so. I watched Scandal in Belgravia again last night.

[rosa_acicularis]

ETA: Much thanks to boxed, who saved my bacon when I was an idiot and let LJ have its wicked way with this post. It probably wasn't worth all my anxiety over its loss, but that doesn't make me any less grateful to her for saving it. Big thanks also to phoenikxs and mylittlepwny for answering my call of pain and rage.

And now, back to our formerly scheduled post:

In some ways

Comments

[remindmeofthe]

No one could watch this episode and not see that Sherlock loves Mrs. Hudson, that he is capable of loyalty and protectiveness and empathy, but it's typical of this wonderfully imperfect, irritating show that most of these moments hinge on a woman being hurt and vulnerable - Molly, Mrs. Hudson, Irene.

Yessss this. I've heard several people say "BUT IT'S OKAY BECAUSE IT WAS ABOUT SHERLOCK'S HEEEEEEEEEART" and I just cannot even with that. Thanks for acknowledging the good character stuff AND the problematic crap behind it.

Also I think something is going on with Molly. Well, okay, mostly I hope something is going on with Molly other than her having taken a dozen steps back in terms of characterization, but the camerawork is really interesting. Each of her three scenes ends with a reaction shot of her, which makes enough sense the first time and could be stretched into making sense the second time, but is just weird the third time. Each of those scenes also has Irene as a major off-screen presence. So, okay, maybe they're just

[rosa_acicularis]

Thanks for acknowledging the good character stuff AND the problematic crap behind it.

That's certainly what I've been trying to do in my head, but sometimes it's hard - on one hand I want to just stop thinking critically (for once) and let myself enjoy a show I'm very fond of, and on the other hand I'm so full of indignation and disappointment that I just want to quit the thing altogether. (As I very nearly did after Blind Banker.) There's got to be a middle ground somewhere, where we can celebrate the show's strengths and use its failings as an opportunity for discussion, analysis, and fannish subversion.

Or something. ;)

THEN during the scene where John feels the need to say Molly's full name in front of Irene (like, nice dialogue there, Moffat, how many Mollys would they trust with retrieving Irene's phone anyway?), we get a reaction shot from Irene.I DID NOT EVEN NOTICE THAT. You're totally right, though - I'd be very surprised if that didn't end up having some kind of significance. I've wondered since first series why Molly

[remindmeofthe]

There's got to be a middle ground somewhere, where we can celebrate the show's strengths and use its failings as an opportunity for discussion, analysis, and fannish subversion.

Exactly. I am a big fan of the middle-ground approach, which is why I like this post. I want to call the show out when it does stupid shit, but I also want to squee when it's awesome. I certainly don't begrudge anyone the right to stick to squeeing - it's when people start trying to justify the problematic stuff that it starts to grate on me.

[rosa_acicularis]

it's when people start trying to justify the problematic stuff that it starts to grate on me.

Absolutely. I certainly understand the impulse, and in retrospect have been guilty of it myself, but I'm trying to be proactive in acknowledging problematic material, even in shows I enjoy.

And squeeing too, obviously.

[phantmgreeneyes]

Aw man, I didn't even think of the whole "Sherlock curing Irene of her lesbianism" debate. Boooooo.
I chose to believe that, like original cannon, after the story ends, she moves to America and marries someone. Namely a woman.

[rosa_acicularis]

she moves to America and marries someone. Namely a woman.

Totally. And then she and her Ms. Norton (who is, of course, from New Jersey) run off and have hilarious adventures in bondage and crime.

[larissa_j]

by the time of the Wedding of River Song, she's a psychopath who is willing to let time itself die because she can't bear the thought of being responsible for her love's death. Now, because of the backwards nature of her narrative, we can take from this that she grows into the woman who died in that Library, but our final image of The Woman contains only her weakness, and her incredible selfishness.

You have just summed up most of my problem with Moffat's Who and River Song. It was not only what you mentioned but her over the top declarations of love that became too much for me. It was the same issue with Reinette. The "my love"s and other nonsense that no practical real life woman says on a daily basis. The character of River lacked credibility. Every episode with River is ruined for me. I wanted to find a reason to like her and I just can't. I don't know how I can adore Amy and Rory and hate River so much but I do.

I blame Moffat. I have no desire to watch S7.

I haven't watched Sherlock yet. I was just getting ready to

[rosa_acicularis]

I'm guessing based on the tone of this post that I probably shouldn't?

I'd say this: watch the first episode. You'll know pretty quickly, I think, whether the style and the wit and awesome (male) characters are enough to compensate for the less appealing aspects of the show, only some of which I've mentioned in this post. The plotting in Sherlock is unspeakably better than in series 5 and 6 of Who, but the treatment of class issues, female characters, and characters of color is worse.

The Sherlock fandom, on the other hand, is absolutely amazing, and if you're interested in reading some really incredible fic then it's worth watching Study in Pink and The Great Game just for that. (Nothing is worth watching The Blind Banker. Nothing. Well, Sarah, but nothing other than her.)

Sherlock is a difficult show to like sometimes, but I don't regret watching it at all. You're going to roll your eyes at the fail and clap your hands in delight - it's just a matter of which one you're going to do more often that decides whether it's worth

[airie_fairy]

"but it's typical of this wonderfully imperfect, irritating show that most of these moments [of Sherlock showing love] hinge on a woman being hurt and vulnerable"

On the whole, I totally agree with what you've said in this post about the trouble with the representation of women/Irene on the show, but when it comes to that quoted sentence -- I feel that those moments of him showing it toward anyone male or female, have been like that. I feel like he's like that with John as well. He insults him constantly and then visibly panics when someone threatens to shoot him. Of course, there's so much more to the troubles with the situation Irene was put in than that, so you're still right.

[rosa_acicularis]

I feel like he's like that with John as well.

You know, you are absolutely right. It wasn't highlighted as strongly in this episode, but Sherlock gets very emotional when John's in danger. Perhaps I forgot that bit because I tend to file those moments in my shipper brain, and I rarely consult my shipper brain while writing meta. Clearly an oversight on my part. :)

[earlgreytea68]

Oops! Should have read the comments before I went and wrote the same exact thing! So: I agree! :-)

[eponymous_rose]

This is a really, really good post - the more reaction posts I read, the more uncomfortable I am with the implications of a lot of the things you referenced here. (It's also uncomfortable to realize how much of this went right over my head on first viewing, but that's a different story.) I haven't rewatched yet, so some of this may be a bit off-base:

I think the great strength of the original story is that Irene Adler wins. SCAN was the first Holmes story I ever read, and I was enamoured with the notion that the great, infallible detective had been outsmarted. It was also a very telling element of his characterization that he built a great respect and admiration for Irene on the foundation of his own defeat. The show's interpretation played with that notion, by letting Irene have the illusion of winning, and then, haha, just kidding, of course Sherlock comes out on top. And while he is inexorably changing, in bits and pieces, in this particular instance his overwhelming self-confidence is entirely validated, and that happens on the

[rosa_acicularis]

Livejournal must hate me today, because I wrote a nice, long reply to your comment and then, when I quite foolishly clicked 'Add a comment', it was CRUELLY DELETED. It's not really all that much of a loss, as I was pretty much just using lots of different words to say that I agree with you, but still - it's the principle of the thing.

But yeah. I agree with all those things you said! They were good things. ;)