? Well, maybe, let's check

What's the intent behind having this lamp? Illumination? No, there's clearly another lamp here that does that job, and probably better. An ADHD treatment? maybe, it's actually possible if that's something people seem to believe, so we know if there is an intent behind having this lamp it might not be only an emotional one, but we only care about if the intent is an emotional one, to showcase something about who this person thinks they are. Well the lamp isn't on display, it's actually quite hidden, so it's not trying to claim any identity to other people, but maybe to them? well it's in view of every comfort zone in the room, definitely in view when they're gaming, so yes there's a decent chance it's tied to some aspect of who this person thinks they are. But do realize it's also possible for the lamp to be a Feeling Regulator, or both an Identity Claim and a Feeling Regulator, so keep that in mind when classifying these things, they're not mutually exclusive

The study of "Snoop"

I think the book: " Snoop, what your stuff say about you" was recommended by @amateur-deductions. And inspired by @brunoholmes way of learning,

I will also post my progress of learning the book on my website, this is a sample of what you can expect from it.

Identity Claims

We spend hours in our personal space, but there is no obvious functional reason why we should decorate them.

The explanation is that we decorate those that have symbolic values about ourselves. They can be directed towards ourselves or towards others. These are different because they're the results of two distinct motivations.

My theory would be if the objects are large, at eye level when standing up, they will be directed at others, while smaller objects, close to workplace or bed will be directed to ourselves. And depending on the ratio between these two, we can guess if a person is introvert, not many people go into this room, or extrovert, many people see this room.

Since these stuffs have symbolic value, it is essential to get a hang of surrounding objects for similar meaning before concluding. A poster about car can mean that this person is interested in car, or want to be seen as a cool guy, or it's something that his pass away day left for him, etc.

Another thing to note is that having a lot of decorations doesn't mean openness and extrovert. But it is the content of the decorations that we need to pay attention to.

In this pic , the light on the mouse and the rock in the corner virtually have no functions, so they must have symbolic meaning, even the picture on his screen(unless he’s watching a movie, but I suspect not).

Though since it’s a laptop which means it could be brought outside, there’s also a possibility that it’s only used in this room. Consider the meaning, the light on the mouse means he wants to be seen, or he thinks that it’s cool. Cross check with the car image also means cool, we can safely think that this person want to craft that image for himself.

Taking a further step, he doesn’t have a lot of stuff could mean he’s either a simple person or he doesn’t have a lot of money to invest in these. If he’s a simple person, then we need to question about those “cool” objects, were they given to him, leading to indication of other people in his life. If he doesn’t have a lot of money, we need to question if he’s a grown up who doesn’t have a well paying job, or a kid who family members would get this for him, leading to indication about his age and financial range.

And of course, no one would bring a rock back and forth, so this rock is self-directed. There’s also a comment about people using this rock as treatment for ADHD, so this could also be a possibility.

[comicgeekery]

Sherlock & Co.: The Sign of Four

New Sherlock and Co. Thoughts!

Ok, so of course I HAD to talk about The Sign of Four. I was intrigued from the first episode. I’d been wondering when and how Sherlock and Co. would tackle the novels. They sprinkled in a few elements of The Valley of Fear early on, but that novel is a whole other situation, seeing as the majority of it isn’t a Sherlock Holmes story at all. And of course A Study in Scarlet is unavoidable as Watson and Holmes’ origin story. I suspect S&C will visit those again in different forms at some point, since neither mystery was really explored.

So The Sign of Four was an interesting choice at this stage. The show’s gotten into a good grove with 2-4 part adventures, they could have done for ages more, but it looks like the S&C team is ready to tackle more ambitious ideas.

I admit I was nervous at the start. Some of the four-part adventures have felt over-stretched (particularly Silver Blaze), so a TEN-parter might have been a disaster. Thankfully, I had nothing to worry about! The Sign of Four was captivating every week, brilliantly balancing interesting elements in every episode while also keeping the listener engaged with the larger mystery.

There were excellent deductions, familiar humor, some genuinely gripping suspense, and SO much fun when the gang all went to India! Whoever it is on the writing team who loves to write in poetic descriptions of landscapes had an absolute ball about that long train ride. I really felt like I could feel the scenery, not to mention the peaceful comradery of John, Sherlock, and Mariana. It’s so heartwarming to see how close they’ve all gotten.

I also really appreciate the tactful way that the writers and characters dealt with questions of Indian culture, British colonialism, and the connections between superstition, history, and the many things a big diamond might mean to different people. Everything seemed super respectful of India and British people of Indian descent. I don’t know if anyone at S&C is Indian themself or if there were sensitivity advisers or what, but it all clearly came with significant effort and that was SO nice.

(Note: I am white though, so it’s also possible that I missed some inaccuracies or insensitive elements.)

However, the real star of the show was always going to be the often-reimagined Mary Morstan. I was VERY curious about her, as in the original canon she and Watson get married shortly after the events of The Sign of Four.

In canon my opinion of Mary is…fine. She’s fairly brave in her adventure and it’s cute how she and Watson fall in love. But…yeah. That’s it. She’s mentioned offhand in a few other stories. Her presence is actually so vague that Sherlockians struggle to establish a timeline for her after The Sign of Four. She becomes Mrs. Watson. She’s there. She dies at some point so Watson can move back in with Sherlock. Then she’s back again? Or maybe she’s a second wife, also named Mary? It’s another one of those areas where the fans care more about Sherlock lore than Doyle ever did.

So there’s been various versions of Mary in the hundreds of Sherlock Holmes adaptations over the years. She’s usually pretty boring, a plot convenience for Watson to talk to about his latest adventure with that master detective what’s-his-name. I’m not sure if she ever showed up on Elementary, since they were focused on that whole Joan/Irene/Moriarty thing. And BBC’s Sherlock got…interesting with her. I wasn’t a fan of Mary as a secret elite assassin, but I give them credit for at least doing something with her. Until she died. Which was stupid.

The trouble with Mary is that, no matter how incredibly straight Holmes and Watson are, Mary functions as a wedge between the BroTP. She is, explicitly, the reason Watson moves out. And, since so many writers struggle to convey that people generally love and cherish more than one person at once, that means Mary must to an extent replace Sherlock in Watson’s heart.

I say all that because I want to emphasize that, hands down, Sherlock & Co.��s portrayal of Mary Morstan is the best I have ever seen.

I’m on record as really rooting for Sherlock & Co. to evolve into a gay romance. Fans have been waiting literally over 100 years for Sherlock and John to fall in love and be a couple in a professional production. I’ve felt shipping vibes in some episodes and in others John and Sherlock seemed completely platonic to me. I knew bringing in Mary could mean confirming the show as another Strictly Straight interpretation. Which would be disappointing, but not actually a sign of poor quality in any way.

First off, Mary was introduced as not quite a new character. She was meant to go on a date with Watson in the first episode, but got held up because of a traffic accident (and Sherlock did a bunch of deductions and was very clever). In functioning as a call-back to the first episode, she also easily illustrated the growth that John has had since the start of the show, when he was so freshly traumatized and uncertain about his life. Back then, it just made sense to him that his date would ghost him. He was the kind of person to be ghosted.

But we also got beautiful insights into Mary’s character. I think it was a brilliant idea to open the story with a recording of Mary as a child getting her plot-relevant bedtime story from her father. S&C is often limited in what it can portray because of the “true-crime podcaster” premise. This diagetic flashback was super clever and excellent way to tell the listener “We’re doing something different this time. Something big.”

Mary is such a FULL character too. She’s smart but shaken from her own military PTSD. She has a goofy, self-deprecating charm that complement’s John’s similar humor. She’s bisexual, a trait that informs her past and personality without feeling like just a token element to please the fans. She’s got complicated feelings about her father and his legacy. She’s understandably torn between wanting to help save a missing boy and bring criminals to justice or just washing her hands of a situation that seems to hurt more with every twist.

She and John do have an easy chemistry. They bond over their similar humor, their military trauma, and just being a warm piece of comfort for each other. As a fan of pairing John and Sherlock, there were times where I outright groaned because of how great Mary was and how sweet her budding relationship with John was. Beautiful, infuriating, 10/10.

SPOILERS BELOW

By the last episode of The Sign of Four, I was ready to admit defeat. Clearly Mary was going to be a new regular cast member and I was going to love her for the rest of the show….which is also basically what John thought.

I sincerely did not expect for her to die. Why would she? She was such a great character! I didn’t expect to end a Sherlock and Co. adventure with a real, lasting tragedy. Other characters have died, but never ones I would expect to be mentioned as on-going sources of grief in later adventures.

Her death also felt surprisingly real. It took her a week to die from her wounds and she was touch and go in the hospital. She easily could have lived. And now she’ll always be a point of a divided timeline for John. Of what might have been.

When BBC’s Sherlock killed off Mary, it felt cheap and perfunctory. She died to raise the stakes and the drama for Sherlock and John. I was never especially clear on why John was so in love with her, honestly. (It didn’t help that he’d been considering an affair at the time.) Sherlock and Co. has just delivered a masterful lesson on how to introduce a character, make her sincerely matter, and then make her death hurt for the simple reason that now she’s gone.

Bravo to Sherlock and Co. and bravo in particular to Acushla-Tara Kupe for her excellent performance as the best damn Mary Watson who never was.