If she does come back, will she still be a Dominatrix? Assuming she's had an identify change, she could return as a computer scientist or an Olympic athlete; she's basically a professional con woman so she could return as anybody

kaye wrote:

Love your analyais beekeeper.  But if the creators of Sherlock are using the original stories as their guide, Irene won't appear again. In the original stories she and Sherlock only appear together in one story, at the end of which she leaves for America with her husband, never to return. BTW - in the original stories Irene Adler is an American!

As for woman and Sherlock - in the original stories Sherlock expresses admiration for three women - one is Irene Adler. The second is Violet Hunter, a governess who comes to Sherlock with a problem. Sherlock complements Violet on her courage and her ability to solve issues in the case.  John writes that he was hoping Sherlock would show some romantic interest in her, but after her case was solved Sherlock forgets all about her.  The third woman I recall making an impression on Sherlock is the fiance of the man killed in 'The Lion's Mane'. I can't remember her name. She makes a brief apperance in the story - which was narrated by Sherlock - and he admires her person.  So he is obvioulsy not above noting attractive qualities in women.

I have come across several references in various stories where Sherlock has told John (to paraphrase) 'If I were ever to marry, I would hope my wife would have more regard for me than the wife of the dead man had for him' (I believe this was in The Valley of Fear); and 'I have never loved a woman, but if I ever should..', and 'If I ever had a son...' etc.  Making me believe that Sherlock at least thinks it would be possible for him, some time in the future, to marry and have children. Quite astounding when you think about it.

But in the end, Sherlock remains alone, unattached, and seemingly without a romantic or sexual past. It appeas the creators of Sherlock have no real intention of changing this narrative too much. 

I do love Irene Adler - she is an amazing character. In the original story she is more compassionate and caring, not a criminal type, but certainly a sexual adventurer by the standards of the day - the affair with the King of Bohemia.  The modern Irene Adler is sexually on the far side of things and consorting with criminals. 

I find it interesting that,unlike in the original, her story is not tied up neatly (like going off to America with her husband), but is left open. One has to wonder what happend between them after Sherlock saved her.  Did they spend any time together? Where did she go? Where is she now?I have to wonder why they did that.  Yet I don't feel we will see her again. There are just too many wonderful stories in the orignial that the producers can use, that I don't see any new story lines coming.


 

Irene ONLY appears in one of the original stories. She is described as an "adventuress" and is an actress (which itself was rather scandalous in the day.)

The King of Bohemia hire Holmes to retrieve evidence of his and Irene's past affair...because she has apparently threatened to send it to his current-princess-fiance, who is SO puritanical that "any shadow of a doubt as to [his] conduct" would mean an end to the engagement.

But the King also exclaims several times over how awesome Irene is...and how he wishes she were of his class so he could marry her. Which would make you go, "Double standard," "Hypocrite," EXCEPT that, it's a bit surprising that the MAN can actually be compromised by a sexual affair. 

Wouldn't you think the princesses would be conditioned to accept that the men had affairs before marriage...or maybe during?

Holmes, while spying on Irene, ends up being a witness to her marriage to a lawyer.

Holmes stages a fire alarm at Irene's house to make her rush to where she keeps the information to retrieve it....but because one of her servants is present, he leaves and plans to come back the next day...by which time Irene has fled. but the letter she leaves behind says that she eventually saw through Holmes' disguise when he visited her house, but that her new husband is a "better man" than the King and she is keeping evidence of their affair only for her own protection.

I, for one, don't think she ever threatened blackmail (the King was either paranoid or misogynist), and wonder if the King actually wanted to get the information to compromise her in the eyes of other men? He admits that, prior to hiring Holmes, he's had her abducted so he can search her!

But Irene also says that she and her husband feel safer fleeing to America with someone like Sherlock Holmes after her...so she never appears in the stories again. 

In short, she's not a criminal, not a blackmailer, not rescued by Holmes, and not romantically interested in Holmes. 

For some reason, most adaptations of Sherlock Holmes make her either a recurring villain or something like the heroine.

But I actually like ACD-Irene better than the adaptations. She seems to be earning her own living by singing and acting (though she may be getting material things from her lovers, as well); she dresses in men's clothes and actually says this is because it gives her freedom; and she sees through Holmes' disguise while he doesn't see through hers. 

On the other hand, she says, "the best thing my husband and I can do now is flee the country," so it's like SHE doesn't feel like's won.

And the fact that she's marrying a simple solicitor kind of comes across as "giving up her adventuressing way."

Trying to be fair and overcoming my Johnlock bias, there are a COUPLE of lines that could imply Holmes is attracted to her: we are told he calls her "The Woman"; he definitely expresses admiration for her (and contempt for the King); and he accepts a photograph of her as payment, rather than money.

BUT, there are some very nice Johnlock moments, too, including Watson sleeping over at Baker Street during the case, even though he's (supposed to be) married. 

BBC's Irene DID rely on men: didn't she get guidance from Moriarty in how to be a spy or blackmailer? And her whole scheme fell apart because she fell for Sherlock. Though I think there's a subtle feminist message in that: "Being too into a guy interferes with being a strong women. Affairs can give men power over YOU, too."

I think the original ACD character was MORE atypical of a woman for her times than BBC's Irene is in modern times. These sexed-up femme fatales are not so unusual in the media today. 

I don't quite understand the whole Dominatrix bit. Did they think that a woman just having regular sex with public figures was too typical? 

Sellling sexual favors is a crime in most U.S. states, so she could have done that and still been a criminal without being a dominatrix.

She could have been made into someone like Rielle Hunter or Monica Lewinsky, and then it could have been shown, as it was in the original, that the man did her wrong more than the other way around. Or how about the DC Madame?

Or better yet, someone like Linda Tripp, who didn't have the affair herself, but had the information and saw herself as a legitimate whistle-blower.

I see ACD's Holmes as much more likely to be either asexual or gay than into any women, but I can sort of see why Irene would be his match if he did like women.

That's harder with the BBC series: shouldn't Sherlock be a little, well, turned off, by the villainous things she's doing? Even if he's not especially "angelic," he's chosen to work on the side of the angels. You would think he wouldn't want to be in bed (figuratively or literally) with someone who wasn't, if only because he'd be too vulnerable.Sherlock appears to hate CAM. So he is capable of actually hating people for doing bad things. In ACD, Holmes admired Adler, but thought Milverton, the blackmailer, was the scum of the Earth. That contradiction can be explained because Adler wasn't really a blackmailer. 

And another thought about the rescue scene at the end: I wondered if what was happening even WAS a rescue...or if Sherlock was doing the executing.
 

Last edited by SherlocklivesinOH (February 6, 2014 5:05 am)

Well, Moftiss have confirmed that the events in Karachi were real, Sherlock did assist her in retaining her head and his instruction to her is nicely unheroic:

'When I say run, run!'

I do like the mental image of them running like hell for their escape vehicle which, in Karachi, was probably not an elephant. Nor, for that matter, a camel. But they definitely had something

Tinks wrote:

I prefer the ACD Irene, too, but I'm in a minority because I don't rate ASIB as one of my favourite episodes - it had some nice John/Mycroft/Sherlock moments, but I had a big problem with the way Irene was portrayed - I think the episode fell into that trap of believing that a strong woman must be one that is cold hearted and - for want of a better word - "emasculating".
Trying to redeem her by having her appear to have fallen for Sherlock didn't work for me because I just found the cat and mouse stuff that went on between she and Sherlock before those end scenes, too cliche and formulaic.
But I also wondered if the ending was real or whether it was in Sherlock's head?

My issue with women like Irene is that we're told we're seeing a "strong woman" but everything is all about sex and her sexuality, which is basically her need for other people (usually meaning men) and her ability to please them.

And ultimately, Irene wasn't that independent. Didn't she need guidance from Moriarty?

And while Sherlock may not be an angel, I have trouble believing he would get in bed (literally) with an enemy, especially someone allied with Moriarty who tried to kill him and John. 

Shouldn't he have a little disgust at what she was up to (not the sex part, perhaps, but the collecting of information and relationships with terrrorists)? Look how much he hates CAM.

Last edited by SherlocklivesinOH (February 8, 2014 2:36 am)