BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / The Reichenbach Fall and Oscar Wilde

**Posted by SusiGo** February 27, 2018 1:39 pm

This is quite an amazing post about parallels between TRF and the Oscar Wilde trial and subsequent events. I never realised this but knowing Mark Gatiss I am quite sure that this is no coincidence (we can assume that he and Steven had influence even though Steve Thompson wrote the episode):

https://ebaeschnbliah.tumblr.com/post/171344208074/gosherlocked-ebaeschnbliah-gosherlocked

**Posted by Yitzock** March 1, 2018 1:43 am

A very interesting read!
I was amused to read that Oscar Wilde showed off, probably in a similar way that Sherlock did. I can just picture it, knowing Wilde!

On a non-Sherlock-related note, I thought it interesting that Wilde had a friend called Robert Ross, since that is the name of the protagonist of a novel I read recently, called The Wars, written by Timothy Findley. I don't know if those events had any bearing on Findley's naming of his character or not.

**Posted by besleybean** March 1, 2018 7:26 am

How did I miss this?
Sounds fab.

**Posted by Liberty** March 1, 2018 7:40 am

IIRC in the episode there is an explanation for Richard Brook's name, as a rough translation of "Reichenbach" (I don't know German!). And it's Moriarty who goes through a trial in the episode, not Sherlock.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the writers put in references to things like this. But I'm not too sure about the parallel here. If it's suppose to be about internalised homophobia, that seems odd when they've created a world which is notable for being less homophobic than the real one. To be honest, I don't really see internalised homophobia in either Sherlock or Moriarty. Moriarty, I suppose, who knows? I don't see it, but he's a bit of an enigma. I don't really see that as part of the story, though, so if there is anything there it might just be "asides" rather than plot points.

Last edited by Liberty (March 1, 2018 7:54 am)

**Posted by Yitzock** March 1, 2018 3:38 pm

Yeah, I don't think it's to suggest homophobia or anything related to that topic specifically.

**Posted by Liberty** March 1, 2018 4:09 pm

That was maybe me just reading too much into the comment about Moriarty being a symbol of internalised homophobia!

**Posted by SusiGo** March 1, 2018 5:46 pm

Yitzock: You are right, I read the novel decades ago and was very impressed. Not sure if there is a connection to this Robert Ross.

Liberty: Yes, it is a rough translation of "Reichenbach". However, the fact that it is used as Moriarty's alias is interesting because this is not in ACD canon, just in the episode.

I think - apart from any symbols of homophobia - there is indeed a parallel between the trials: In both cases first one man (Queensberry/Moriarty) was accused Wilde/Sherlock by but then the cards turned and Wilde respectively Sherlock became the accused themselves. Both were sentenced to two years of hard labour/two years of being alone and in danger and their lives never were the same afterwards.

**Posted by Liberty** March 1, 2018 7:19 pm

There is a parallel, but I'm not sure - Sherlock is never tried, and it's his own plan, both to destroy his reputation and to go into exile. Quite different to Wilde ... unless that's the point?

Anyway, it's great that there are still new things to see!

**Posted by SusiGo** March 4, 2018 11:01 am

Just realised that there is one parallel between the Wilde case and TRF that is not in ACD Canon: Canon Holmes was never crucified by the media or hounded by the police. His reputation was never destroyed. Mofftiss deliberately changed this (just as they turned a fight with presumably deadly outcome into a suicide in front of John's eyes).

In this TRF is much more similar to the Wilde trial than to ACD's "The Final Problem".

**Posted by Yitzock** March 4, 2018 11:26 pm

Interesting observation!

**Posted by Liberty** March 5, 2018 7:26 am

I suppose what really ruins his reputation is the suggestion that he kidnapped children. That's not a very comfortable comparism to sex with men, if the parallel is taken further, so I don't think that's intended. They did need something that would make people despise him (not just something illegal) and also something that John would know wasn't true!

It's also a nice foreshadowing of the power of the media in HLV, I suppose.

**Posted by SusiGo** March 5, 2018 4:46 pm

I think it is not so much about WHAT ruins his reputation but THAT it is ruined - which strongly deviates from ACD Canon where Holmes dies as a mourned hero of justice and is immortalised by Watson.

**Posted by Liberty** March 5, 2018 6:50 pm

I know you were emphasising the difference from canon - I was just jumping ahead a bit and trying to continue the parallel with Wilde! I do think the "what" matters, in that Wilde was prosecuted for something he did commit, but that isn't a crime today, and which we wouldn't disapprove of at all. Whereas Sherlock was vilified for something which would be deplorable if it was true (kidnapping children, possibly murder, etc. to make him look good as a detective). Sherlock was rightly vilified, Wilde wasn't. I think the parallel loses direction there. What point would they be making? Sherlock kind of brought about his own downfall deliberately (by promoting himself to snare Moriarty - and later, I suppose, it was necessary for a convincing "suicide"), and his exile was planned and voluntary.

I do remember reading that ACD planned for The Final Problem to be the end of Holmes (although I'm sure I also remembering Moftiss saying, that of course he didn't, because there was no body and he must have left it deliberately open for a possible comeback!). Which may be one reason why he made him go out heroically rather than with his reputation ruined. Whereas Moftiss make it clear even within the episode that they are not killing Sherlock off, so they were more free to do what they liked with his reputation, and leave us with a cliffhanger!