![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rj_andersonOn the comment thread for "A Scandal in Belgravia" at Mark Watches, I just found this comment written by Indigo Sto Helit, and it is so well written and so exactly what I think myself that I'm going to repost it here:
As I said in my reply to the above comment, it's not like I didn't find some aspects of this episode problematic -- indeed there are parts of it, including parts of Irene's characterization and behaviour, that I had definite problems with. But I am not inclined to jump on the "STEVEN MOFFAT IS SUCH A SEXIST PIG LOOK WHAT HE DID TO IRENE" bandwagon, either.
(That being said, I'm really looking forward to HOUND, as I think it will be much less nerve-wracking.)
I had kind of a different interpretation of the end of "Belgravia". I felt like Irene lost one conflict, but won another.
Ultimately, it seemed to me that there were two struggles going on between Mycroft and Irene. One was for the photos, and the Holmes brothers outwitted her on that. But the other one was for Sherlock himself. All his life, Sherlock has had Mycroft as his older brother, his role model. Mycroft is successful, powerful, and poised. There's no way Sherlock doesn't look up to him on some level. And Mycroft's lifestyle is very clear from the clues Moffat gives us. He says "caring is a disadvantage", he sees his own little brother as nothing more than a tool to solve a case... Mycroft is unemotional, aloof, and arrogant, and Sherlock is attempting to imitate him.
But then comes Irene Adler, whose power comes from relationships. It's all there in her catchphrase: "I know what he likes." She has unquestionable mastery over human emotion, and she uses that mastery brilliantly to her advantage, exploiting Sherlock to make him give her the information about the plane so she can send it to Mycroft. So when Sherlock says, "Sentiment is a chemical defect found on the losing side", he's mocking himself more than Irene. He's aware that she's influenced him intensely throughout the episode, and he's reminding himself of the Mycroftian values he's always lived by.
And then comes the ending scene. Though it's no advantage to him, though it might be more judicious to let her die, Sherlock travels all the way to the Middle East to rescue Irene from terrorists. This isn't a moment of weakness for her. It's a moment of triumph. She's lost her blackmail material, but she's won Sherlock's loyalties, and if I had to choose just one of those, I know which one I'd walk away with.
I think his encounter with Miss Adler has greatly changed Sherlock, and I can't wait to see how it affects him in the future.
As I said in my reply to the above comment, it's not like I didn't find some aspects of this episode problematic -- indeed there are parts of it, including parts of Irene's characterization and behaviour, that I had definite problems with. But I am not inclined to jump on the "STEVEN MOFFAT IS SUCH A SEXIST PIG LOOK WHAT HE DID TO IRENE" bandwagon, either.
(That being said, I'm really looking forward to HOUND, as I think it will be much less nerve-wracking.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-01-08 01:51 pm (UTC)It seemed to me, now I've watched the episode (twice :) ) that Sherlock and Irene each win at their own game once and lose at their own game once, and that is about as equitable as the original ACD story (no Godfrey Norton in this tale). Sherlock may have gotten the code, but Irene certainly had his number.
The real telling bit for me was Sherlock's reaction to Mrs. Hudson getting smacked around by the American agent. All the other characters are focusing on Sherlock's capacity for "caring" by looking at Irene...and the answer is already there in plain sight. Or at least, defenestrated and lying on Mrs. Hudson's mangled bins. :)
no subject
Date: 2012-06-12 12:54 am (UTC)(However, since this is being written months after the fact, I have to say that Hounds, while entertaining, and important to the arc of Series 2, was the weakest episode this time around, in my opinion.)
no subject
Date: 2012-01-07 05:26 am (UTC)Besides, Stephen Moffat got Sherlock in a deerstalker and Watson in a newsboy cap and I will love him forever and ever amen. (Can't wait to see how he updates HOUNDS.)
no subject
Date: 2012-01-07 06:37 pm (UTC)Among other interesting things, she states outright that her skill is finding out what people like and giving it to them. Also that she makes it her business to put people in a position where they owe her, or where she has power over them, for her own protection -- "I like to know people will be on my side exactly when I need them to be." And that's exactly what she does to Sherlock. He acts contemptuous and indifferent when he leaves her with Mycroft, he speaks as though he doesn't care whether she lives or dies, but the moment her life is in imminent danger, he turns up in Karachi.
So Sherlock definitely "lost" that round, whether Irene could be certain she'd won it or not (I don't think she was certain at all when she sent that text -- I think she'd given up hope). But by then, I suspect, neither one of them was keeping score.
What I'm still trying to wrap my head around is how and why Irene made contact with Moriarty. She makes it sound as though she ended up with all this Useful Information, including the code about the airplane, and didn't know what to do with it so she consulted Moriarty for advice. She speaks as though he was happy to help her without even asking for reward, and that she regards him as a friendly equal.
But that's clearly not true -- the way Moriarty talks to her on the phone at the beginning of the episode is far more menacing/threatening than friendly. He threatens to make her into shoes if she can't deliver what she's promising (presumably referring to the "e-mail that's going to save the world," which the two of them then use Sherlock to decipher). It sounds very much as though Irene is somehow indebted to Moriarty or somehow at his mercy (could he be behind the "killers" she's so elusive about, when Sherlock asks her who she needs protection from?). And when Sherlock does break the MOD man's code, she texts Moriarty immediately, which suggests a certain urgency/desperation. So I'm wondering if there's a bigger plan here that we're only seeing the beginnings of, and whether the next two episodes (particularly the third) are going to make that more clear...
no subject
Date: 2012-01-11 12:29 am (UTC)I'm really surprised so many people take that ending literally
Date: 2015-03-23 10:21 am (UTC)Then I read multiple synopses that take the ending literally, as though Sherlock was actually in Pakistan, somehow infiltrating a terrorist group. This seems completely absurd to me, and even more absurd that he could save her, spirit her out of the country (presumably), yet then make it so convincing that she was beheaded that Mycroft would be sure this time, after being "thorough", that she was definitely dead.
Re: I'm really surprised so many people take that ending literally
Date: 2015-12-23 03:25 am (UTC)