The New Sherlock as Commentary on Society

Tuesday April 17, In the year of our Lord 2012
My House, Caronport Saskatchewan
Posting pre-written post, 4:26 PM
Weather = Cool and Dreary


A few nights ago I was introduced to the ‘Modern Sherlock Holmes’ mini-series. For those unfamiliar with the series, basically take Sir Arthur Conan Doye’s Sherlock Holmes from 221B Baker Street and teleport him and his peers to the 21st Century world of today. Instead of horse drawn carriages they ride in modern cars, instead of telegraph they use Skype, and so on. To be clear, I’m not talking about the recent movies with Robert Downey Jr.

I am a huge fan of the 1984 series with Jeremy Brett but this new Sherlock played by Benedict Cumberbatch seems to encapsulate the spirit of the detective quite fine.

I watched the episode where Holmes encounters Irene Adler, who he forever refers to as ‘The Woman.’ Her original character was one of mystery and political intrigue with only a very mild sexual hinting that she may have been a ‘courtesan.’ She was one of the few persons who Sherlock respected as a mental challenge, perhaps even as an equal in some respects. The new adaptation keeps the mystery and political intrigue and then takes the mild sexual hinting to become the ‘dominant’ part of her character. Her preferred title is dominatrix, she gets paid by political bigwigs to put on leather sex gear, tie them up, and whip them for their sexual pleasure. Power play and sex becomes the focal point of her entire personality as well as how all the other characters relate to her.

Despite the change in her character, Sherlock’s response to her is the same and their relationship is ambiguous at best, which captures the spirit of the original work I think. I find it interesting that Irene Adler was cast in this way though. Times have changed a lot since the late 1800’s. Western society, (specifically England and America) which used to be ‘dominated’ by Puritan values is now ‘dominated’ by freedom of expression. Sex, being one of the strongest of human forces, is now free to express. The Puritans would be horrified if they could have seen today, they may have called this freedom of expression a ‘societal license for debauchery’ or a ‘communal covenant of corruption.’ At the worst, they viewed sex as sinful and at best they viewed it as holy, in either case it was not something to express freely and unashamedly lest they be ashamed before almighty God or cause the onlooker stumble into sinful lust.

And in walks Mistress Adler, clad in nothing but a smile, telling Sherlock that she will have him on a leash. In walks Watson to behold a nude dominatrix standing over the detective with a look of sexual aggression and engorged lust upon her face. Apparently blatant sexual overtones are the new racy and subtle hints about women maybe being courtesans don’t do the trick anymore.

I don’t see this as some sort of ‘new level of depravity’ but I do see it as the logical conclusion of such freedom of expression and media saturation. Sex is a powerful desire; freedom to express it in the media will look like any number of things. Does this freedom of expression respect the sanctity of the sexual relationship between husband and wife or the purity of an innocent mind? No, such things have become secondary to the now mighty sanctity of freedom of choice. All sacred things must now be thrust out into the street for all to see and make judgment on. Those who protest are told to simply not look. We are flooded with expressions of sex, religion, politics, consumerism, philosophy, anything and everything every day of our lives now. So it doesn’t surprise me in the least that Irene Adler took a sexual overtone, it’s the modern language of ‘mystery’ and ‘intrigue’ and nothing less would hold a modern audience’s attention. Oddly enough, I think it actually worked, maybe even well!

Sexuality used to be shunned in the time of the original Sherlock Holmes so the characters’ sexuality was only mentioned in passing. Society has since pushed what was once sexual repression into sexual saturation so a modern adaptation has the characters’ sexuality explicit and emphasized.

How interesting.

I have to wonder if we’ve developed thick filters or just become completely desensitized because I watched the video with my fiancé and I didn’t really find dominatrix overtones awkward until thinking about it afterwards.

When I discussed this with her she pointed out another interesting piece of character change that I had overlooked. What is Sherlock's most identifiable trademark? A gaunt figure, his funny hat, and a pipe. The original Sherlock was constantly smoking, going to opium dens, and injecting himself with drugs to stave off mental stagnation. The new Sherlock still has drugs, but they are rarely ever seen and you know that he is very not well when he lights up.

What happened? The same thing that made Ms. Adler a dominatrix has made Sherlock's recreational use of drugs nearly vanish from the screen! It used to be common practice and acceptable to smoke but today such an act is almost abhorrent. Today's film makers have health concerned lobby groups breathing down their neck and ready to sue the tobacco juice out of them if these sorts of things are filmed favourably. So once again, modern adaptation of a character is a commentary on today's society...






But yes, the new Sherlock Series is good (if you can get over the freedom of expression bit). Too bad no new episodes can be made until 2013.