jai jai shiva
Apr. 22nd, 2014 10:22 pmIt's an odd thing that, as so many of y'all have argued, Sherlock's central flaw lies in its absolute infatuation with Sherlock Holmes - considering how much Holmes' actual c19th author disliked and was tired of him! Final Problem/Empty House used Holmes as a proxy for a conversation between ACD and his readership - "if you won't stop loving him so much I'll kill him off, see if I don't," and then three years later "all right all right I'm sorry he's not dead he's just been to Tibet and other whatnot and hey look wax dummies! air guns!" - and it's interesting that a century later the character can still be said to serve a proxy function, mediating between the audience's perverse desire and the show's starstruck narcissistic neoliberal power trip. Also interesting that the resonance between Victorian Holmes' drug use and the repeated "hit" of serial fiction seems to have shifted over into abuse/codependency territory instead of addiction: the author as dom, the viewer who only thinks she knows what she wants. I mean, speaking for myself, watching Sherlock does sort of feel like getting negged.
I enjoy the instance of "The Empty House" - I feel for ACD in a comical sort of way, like, the poor guy! but I also like it when readers' desires come out on top. No matter how many times I try to engage with Sherlock I always end up bouncing solidly off of the much more authoritarian textual power dynamics.
I enjoy the instance of "The Empty House" - I feel for ACD in a comical sort of way, like, the poor guy! but I also like it when readers' desires come out on top. No matter how many times I try to engage with Sherlock I always end up bouncing solidly off of the much more authoritarian textual power dynamics.