Zatoichi wrote:

First I'd like to agree with Ah-chie in that those reactions say more about the fans than about the writing.
But then there's also the team that emphasizes Sherlock's nastiness and cruelty in interviews lately.. and I confess it confuses me. I'm at a loss as to why they paint him as ruthless machine that's also endearing because it's incomplete as a human being.. Paraphrasing here, but pretty much the words Benedict used. Maybe this is the backstory they thought up for him, maybe that's why they feel he needs penance on the one hand and human growth on the other. That's where it doesn't fit with my concept of ACD Holmes, who I think was an eccentric but pretty complete human being.. It's fine if Sherlock develops into this character, but personally I would have preferred not to delve into his childhood traumata and self-loathing. Well, that aside I think it's only natural that a part of the audience picks up more on the one aspect of his personaliy and one on the other.. He's an arse for some and a sad gay baby penguin for others, you find things that support both those readings in the show. Sherlock is written to polarize, and he does. I'm not sure if that's a flaw in writing or genius in writing.. If you want a strictly positive public image of Sherlock Holmes it's probably the first, if you want to create a TV smash hit it's probably the latter.

 
I agree that maybe some points of Sherlock might not have been necessary, such as furthering the backstory (childhood dog, parents, etc). Even though Ben insisted on it. I do understand that they're trying to make him seem more 'human' but just like you, to me, Holmes is already a perfect representation of being human. I guess that in this TV age, fleshing out a character that much is normal to destroy any hero images and insert a 'everyday joe' feel.

Yes it does seem like the consequences of his 'flaws' have gotten more aggresive as the series progresses. And yeah he has certainly developed as a character to finally show that he truly does care. Even though it sucks that he has to suffer so much to do so.

But what I was trying explain was why this unflattering, downright negative image of Sherlock was allowed to ?tarnish the original's reputation. Nobody before Mofftiss would want to treat Holmes so horribly, make him out to be a pariah and enable him to be so hate-able by those people nakahara mentioned. All the Holmeses before this probably were assholes, but it was Dr Watson-filtered. So I think since Watson almost hero-worshipped him, it doesn't make people automatically scream that he's a dick. But Mofftiss stripped everything away so it's like a behind-the-scenes look where his insults, stubbornness and excitement at manipulation is laid bare.

I still ask myself sometimes when I watch Sherlock: "Is that what Holmes would have done?" I'm still undecided but I love them both anyway

When I first started watching Sherlock, I was admittedly a tiny bit indignant- I can see where nakahara's coming from about the ..disrespect? Loss of dignity? that came with the series compared to previous compositions of SH. It seems that SH has transformed from an unreachable, public-assisting independent  with coping mechanisms to Mofftiss' childish, addicted social recluse who just repels people. I too sometimes think the more negative points of his character are exaggerated in Sherlock.

However! That being said, there is a good reason they played them up so much. Moftiss wasn't writing a detective series like SH, but a story about the detective. Most importantly, his relationships with people. They're trying to humanize him and make his flaws, vices, fears and loves extremely apparent. Anything you might hate about Holmes has been magnified and put into practice with characters who have very close relationships with him. You wouldn't see Holmes tearing 'smitten Molly Hooper' apart, but you do read about him slamming NSY, insulting clients and making everyone look like fools. Nobody admonishes Holmes in ACD's books for assholish behaviour, but there is a huge backlash from the people that surround Sherlock.

Sherlock is held to a standard in this modern setting, unfortunately. He's not allowed to get away with what Holmes would, because there are people telling him that things can't be done/said the way he wants to. They labeled him a dick, because there are expectations of him not to be one. Holmes can be a statuesque ideal of a misunderstood, insurmountable character, but Sherlock is presented as a complicated human being who is still growing. The leaps of logic and brilliance are still the same, but Sherlock is so set in our universe that John can yell at him (but not Holmes) "Oi what the hell! You can't say that! Do it again and I'll smack you!"

Hi everyone!

I've always enjoyed the ACD books since I read them as a child (and found them quite scary back then). But I love BBC Sherlock and can't wait for season4!!

Glad to meet you all! So excited finally being able to chat with fellow Sherlockians!



(...still traumatized by 'Oh What A Night'.)