BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.
- Yeahright
- Homeless Network
Offline - Registered: January 6, 2014
- Posts: 19
Re: Moriarty; an in-depth analysis.
Professor Moriarty in the books was a highly respected mathematician, no one suspected his criminal activity Sherlock spent months if not years meticulously gathering evidence and following leads that would incriminate him and hold up in a court of law. Sherlock was the only one who saw the academic for the psycopath that he is making both nemeses. When he felt the noose tightening around his neck he followed Sherlock to Switzerland and tried to kill him in desperation at the cost of his own life. Sherlock's process wasnt detailed in stories but he summed it up pretty concisely to Watson in the final problem. Sherlock did this at great risk to his life but saw it as fulfilling his life's purpose to bring such a criminal down.
Now the adapting duo called Moftiss like to play contrary and had Moriarty attempting to drive Sherlock to desperation, simply to get rid of a palpable threat to his nefarious activities. It was almost a complete reversal, he wanted to reveal(falsely ) to the world that your hero is a fraud. They also had Sherlock orchestrate Moriarty's arrest off screen between Scandal and Hound. How did Jim end up in custody in Hound ? They never explAined it other than Mycroft claiming that they knew about him all along and kept tabs on him. Hardly unlikely also it would render the threat in Scandal pointless.
No Sherlock led The government to M offscreen and that would explain how Jim owed Sherlock a fall. IOU literally.
But with these writers no one knows and you really can't theorize without enough data, especially when they are withholding key elements. It's their Moriarty now they can do what they please him.
- Yeahright
- Homeless Network
Offline
- Registered: January 6, 2014
- Posts: 19
Re: Moriarty; an in-depth analysis.
SherlocklivesinOH wrote:
I thought this series spent a bit too much time on Moriarty's obsession with Sherlock. Everything he does, at leat in Reichenbach, is about bringing down Sherlock. Which means that when Sherlock goes up against him, he's saving mostly himself (and his friends.). So it becomes a personal thing. I know Sherlock is motivated by mental stimulation more than a desire for justice, but I prefer for some other good cause to be served when he solves a crime, rather than just protecting himself. When he fakes the suicide, he's saving other people, yes, but they're in danger only because they associated with him the first place. If he had stopped Moriarty from doing something bigger, the sacrifice would be cooler (although I do like that he would die to save John.)
Also, as someone else mentioned, Moriarty is not nearly as signficant in canon as he becomes in most adaptations. Holmes really mentions him in only two stories, and we never meet him. Holmes is not shown to be constantly obsessed with him throughout canon.
Sherlock's defining feature both in canon and all adaptations is JUSTICE, albeit with an -end justifies the means- air. The pursuit of mental stimulation is just how he's built. Admittedly it is summed up beautifully in " I may be on the side of the angels but I am not one of them". The question is asked in Scandal that for someone with Sherlock's abilities why would he settle for being a detective, even a consulting one? Yeah, some would say, but he wanted to be a pirate first. He was a child , and pirates are just cooler, by brother wanted to be a dinosaur.
He had to stop Moriarty at that point precisely to stop him from raising the stakes even higher in a more devastating evil deed even if it is Bond style cooler.
