BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



January 3, 2013 2:56 pm  #1


An analysis on Sherlock

An analysis on Sherlock
Hello everyone, today I will give you my own character analysis
about Sherlock, the character, this analysis will cover everything regarding Sherlock, so without any further delays let us begin: 
An Introduction to Sherlock:
Sherlock made debut in 2010 as a modern version of the world famous detective Sherlock Holmes, the idea was to have a more modern and up to date version of Sherlock Holmes, a version that would adapts the culture and habits and beliefs of modern day London.
Was the attempt a success?
Yes, the creators were able to create a more modern version of Sherlock Holmes and it was able to catch the attention of the audience, because of its renewing factor, to make something old new.
1- Personality
   Sherlock’s personalities is something that is worth taking time and think about it, because we are not dealing with Sherlock Holmes we are dealing a different version of Sherlock Holmes, a new dimension of the Sherlock Holmes universe, different from what Arthur Conan Doyle created, not just in the settings but in almost everything about Sherlock Holmes was changed to fit this new dimension that includes a Sherlock Holmes lives at a 221B Baker street in today’s London.
In this dimension we are looking at more ruthless Sherlock Holmes.
In “A Scandal in Belgravia “at the charismas gathering scene one of the girls said to Sherlock “you always say rude (or bad or horrible) things   
As I said before we are dealing with a different Sherlock Holmes, so we should expect to see a change in personality,
And a ruder Sherlock Holmes is a good idea to bring Sherlock Holmes to modern day London; however this Sherlock Holmes has a conscience and it is obvious that his conscience awakes each times he feels that he has made a mistake.
Another change we see in this version is the amount of respect that Sherlock is getting. Is he respected? does anyone like him?
Yes and no
No, no one likes Sherlock, he is rude, arrogant, and has no respect for anyone.   
Yes, Sherlock is respected, but his respect doesn’t come as a respect of personality but as respect of how good he is. His success is his respect.
Another change is the absence of the 7% solution, the amount of morphine or cocaine that the original Sherlock Holmes uses to keep his mind active; in this dimension we see the result of that absence, a hyper active Sherlock Holmes; this Sherlock Holmes will do anything to keep his mind active thus breaking calm and wisdom that the original Sherlock Holmes has.



2- Sexuality & Friendship
     A- Sexuality 
This topic has been a point of discussion since Sherlock first came on television and has resulted into one question:
Is Sherlock gay, straight or homosexual?
The answer is as follow:
Sherlock is not guy or homosexual, in fact he is not interested in sexual relationships at all.
His only interest is work, and only work.
Again in the “A Scandal in Belgravia  episode when Irene Adler meets Sherlock naked we see that Sherlock doesn’t about sexual contact, but he thinks about working immediately, trying to deduce as many things as he can about Irene Adler.
Now, a question comes in mind:
Can Sherlock love a woman?
In this dimension he can, in the “A Scandal in Belgravia  episode we see that Sherlock has developed some kind relationship with Irene Adler, but what kind of relationship?
Is a romantic relationship, or is it a relationship based on respect, or is a normal friendly relationship?
The answer is open for the viewer to decide
But two things are cretin; one is that the relationship is one of these relationships.
Two, that the relationship is a mixture of all of these relationships 
But at the end it all depends on how we interpret the events of the series.
        B- Friendships
At the begging of the series we see Sherlock confessing to John that he has no friends.
But as the series develops we see that Sherlock develops close friendship with John.
This tells us a lot of things, one of them is that Sherlock is in a desperate need for friends, his loneliness might be the reason for his misery, he needs someone to talk to, someone to keep him company, someone to laugh and talk with him, and John is that someone that Sherlock needs.
This brings another question, where are Sherlock’s relatives?
To be more specific, where is Mycroft?
In times of need the one who will be besides you is your brother,
So where is Mycroft to keep Sherlock occupy?
This brings us to the second part of this section,
The Sherlock-Mycroft relationship.
In the begging of the series we see that Mycroft doesn’t come with contact with Sherlock, he meets John instead, and when he does we don’t see the brothers reunion that we expect to see, we see a cold reunion between two rivals, this tells us that in this dimension something happened in the past that shacked the brother relationship between Sherlock and Mycroft to the core. It could anything, this something else that it is left for the viewer to decide.
     
3- Faith
In a question that was asked to the Sherlock BBC forum most of the answers about Sherlock’s faith suggest that he is an atheist.
Now on one hand this suggestion might be true and on the other hand it might be wrong.
Most of our answers to almost any question that involve serious subjects like religion and sexuality are based on our own in background of that subject, and can also be based on our ideals, beliefs and culture.
Because I am sure that those who suggest that Sherlock is an atheist noticed when he says: “people don’t really go heaven, they are taken to a special room and burn
There are two ways to look at this quotation:
1-    That this tells us something about Sherlock’s belief.
2-     That this is one of Sherlock’s jokes, being the joker that he likes to be sometimes.
But there is something else that we may and may not notice, is that Sherlock says the phrases “for God’s sake  and “dear lord . Some of may say that this is just normal as these phrases have become part of our normal daily life, but we need to remember one thing, Sherlock doesn’t have a normal and he is not an ordinary man. So what is the answer to this question? It will be a question mark that is open for discussion with only two men that hold the key to the answer which are creators of the character, because the only thing we will get from this is different opinions based on different from different places who have different cultures and different backgrounds about these subjects.
       


     

                     
         
   Conclusion
There many dimensions of the Sherlock Holmes universe. And each one represents the creator or writer’s own background of the original character, and his own vision of the character is created based upon his own interpolation of the original text and the character’s analysis that he makes upon his own culture.

So what do you think?
Do you agree with me or do you disagree with me?

 

January 3, 2013 3:14 pm  #2


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Nope, totally disagree.
You've completely missed the point of this series and applied your own values to a slim slice of the subject matter.
In fact, you've showed a lack of understanding to the whole concept of ACD as well.

Nice try but you've disregarded the best advice fans have been given: romanticise at your own peril.


____________________________________________________________________________________________
Also, please note that sentences can also end in full stops. The exclamation mark can be overused.
Sherlock Holmes 28 March 13:08

Mycroft’s popularity doesn’t surprise me at all. He is, after all, incredibly beautiful, clever and well-dressed. And beautiful. Did I mention that?
--Mark Gatiss

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert McCloskey
 

January 3, 2013 6:13 pm  #3


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

a sherlock holmes fan wrote:

An analysis on Sherlock         
...           
   Conclusion
There many dimensions of the Sherlock Holmes universe. And each one represents the creator or writer’s own background of the original character, and his own vision of the character is created based upon his own interpolation of the original text and the character’s analysis that he makes upon his own culture.

So what do you think?
Do you agree with me or do you disagree with me?

As an academic scholar I quite agree with you on your conclusion. Observing this framework is imho very important to any serious interpretation of art.

About the details, you will find there is pretty much arguing around here. And it's good that you point out how much these issues are related to the Eye of the Beholder.
I don't share each of your ideas, but can go along pretty far 


PS Maybe you like to introduce yourself, so that we can welcome you 

Last edited by Harriet (January 3, 2013 6:31 pm)


Eventually everyone will support Johnlock.   Independent OSAJ Affiliate

... but there may be some new players now. It’s okay. The East Wind takes us all in the end.
 

January 4, 2013 11:02 am  #4


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Hello, and welcome!

I am assuming that you are not an English native speaker? You did well seeking to express your thoughts!

 

January 4, 2013 11:42 am  #5


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Trying to take this piece bit by bit and so far I can say that I can probably agree that BBC Sherlock is  a tad more ruthless than a gentler Canon Holmes.  Tho this may depend on what we consider to be ruthless?  How many people has BBC Sherlock actually killed?
Tho I don't actually consider BBC Sherlock to be at all rude, he is just bluntly honest.
I also disagree on the respect thing.  I think he greatly respects John's opinion and I think he considers both Lestrade and Molly as valuable colleagues.
I think John and Mrs Hudson love him in their own ways and I hope he and Molly  are going to become good friends.  Lestrade admires him.
BBC Sherlock can be manic, but this does not stop him being wise and he can be very calm, particularly when it matters:  dealing with the cabbie, Moriarty or Irene(at the end).
I think you're overplaying the friend thing a bit far.
I honestly think the sequence was: Sherlock needed flatmate, then Sherlock needed assistant.
I think the friendship thing happened by accident and now Sherlock is very emotionally tied to John, which he finds difficult to deal with.

Last edited by besleybean (January 4, 2013 11:44 am)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 4, 2013 11:51 am  #6


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Agree, Besley - I'd also say that this Sherlock wouldn't consider himself as lonely - why should he? "Alone is what I have, alone protects me."


Eventually everyone will support Johnlock.   Independent OSAJ Affiliate

... but there may be some new players now. It’s okay. The East Wind takes us all in the end.
 

January 4, 2013 11:55 am  #7


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Agree 100% besleybean. I think I've posted similar 100 times in this forum, lol. (which is why I wasn't too keen on going over it all again)
Towards the end of the analysis we're told to not consider Sherlock in terms of 'normal' yet right at the start that is exactly what was done. People believe it is 'normal' to want a friend (that's debatable in itself) Sherlock showed no sign of craving companionship; if he did he wouldn't have listed his 'faults' straight up.

As for the ruthless & rude part; as I said it is necessary to go back & listen to what the creators have said of this Sherlock. He is a yet-to-be-matured Holmes. A youthful version of the canon Holmes and as with most creatures, human or otherwise, there are steps to maturing. He is just starting on those steps.
So no; I don't think this is a different 'version' of Sherlock Holmes; I do believe it is a younger model that will eventually mature into the canon model.

Last edited by kazza474 (January 4, 2013 11:56 am)


____________________________________________________________________________________________
Also, please note that sentences can also end in full stops. The exclamation mark can be overused.
Sherlock Holmes 28 March 13:08

Mycroft’s popularity doesn’t surprise me at all. He is, after all, incredibly beautiful, clever and well-dressed. And beautiful. Did I mention that?
--Mark Gatiss

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert McCloskey
 

January 4, 2013 11:58 am  #8


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Yes and there are certainly enough of the original Canon elements to ' keep it real' for us.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 4, 2013 12:15 pm  #9


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Because I am sure that those who suggest that Sherlock is an atheist noticed when he says: “people don’t really go heaven, they are taken to a special room and burn
There are two ways to look at this quotation:
1-    That this tells us something about Sherlock’s belief.
2-     That this is one of Sherlock’s jokes, being the joker that he likes to be sometimes.

This is something that holds no water at all. For a start, it's a bad way to present something, giving only 2 possibile reasons. I'll give you a third straight off the top:
3.  This shows that Sherlock simply speaks of facts with no subjectiveness involved.

It's simply a matter of fact statement. As for Sherlock being a joker .... with strangers? And especially children .... no. On the rare occasion that Sherlock jokes, it is a very dry wit that shines through. The use of that dry wit would be lost on the children and so he loses the attention grabbing feel of superiority ; which is why he jokes (from what we have seen thus far).
The question of religion is one you asked in the forum elsewhere (in fact most of this is made up of those questions) You offered your opinion on the matter and asked opinions; many gave opinions. As you stated, most said he was not a religious person, yet you still stick by your original thought. (again in fact all your questions were superfluous as you've simply put all your original thought together & called it an analysis)

It appears that you WANT there to be some thread of religion in these shows. Unfortunately, just as with the canon, there is nothing to suggest one way or the other about the subject. It's not addressed as it has nothing to do with the stories. And I doubt you will ever find Moftiss adding a 'faith' theme at anytime at all.

So as far as the faith/religion question being an open one; that is incorrect. It's a non-existant one.


____________________________________________________________________________________________
Also, please note that sentences can also end in full stops. The exclamation mark can be overused.
Sherlock Holmes 28 March 13:08

Mycroft’s popularity doesn’t surprise me at all. He is, after all, incredibly beautiful, clever and well-dressed. And beautiful. Did I mention that?
--Mark Gatiss

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert McCloskey
 

January 4, 2013 12:25 pm  #10


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Kazza, you have your own perception of the stories and you have your own way of dealing with other's opinions.
And again, you forgot your smilies 


Eventually everyone will support Johnlock.   Independent OSAJ Affiliate

... but there may be some new players now. It’s okay. The East Wind takes us all in the end.
 

January 4, 2013 12:34 pm  #11


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

And you are stating the obvious, why?


____________________________________________________________________________________________
Also, please note that sentences can also end in full stops. The exclamation mark can be overused.
Sherlock Holmes 28 March 13:08

Mycroft’s popularity doesn’t surprise me at all. He is, after all, incredibly beautiful, clever and well-dressed. And beautiful. Did I mention that?
--Mark Gatiss

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert McCloskey
 

January 4, 2013 12:51 pm  #12


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Harriet wrote:

Agree, Besley - I'd also say that this Sherlock wouldn't consider himself as lonely - why should he? "Alone is what I have, alone protects me."

That's true. On the other hand his own brother once called him "a lonely, naive man." But that's of course Mycroft speaking. 

Kazza, I frankly don't understand your attitude. One doesn't have to accept other people's opinions but one should accept that there are different opinions.


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)

http://up.picr.de/28609194so.png

 
 

January 4, 2013 1:11 pm  #13


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

I don't actually understand what you are going on about. It's a straight forward, no frills answer.
I am NOT one to sit & hold hands; this is a forum where we throw up ideas and see what floats & what doesn't.
I don't sugar coat my words; if I think something sucks, I say so.

And for the final time, so that maybe you will take note of this .. just once because this is getting tedious to say the least .... I attack ideas, not people. I pull apart theories, not limbs. If the thought of having your ideas pulled apart hurts so much, don't do forums!

However it is worth noting that I could quote easily list those members who choose to attack my character with monotonous regularity. Not my posts, not my words but ME. It's simple enough to see... you address ME.
This actually affects my ability to take part in this forum like all other members do. I've held back many valid discussions and ideas KNOWING full well that the usual crew are just waiting to pounce.
During a bad time recently for me, in quiet times I came to this forum to read what was going on etc to take my mind off things. At times I saw discussions that I felt I could post in & get involved with. But I stopped myself from doing that by not signing in, knowing full well that at that time, any snide remarks or blatant posts telling me what you think of me would have been the proverbial straw for the camel.
I ended up taking part by private messages about things. Hardly fair for me is it?

So please, let me state this quite clearly: if you want to criticise me as a person in anyway, put in a complaint. If there are enough complaints, I can be banned just like anybody else. Maybe that will appease you all?

Last edited by kazza474 (January 4, 2013 1:13 pm)


____________________________________________________________________________________________
Also, please note that sentences can also end in full stops. The exclamation mark can be overused.
Sherlock Holmes 28 March 13:08

Mycroft’s popularity doesn’t surprise me at all. He is, after all, incredibly beautiful, clever and well-dressed. And beautiful. Did I mention that?
--Mark Gatiss

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
Robert McCloskey
 

January 4, 2013 1:18 pm  #14


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Certainly not me.  I never have a problem with your posts and in fact look froward to them- whether we agree or not.
Maybe that has something to do with the fact I get accused of the same things.
Attacking an argument=acceptable.
Attacking an individual= not-acceptable.
I agree, is this really so hard for people to understand?
If people are still unsure, I believe one can google: ad hominem arguments, which may make this clearer.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

January 4, 2013 1:29 pm  #15


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Kazza, I'm sorry you feel hurt like that. I'm just worried that the way you act towards others might scare away people.
And I address you because I see you responsible for what you choose to do, and am not addressing people in general if I mean a certain person.
I'm not addressing you as "the usual crew", I address you by name. So, see it as a matter of honesty and respect.


Eventually everyone will support Johnlock.   Independent OSAJ Affiliate

... but there may be some new players now. It’s okay. The East Wind takes us all in the end.
 

January 4, 2013 4:45 pm  #16


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

Kazza, saying I do not understand your attitude in my eyes is no personal attack and in no way disrespectful to you. I have never insulted or personally attacked you in any way because this is just not my way of treating other people. However, I feel that if someone's new to the forum one shouldn't answer them too bluntly or totally dismiss their ideas. That's all I wanted to say in my post.


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)

http://up.picr.de/28609194so.png

 
 

January 4, 2013 5:10 pm  #17


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

I've tried to figure out how I'd like to present this link a few times, and I've failed to find a phrasing I like each time. So the link:
http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html

This is a post about "tact filters", but I feel it applies to both Sherlock (as presented in the BBC series), and to your posts, Kazza. It's not always easy to find the best tone for any given forum, but I'd think, given the character we watch, some allowances can be made for a more... gruff... style. And, of course, given the brevity of JCB's post above, it is an imperfect and brief summary. But it's enough to consider and help understand different language styles.

 

January 4, 2013 5:25 pm  #18


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

The original poster did ask whether we agree or disagree with their 'analysis'; I place 'analysis' within inverted commas because, in fact, not all their post contains analyses, rather it often poses some alternative suppositions. Being asked starkly whether one agrees or disagrees does tend to encourage a polarity in responses. It is perhaps unfortunate that the poster expresses the alternatives they provide as being the only possible ones.

Although it is an arduous task there are threads aplenty that explore various aspects of Sherlock's characterisation, personality and relationships with other characters in the series.

I applaud any non-native speaker in their endeavours in expressing their opinions in English but these opinions need to stand up to the same scrutiny as anyone else's; opinion and analysis is not exactly the same thing. If an analysis is offered then it needs to be backed-up with evidence, either directly from the series itself, from the 'creators' or with reference to canon or previous adaptations.

Another consideration is the cultural and social context in which the series is made. In this context Sherlock's referral to 'God', 'Heaven' etc. is categorically not a religious one. These words and their associated phrases have passed into the vernacular and do not hold the religious currency they once did. Naturally, this does not necessarily hold true for other cultures and societies. This aspect has been discussed at some length in another thread.

There are two phrases in English that leap to mind here ( no Reichenbach pun intended):
Putting the cat among the pigeons
and
While the cat's away the mice do play.

Last edited by Davina (January 4, 2013 5:27 pm)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't make people into heroes John. Heroes don't exist and if they did I wouldn't be one of them.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdq1pcLCUR1rs9hrro1_500.jpg
 

January 4, 2013 8:44 pm  #19


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

My only problem with message boards is that you can never see someone's 'tone of voice'. Smilies go some way to remedy this situation but not always. 

Anyway, staying on topic here. 

O.P. (Mr. e.) Thank you for sharing your opinions with us. I enjoyed reading them. However, as some others have stated, I do not believe this version of Sherlock to be 'lonely' or 'miserable'. Just because he spends a lot of time alone does not make him lonely. He's an adult and quite capable of looking after himself (although he will forget to eat if he is working.) And he appears to enjoy his own company. I feel he first got a flatmate out of necessity and that his friendship with John is something that built up over time.

He's not even remotely 'miserable' until Reichenbach when he is suddenly noticed by hundreds of people and is regualrly hounded by the press. And even then it manifests more as annoyance. Hell really is other people to him.

I also do not agree that the line about 'being taken to a special room and burned' shows us anything about Sherlock's belief system (or lack of.) He blasphemes a fair few times but this is common in the UK amongst believers and atheists alike. The alternative to this kind of language would be swearing which would be difficult (understatement) to get past the pre-watershed censors. So when writing a script you have to keep an eye on the timeslot and watch your P's and Q's! 

Last edited by Mnemosyne (January 4, 2013 8:45 pm)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/110410966/eye%20crop%20sig%20small.jpg
'Non Solum Ingenii Verum Etiam Virtutis'
                
 

January 5, 2013 3:57 am  #20


Re: An analysis on Sherlock

equiraptor wrote:

I've tried to figure out how I'd like to present this link a few times, and I've failed to find a phrasing I like each time. So the link:
http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/tact.html

What an interesting read.  I think it does apply to Sherlock perfectly.  (It's also a useful thing to remember when dealing with a few people in our IT department.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John: OK...That was ridiculous. That was the most ridiculous thing...I've ever done.
Sherlock: And you invaded Afghanistan.
John: That wasn't *just* me.
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum