Who is the "Client"?

Now, I know that they describe the Client as a "young female," and Irene confirms this by telling Sherlock that she might want to see "her again."

So, the very simple answer is that the Client is merely young female royalty whose identity is not relevant or otherwise interesting for such intents or purposes with respect to Sherlock (the TV show).

But that's just so boring 


***SHORT STORY SPOILER BELOW***

Here are my reasons why I believe we actually see the Client in the episode (and also why I love the idea):


1.  Sherlock meets the Client face-to-face in the source material/short story

I can't be the only one who read the A Scandal in Bohemia (the story on which A Scandal in Belgravia is based) AND assumed that the Client's Representative (who walks in saying "...illustrious") was actually the Client when watching the episode. 

Am I?

In the short story, during the initial consultation, the meeting was conducted between Holmes/Watson and some purported representative of the Client (whom I remember to be some sort of duke or baron or something.  Forgive me, it's been a while since I've read it). 

The Representative has covered his face with I believe a handkerchief, masking his identity.  However, Holmes quickly deduces (and reveals to the parties) that the representative is actually the Client himself, rather than just mere proxy for the duke, at which point the duke removes his mask.

So, if Sherlock (the TV show) followed suit, they would have had Sherlock not only actually meeting the Client face-to-face, but exposing the Client's wasted attempt to disguise himself as a mere representative of the Client.  Here, the "mask" would be the "the Client's a young female" mis-direct.

I know that Moffat/Gatiss aren't going to adapt and borrow everything, but this particular plot point would've been easily filmable, and more importantly, it would've been charming and hilarious, and totally within the TV show's tone.  Which brings us to the next point....

2.  It would have been a hilarious scene, in line with the TV series' wit and humor

Mycroft and the Client's Representative try to throw Sherlock and John off the scent by saying it's a "young female," even though it's the complete opposite (an old man). 

It would have been hilarious to see Cumberbatch's Sherlock deduce that the two men are not only lying, but that the Client is actually one of them.  (And it'd be even funnier than in the story, since the short story didn't paint Irene as a dominatrix, nor did the story try to describe the Client as a young female)

Sherlock's quick deduction would show the Client that he is the real deal, but it would also simultaneously embarrass the Client since he'd be revealed to be the one fooling around with S&M Irene. 

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think it would have been a funny, if charming, scene to watch, and definitely within the range of Cumberbatch's Sherlock. 

3. WHO. IS. MY. CLIENT?!

There's a rhyme and/or reason to everything and anything that the Sherlock team writes, whether as a clue or as a red herring. 

I think Sherlock's clear (and impatient) display of interest into the identity of the Client demonstrates that the identity of the Client is someone we, the audience, should be interested in.  I don't think it'd be a throwaway scene or red herring -- the "who is my client" sequence was meant to direct us into deducing who the Client really is.

Otherwise, it'd be a slightly awful tasting red herring, not to mention a waste of time. 

4.  The Representative lights up cigs for the Client

We know that the Representative is some sort of subordinate who lights the cigarettes for the Client, as deduced by Sherlock.

Unless the Rep was trying to elaborately trick Sherlock into believing that he was some sort of subservient cigarette lighter to the Client, despite actually being the Client (which would be a Moriarty-level of dedication) -- then we can safely assume that the Representative is NOT the Client....which means that....

5....Mycroft would be the Client.

We know that Mycroft "practically is the British government," (echoed from the books), so while he may not be royalty, he's certainly very, very high up on the power ladder, where other "Clients" would be, i.e., the type who gets his cigs lit by someone else most of the time. 

It'd be quite reasonable to assume that Mycroft is the one whose cigarettes are lit by the Representative, proving him to be the Client. 

Most importantly, we see Mycroft smoking in the end of the episode!

It's a borderline Chekov's Gun -- why show Mycroft smoking at all? 

No where else in the entire series do we see Mycroft smoking, or even mention smoking as his own habit.  Yet, he smokes in this episode?   Not only have Mycroft smoke at the end of the episode, they have John point out that Mycroft is smoking -- doubly confirming him as one who smokes.


IN SUM (I know, way too long)

In the short story, Holmes' deduction that he was actually speaking to the Client -- and NOT the Client's rep -- was one of my favorite moments in the story, and I think it was, or should have been, portrayed in A Scandal in Belgravia.  I truly believe that the writing team did do as much.

We know that Mycroft and Sherlock (in the TV series) have "too much history" for Mycroft to ask Sherlock for help on his own matters.  So, instead, Mycroft has that Representative ask Sherlock and John for help.

We're clearly directed to focus on the facts that:
1) Sherlock really, really wants to ID the Client
2) the Client's Representative lights up the Client's cigarettes
3) the Client's Representative does not smoke at all
4) Mycroft is seen smoking later in the episode, but nowhere else in the entire show
5) John points out the fact that Mycroft is smoking

When you take these actual plot points, you add in the writing team's affinity for adding in "easter eggs" and/or homages to the source material, and you top it off with the hilariousness of it all (Mycroft is the Client whom Irene Adler photo'd) -- I think you have a winner of a plot thread.





P.S. -- Want some food for thought that might blow your mind?

What if Mycroft was not only the Client, but the M.o.D. man whose e-mail was photo'd by Irene while he was "tied up"?  If we can get as far as accepting that Mycroft was/is a Client of Irene, certainly we can accept the likelihood that Mycroft had the Jumbo Jet e-mail. 

Also, at one point in the episode, Mycroft did mention, "our hands our tied!"....