My favourite part of SIB was it poking a bit of fun at the royals...you may have gathered, I'm not a fan.

Anything to discredit the royals is fine by me, so we can get rid of them,.

SherlocklivesinOH wrote:

Assuming the rescue in Pakistan really happened, do you think the implication is that Irene changed her ways (either her criminal or her sexual ways) as a result of her experience with Sherlock?

Or, at least, if she "has dinner" with Sherlock, she would play the damsel who is grateful, as opposed to her usual role?

That's an interesting question!   Although I do hate to assume that the rescue sequence
really happened at all,     let's assume it did.    One of the things about Irene I really
like in the Canon is how she 1) outsmarts him and then 2) disappears, moves on,
and doesn't look back or obsess about him.   Nicely done, and we don't
hear from her again.


I like to think Irene doesn't change her ways as a result of her experience with Sherlock,
in any fundamental way.   I'd hope she won't play the 'damsel' if/when they ever have 'dinner'.
In fact,  I like the idea that it was her final outsmarting of him (playing to *his*
emotions) which ultimately saved her.  His rescue of her was her final manipulating victory,
a confirmation that she has the upper hand.   *She* got him to do it!   I'd hope she takes
his advice - "Run!" -  and actually disappears,  moves on, and doesn't look back or obsess
about him.  Nicely done, and maybe we don't have to hear from her again.


But, then again,  I'm not Steven Moffat,  the grand manipulator. 
 

Let's hope! 

jenosborn wrote:

SherlocklivesinOH wrote:

Assuming the rescue in Pakistan really happened, do you think the implication is that Irene changed her ways (either her criminal or her sexual ways) as a result of her experience with Sherlock?

Or, at least, if she "has dinner" with Sherlock, she would play the damsel who is grateful, as opposed to her usual role?

That's an interesting question!   Although I do hate to assume that the rescue sequence
really happened at all,     let's assume it did.    One of the things about Irene I really
like in the Canon is how she 1) outsmarts him and then 2) disappears, moves on,
and doesn't look back or obsess about him.   Nicely done, and we don't
hear from her again.


I like to think Irene doesn't change her ways as a result of her experience with Sherlock,
in any fundamental way.   I'd hope she won't play the 'damsel' if/when they ever have 'dinner'.
In fact,  I like the idea that it was her final outsmarting of him (playing to *his*
emotions) which ultimately saved her.  His rescue of her was her final manipulating victory,
a confirmation that she has the upper hand.   *She* got him to do it!   I'd hope she takes
his advice - "Run!" -  and actually disappears,  moves on, and doesn't look back or obsess
about him.  Nicely done, and maybe we don't have to hear from her again.


But, then again,  I'm not Steven Moffat,  the grand manipulator. 
 

The canon ending sort of works both ways. On the one hand, she has outsmarted him, but on the other hand, in her own words, she is leaving England for ever due to being "pursued by so formidable an opponent." That carries a sense, not of fear, perhaps, but a sense that she may not feel she has won. Because after all, if her life, acting career, and such, were all in England, then she's losing something and essentially having to start over, perhaps even be "on the run" or "in hiding." So perhaps that's the parallel with the BBC ending.

But it pretty much precludes further contact between her and Holmes. (And really makes you WONDER how all these critics and different adaptations have turned her into basically the herione of the stories.) Though you could imagine her as the heroine of another story. Carol Nelson Douglass has a series of books starring Irene as the detective (sometimes allied with Holmes but she's married to her solicitor husband.)

I like the original Irene better than BBC's, and wish BBC's Irene had stuck to outwitting Sherlock intellectually, rather than trying to seduce him. Although, I think she herself learned the lesson that that would have worked better.

I don't know where the whole dominatrix thing came from. The original Irene probably had some affairs and therefore was far outside the bounds of acceptability for the times...did Moffitiss think a dominatrix was the only thing left that's "out there" enough these days? And would Sherlock really be into that, as a fetish, when kidnapped, tied up, and such is a risk Sherlock faces in dealing with criminals? What she did to him wasn't exactly consensual... I always like to think that he falls in love with John as a natual outgrowth of their trust and friendship. 

I think it would have been nice if Irene had, as in canon, turned out not really to be the bad guy - either being wronged by the person she had supposedly had an affair with, (like in canon) or in fact she was threatening to make the affair known but it was for a sympathetic reason - like she believed it was ok to be with more than one person but everyone needed to be honest about it. And then she could be into  Sherlock while championing Johnlock.

I like the idea that she taunted John about being gay for Sherlock, but ultimately, that seemed like just a game she was playing and the sexual tension between Sherlock and her was what the audiences remembered.

Last edited by SherlocklivesinOH (March 9, 2014 6:42 pm)

besleybean wrote:

Well I didn't...but I know I'm alone on this.
I don't think Sherlock resoponded sexually to Irene at all, but I know Benedict and Steven say he did.

When I posed the last question I was recalling someone saying they envisioned Irene "thanking" Sherlock for saving her "at some exotic hotel"....well, I guess not everyone here is a Johnlocker!

My point about wanting to see the royals discredited is that if you feel that way, you're not going to be as inclined to cheer Sherlock on against the blackmailers.

I feel a bit differently about the situation with Irene. It's not so much the question in which way they feel attracted to each other. For example, if Sherlock slept with her after rescuing her in Karachi doesn't really matter because it wouldn't change anything about the story. The point is that he came back to London (meaning to Baker Street, and to John) immediately afterwards.
Sherlock and Irene are fascinated with each other, but their ideas of what life should be like are too different. Irene would never stay in Baker Street to live with Sherlock like John does. She would want to be the dominant one in the relationship, and Sherlock would have to follow her into a wild life where they would go to strange places all over the world and do all sorts of dubious things. In some part of his soul Sherlock is adventurous enough to want that, and then he considers leaving John behind to be with Irene. That was the actual "seduction" Irene probably had in mind. But in the end Sherlock decided against that because ... well, he's really more the stay-at-home type. It's important to him that he can always come home after every adventure, back to the surroundings and the people he's used to. Living with Irene is perhaps something he does in his dreams but not in reality. Only under certain circumstances like in TSOT, where Sherlock fears his connection with John could be in danger because of John's marriage, the thought of Irene comes back because then she suddenly seems "attractive" again.

Last edited by QuiteExtraordinary (March 9, 2014 7:58 pm)

QuiteExtraordinary wrote:

I feel a bit differently about the situation with Irene. It's not so much the question in which way they feel attracted to each other. For example, if Sherlock slept with her after rescuing her in Karachi doesn't really matter because it wouldn't change anything about the story. The point is that he came back to London (meaning to Baker Street, and to John) immediately afterwards.
Sherlock and Irene are fascinated with each other, but their ideas of what life should be like are too different. Irene would never stay in Baker Street to live with Sherlock like John does. She would want to be the dominant one in the relationship, and Sherlock would have to follow her into a wild life where they would go to strange places all over the world and do all sorts of dubious things. In some part of his soul Sherlock is adventurous enough to want that, and then he considers leaving John behind to be with Irene. That was the actual "seduction" Irene probably had in mind. But in the end Sherlock decided against that because ... well, he's really more the stay-at-home type. It's important to him that he can always come home after every adventure, back to the surroundings and the people he's used to. Living with Irene is perhaps something he does in his dreams but not in reality. Only under certain circumstances like in TSOT, where Sherlock fears his connection with John could be in danger because of John's marriage, the thought of Irene comes back because then she suddenly seems "attractive" again.

I don't think Sherlock would be opposed to going to strange places on adventures or cases...he seems to have done that during the Hiatus. (Die-hard Holmes-Irene shippers believe that canon-Holmes hooked up with Irene during his travels during the Hiatus of canon.)

But I do think Sherlock would want his partner in relationships, sexual and otherwise, to be more...I wouldn't say submissive, because John stands up to him...but willing to follow him, a bit in awe of him. Loyal, like John.  And Irene gives out in the end that she was in awe, but we don't know how reliable that is. Most adaptations of Watson are very willing to play "second fiddle" to Holmes.

But I think the Sherlock-Irene interaction suggests that Sherlock is NOT immune to all sexual feeling (as he is suggested to be in canon, if we take Watson's word). But maybe being "interesting" in how she behaves makes a woman more sexually attractive to him?

There is also the fact that Sherlock felt a very personal, almost moralistic revulsion towards CAM, because of the kind of activity CAM engaged in...he should have felt something similar about Irene, then.

AuntClara wrote:

I agree Sherlock came to admire Irene for her intelligence, cunning and gamesmanship - she's a worthy opponent - she certainly wasn't boring! Was he in love? Not likely (yet), sentiment is chem defect on the losing side, but I like to think he was finding himself challenged and perplexed that he might actually be experiencing this defect - because something about Irene had sparked it.
I think both of them started out being intrigued by one another's game, the intrigue eventually becoming admiration and respect, and heavens! leading to sentiment. Irene revealed her hand first literally - but Sherlock's actions in assisting her in Karachi - reveals his, perhaps. I can't imagine it was all to fool Mycroft!

 
I think you hit the nail on the head here.

I really just find it hard to believe that Irene is as 'intelligent' as Sherlock. Clearly she is clever but we just haven't seen enough of her in action to 'deduce' that if you will. Now I have only read a Scandal in Bohemia, and seen this episode that is being discussed, so perhaps there are other books that include Irene Adler to reveal more of her character and her abilities. Therefore I think AuntClara nails it when she says that even though Sherlock is aware of the 'chemical defect', even if he didn't fully acknowledge it, he was experiencing feelings for her too.

But that may just be the sentimental side of myself evaluating things.