Jump to content

Hikari

Detectives
  • Content Count

    1,320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    55

Hikari last won the day on September 30

Hikari had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,287 Excellent

3 Followers

About Hikari

  • Rank
    Detective Chief Superintendent

Contact Methods

  • Facebook
    Hikari

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Ohio, USA
  • Favorite series 1 episode
    The Great Game
  • Favourite Series 2 Episode
    A Scandal In Belgravia
  • Favourite Series 3 Episode
    The Sign of Three
  • Favourite series 4 episode
    The Lying Detective

Recent Profile Visitors

1,537 profile views
  1. Agreed there. That is the fault of Sir Arthur. He really just couldn't be buggered with deep analysis of backstory. He has Holmes dismiss three entire years with "I was at Llasa." He could be quite fanciful on occasion, such as when Sherlock Holmes stands at a window and philosophizes over a rose--but most of the time he was too keen to get to the action to be bothered about personal details. The most mundane explanation is that Sir Arthur just threw those bits in in a flash of momentary inspiration, but didn't develop them any further because landed squires and French impressionist painters were completely out of the purview of a doctor who grew up in grinding poverty as the son of an alcoholic. Doyle, Sr. did seem to have a bit of artistic ability. Not very good, but he did try. Sherlock Holmes never mentions his parents at all. There is only the reference to the landed squires and his maternal great grandmother being a sister of Vernet. Obviously the readers, then and now, are keen to know what accounts for the Holmes' boys' singular talents. What kind of nature/nurture environment conspired to produce such extraordinary children? The parents themselves must have been pretty special, too. There may be one savant produced in an otherwise ordinary family--but two? Not likely at all. I think Conan Doyle avoided references to Holmes' parentage and childhood because those were very painful subjects for him personally, of which he did not care to be reminded. He preferred to have the Great Detective sprung forth fully realized like Venus from the head of Zeus . . no awkward childhood failures or family dramas. It was left to writers who came after to fill in some of the copious blanks of Sherlock's past--the whole thing is nearly a blank slate. So many writers have gotten a lot of entertaining mileage out of imagining childhood/university or otherwise off-canon exploits for Sherl. I don't think it would have occurred to Sir Arthur to imagine a scenario in which Mother and Father Holmes had intentionally misled the boys about their background. What is more likely: Sherlock Holmes made it up, as a lark, and to appease Watson with a few crumbs to put in his scribblings. I guess it depends on one's interpretation of SH's character. We know he is fully capable of assuming disguises and telling tales in pursuit of a case. It's entirely possible then that he continued such embroidery into his personal life with Watson, just for amusement, or to throw his friend off the scent. Watson hero-worships his friend and his stories are intended to be laudatory about the methods of his exceptional friend. Watson is far more likely to be impressed by a flatmate who is the scion of aristocrats and artists than one who, say, had an alcoholic father who deserted the family, leaving his mother to scrape by taking in washing and running a boarding house in Clapham. Dr. Watson is a Romantic, and SH, a born actor, plays to his audience. That's my interpretation. I think the truth is that Conan Doyle just threw in some random bits and pieces and moved on. He didn't care about Sherlock Holmes an iota as much as his readers do. He'd no doubt be gobsmacked at the worldwide industry in Sherlock Holmes that remains vital nearly 100 years since his death, or that entire doctoral theses have been written about "Sherlock Holmes: His Origins in the French Impressionist Movement". True fundamentalists take every single word on every single page as Holy Writ. If Sherlock Holmes said it or did it or said he did it, it must be true . . .even if there are no corroborating details at all.
  2. The Gypsy childhood was Baring-Gould's own invention, to explain why the sons of 'landed squires' and descended from French artists on the maternal side have come to have the adult professions they do. If their ancestors had an estate equivalent to Downton Abbey, where is it? If Sherlock is an aristocrat, why does he have to share digs on Baker Street? Conan-Doyle provided almost no background information on his signature detective because he just wasn't that interested to. Holmes was a moneymaker , and the case at hand is what most people wanted to read. But the little breadcrumbs Sir Arthur strew here and there have proved irresistible for Sherlockians to weave a life narrative from, and Mr. B-G is 'the' preeminent Sherlockian. He's their Moses. 😛
  3. According to preeminent Sherlock scholar, William S. Baring-Gould, Mycroft's standing as the firstborn son is inherent in his singular name. The Holmeses were descended from 'landed squires' (Mr. B-G favors Yorkshire). "Croft" is a Northern name (Northumbria-Scotland, particularly) for 'homestead'/cottage/family house. "My + Croft' seems to designate that Big Myc was born the heir of the family. However, the Holmeses appear to have become 'genteel poor' having lost the family croft, lands and wealth. Holmes pere (Siger?) had a great wanderlust, and raised his family on the move throughout Europe all through the boys' childhoods. A bohemian, continental and adventurous upbringing, fertile fuel for a future consulting detective and a future super spy--an international outlook and exposure to many foreign languages and customs, at which both Holmes boys excel. Mycroft has a comprehensive world view thanks to this singular childhood, but discovered that he much prefers a predictable, comfortable routine. Having had more than enough of being forced to be constantly on the move like a rolling stone as a child, as an adult, Big Myc proposes to move as little as possible. Sherlock's restless energy continues into adulthood. He likes his domesticity at Baker Street, but has to break it up with frequent adventures away from home. Mycroft would never sleep rough. He'd have great difficulty getting up from the ground. With no family estates to inherit, and with a natural aptitude for government service and intrigue, M found his niche in Her Majesty's secret service.
  4. Herl, The other night I re-watched Murder by Decree (1979). I like it on the whole, but I have a few quibbles. The 'frightened psychic' character, Robert Lees (played by Donald Sutherland, looking like a more demented Willy Wonka) is entirely out of place. Holmes visits with him several times and even gives credence to what this man is saying. Lees is sincere (and apparently, a real psychic), but in the early going, he certainly seems like he could be a suspect. I just don't get this silly part being stuck in, and it wasn't worthy of Sutherland's stature, either. James Mason is quite delightful as a mature Doctor Watson. I think he hits the esprit of the character perfectly, albeit he's a lot older than his Holmes. Christopher Plummer, who played Captain von Trapp in a wolfish and vaguely leering manner that is unsettling, is here, as the famously misanthropic Holmes, so twinkly and good-humored. It's quite startling. This Holmes is positively cuddly! But really, the Inverness cape and deerstalker *at the opera*, Bob Clark? Sherlock would never be so gauche. Excellent job of playing 'the Chimney sweep' though--one of SH's favorite disguises.
  5. I requested my absentee ballot back in August, when Trump was threatening to dismantle the Post Office and received it the first week in October. I mailed it on October 6 and via TrackMyVote.com, I saw that it was processed by my board of elections on October 13th. For the last 2-3 weeks, I have received *daily* multiple texts of 'BALLOT NOT RECEIVED!' and also flyers in my mailbox proclaiming same. (Addressed to me OR 'Current Occupant', lol). Still, if I were a senior citizen with memory issues, these would be upsetting because I might think they were real. I have been voting absentee regularly for about 10 years now. My work schedule makes it challenging to get to the polls and my precinct has moved 3 times since then. I have NEVER received any 'reminders' like this about my non-counted ballot before, never mind several a a week over the period of weeks. I ignore everything and pitch/delete. The stench of desperation from both sides is sickening . . .but bullying citizens like this is inexcusable. We do not live in a state-controlled regime but it's moving that way. The Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves.
  6. From a very interesting blog page: https://bakerstreet.fandom.com/wiki/St_Bartholomew's_Hospital 'Barts' is the oldest hospital in London and the oldest in the United Kingdom which still occupies its original site. Standing in the same spot since 1123! Dr. Watson gives it its informal moniker on the first page of ASiS, recounting the fateful day he met Sherlock Holmes. Seems like the 'St' (no period) is bestowed by civilians while medical professionals 'in the know', particularly ones who work or have worked there drop it. No apostrophe, either. Americans apparently like to overpunctuate, where Britons do not. Never any period at the end of an honorific like 'Mr' or 'St'. This looks unfinished to my Yank eye, and I confess, as an English teacher the 'Barts' bothers me, because it 'should' be in, but it's one of those charming idiosyncrasies that a city as old as London must be rife with. On the very day that I had come to this conclusion, I was standing at the Criterion Bar, when some one tapped me on the shoulder, and turning round I recognized young Stamford, who had been a dresser under me at Barts. As to Molly's position, I think in the beginning, when she was only intended to be a comic relief character in a couple of scenes in the first episode, they were content to call her a lab assistant. She and Sherlock have a pre-existing acquaintance, seeing as she allows him access to the morgue to flog unsuspecting bodies. In the next episode, he's exploiting her again to give him access to the two dead men with tattoos on their feet. By the time we get to the Reichenbach Fall, Sherlock is asking Molly for an incredibly huge, and possibly career-ending favor, if she's detected--not only has she altered official medical and legal records, but she's actively complicit in the abuse of a corpse, at the very least. What kind of strings did she have to pull to obtain a body that resembled Sherlock enough at a distance, and with his body type to dress in his clothes and toss out of an upper-storey window? That's a bit beyond the purview of a mere lab assistant, meaning that she must have the authority to have access to all this stuff and be able to direct staff. Molly downplays her accomplishments and hides her competitiveness, but we saw the inner heart of 'Dr Hooper' in 'The Abominable Bride'. Molly hides her light under a bushel so much, it didn't really occur to anyone before then that she is a doctor. So, with an M.D. in forensic medicine, she is elevated to a junior staff pathologist, qualified to conduct postmortems on her own, reporting to the head of the department. She's a bit young still to have full charge of somewhere like Barts; it's likely her senior supervisor has a 'Sir' before his name. But if she's been a qualified pathologist for 10 years, with experience at such an esteemed hospital, I think she'd be ready to be promoted. If she relocated to a rural county, she could be 'the' pathologist for the entire district. If she's as ambitious as her 'Bride' alter ego was, I think she'd go for it, and she wouldn't have to pretend to be a man, either.
  7. I don't really have that difficulty . . it seems that Molly lives for her work mostly and spends the majority of her time in the lab. She does not seem plugged into the London social scene. Not for lack of trying, she's not been able to get a relationship to stick. She likes the gang that congregates around Sherlock, but not intimately. She is only connected to the likes of John, Lestrade and Mrs. Hudson through working with Sherlock at St. Barts, and they aren't super close. We hear nothing about Molly's family, so I always envisioned her as a transplant to London from elsewhere--for university and medical school and then she just stayed on after getting a good job in her field. The morgue, her flat and her cat--that's what she's got in London, a city which can be exciting but also is full of some pretty bitter memories for Molly. She did date 'Jim from IT' . . then there was the failed relationship with 'Tom'. She might be open to a fresh start in another city, particularly if it entails a promotion. As it stands at St. Barts, she's very junior but she might get more responsibility in a smaller jurisdiction. DCI Vera Stanhope up in Newcastle seems to run through pathologists at a clip, lol.
  8. Presumably even though you had fond memories of your high school crush, and you could think of him with nostalgia, you weren't nursing hopes that you and he would get together eventually, which allowed you to develop a relationship with your husband. Molly's fixation on Sherlock is more than a crush; she's so obsessed by him that she finds a man as close to his identical image that she can--this was subconsciously done, because she seems oblivious to how much Tom apes Sherlock in his appearance, even though it's obvious to everyone else, even Sherlock himself. Molly thinks she's 'moved on' but she winds up finding Tom unsatisfactory because he is 'not' Sherlock, despite all her efforts to make him into an SH-substitute. One of my favorite bits in my favorite episode is the 'Christmas Drinkies' portion in which Molly is humiliated in front of all her and Sherl's mutual friends when he mocks her attempts to be alluring. He seems to not realize that all her efforts are for his benefit until he opens her Christmas gift . . a little disingenuous on the part of Mofftiss because Sherl in other places is very aware of Molly's susceptibility to his . .er, charms, and exploits it shamelessly to get cooperation out of her . .complimenting her hairstyle for example. He is very cruelly dismissive of her other attributes, in their very first interaction and in this drinkies scene--really, one of Sherlock's going for the jugular moments--and she calls him out on it. But even after that humiliation, and, adding insult to injury, the revelation that Sherlock has had intimate knowledge of another woman (implied) based on his familiarity with 'not her face', she still nurses that crazy passion for her elusive crush object who has been quite frankly abusive. I think things between them changed a bit after Reichenbach . . maybe Molly assumed that such loyalty would be rewarded when Sherl came back . . and she was disappointed again, hence, Tom. I think Mols could move on, but it might require removing herself from SH's orbit since he's like her drug. I like the idea of her with Lestrade, but that would still have her working very closely with Sherl. And a harried Inspector with the Met is going to have to work too much. Perhaps our Molly will take a Home Office transfer to Northumberland and meet a nice, uncomplicated Northern bloke. Someone not into the sciences or police work. Then her all-encompassing crush on Sherlock Holmes could recede to a safe distance.
  9. One of the highlights of 'The Empty Hearse' episode is when Molly joins Sherlock for the day on his investigation into 'Jack the Ripper'. Molly comports herself very well as the Watson stand-in, even stirring Sherl's jealousy a bit when she exercises her forensic acumen which is a bit superior to his, seeing as she is a forensic pathologist. Molly earns herself an invitation to the chippie, which she does not accept, on account of Tom waiting at home, but as the two part, she cries while watching Sherlock walk away. Poor Tom never stood a chance; he was only the Sherlock substitute. For SH, of course, there can be no substitutes. For a highly competent professional woman, Molly was like a besotted junior high school girl around Sherl. I think the events of S4 did finally grow Molly up in terms of her feelings for Sherlock. She loses the hero worship once she recognizes how he has manipulated her since they met. Could a collegial friendship survive between them after what he has put her, and himself (and John) through? Unclear. I don't think it will ever be the same between Sherlock and any of the people in his life after S4. Molly might have to transfer hospitals, if seeing Sherlock on a daily basis becomes too painful. For a woman who made her living cutting up dead people, Molly was a refreshingly innocent spirit, with an intrinsic girlish optimism. She's lost that innocence and optimism and is now going to be a lot more cynical and cautious going forward. One thinks, not just with Sherl, but with everyone. She will be examining this unhealthy romantic fixation on an elusive man who keeps hurting her and questioning her own judgement . . but somewhere deep inside, I think she will always carry the torch for him. Will she end up spending her life alone, since she can't have him and he's ruined all other men for her? I hope not, but it seems more likely than her being able to find a man who eclipses SH in her heart.
  10. Lots of good commentary here. Notwithstanding that 'A Scandal in Belgravia' is my favorite episode . . . it's hard for me to see what Mofftiss turned Irene Adler into. I am a devoted stan of the original Sherlock-Irene ship first launched in "A Scandal in Bohemia". The Woman that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote is the Woman I would want for Holmes in any era. She is daring for her time, in that she is a woman on her own in a time dominated by men. She makes her own way as an artist of a very high caliber. She defies convention, as Sherlock himself does--the stifling convention of the Victorian era that had very narrow parameters of behavior for a female. Living outside the protection (ie, under the control) of a man as Irene does gets her labeled 'an adventuress'--code for a lady of lax moral behavior. The Woman takes a chance on love with an undeserving, brutal man, and fearing for her safety, she takes measures that could be construed as blackmail. But she's not doing it for money or for kicks, rather self-preservation. As long as she has possession of the compromising photograph that she safeguards, no harm will come to her. BBC's Irene is a lot more mercenary. She sells sex. She sells information. She works for Moriarty and she does it for the thrill of being bad as much as for the financial rewards. She's exciting--but she's not trustworthy, and she's not worthy of Sherlock, seeing as she is absolutely corrupted. The darkness in her speaks to Sherlock's own dark side--she represents what he might have become, if he'd decided to not be on the side of the angels. The original Adler is a refined and loyal, loving person who is resourceful enough to best Sherlock Holmes at his own game (twice). She was badly used by a bad man, but she is not herself bad, just bold enough to save herself. Also, Sherlock Holmes is the one guilty of criminal acts where she is concerned, not she--after all, he breaks into her home on more than one occasion and induces panic by having Watson throw a homemade smoke bomb into the street. A number of felonies. Adler is only guilty of wanting to protect her good name and her life from a powerful man who could easily have her killed. Her brains and courage, as much as her beauty and artistic accomplishment impress SH deeply, probably more. For him she is 'the One'--or as close as he ever comes to it. These two are easy to ship, and legend has it that SH and Adler meet again circa 1891 and make a child together. Works for me! Dr. Watson writes of The Woman as if he remains forever more than a little jealous of her--the one Woman who matched wits with SH and won, and that, for Sherlock Holmes is foreplay that endures forever. Modern Irene is very problematic as a partner for SH. She might stir his loins (if we can Go There)--but he'd never be able to trust her. He saves her life, but the prospect of her reverting to her old habits would be just too strong to ignore. Molly would be a much better match in terms of an actual day-to-day domestic arrangement, BUT whereas she's got a grande passion for Sherlock, I think he regards her as more like a little sister/assistant/whipping post. Essentially, Molly is Watson in female form. He relies on her and must grudgingly respect her skills to have entrusted her with the whole Reichenbach deception. She is loyal and he prizes that highly. Does he have the hots for her? . . . I have to say no, manifestly not. What he feels for her is platonic. As a Watson stand-in, they make a good team, professionally--and Molly is his equal in chemistry, which certainly has its uses. But Sherl would never be able to give Molly what she craves: a normal and fulfilling love life. For that, she needs to look at Greg. Lestrade is totally into her, and he's available in all senses, which Sherlock never will be .. it's not the way he's wired. The Sherlolly fan vids are really cute and seem to focus on Sherlock constantly getting Molly with child. I just can't go there with these two .. Sherlock would find such domesticity stifling and he would take it out on her and start being a butthead again. Molly deserves a more fully-rounded, emotionally adjusted man who is drama-free--Lestrade. Something in Molly is drawn to exactly those qualities in Sherl that make her the most unhappy. She's got a deep masochistic streak, does our Molly. Sherlock is not the guy to give her peace of mind or a fulfilling family life. She really needs to give the Inspector a ride on her merry-go-round. I think that would cure her of needing Sherl's romantic attentions and she could focus on being his friend/Watson stand-in. Sherlock likes working with her and isn't adverse to going out for chips . . but he would never submit to being her ''boyfriend". She's got to accept this if she wants a happy life.
  11. That would age anybody, yeah! Not to mention the shock of Holmes suddenly appearing from the dead. SH underestimated the effect that would have on a grieving friend. He might have given Watson a heart attack. Edward Hardwicke's Watson was considerably more forgiving than Martin Freeman's. When we reconvene with the RDJ-JL pair, I imagine some fisticuffs will ensue.
  12. I was thinking of Burke/Law in terms of the 'manly, military bearing soldier' Watson--the younger, more vigorous man of action Watson who gets to show his physical courage and how crack of a shot he is. In 'Game of Shadows', we get a taste of the 'Watson who enjoys the gaming tables and his cups a tad too much' when the Doctor has a bit too much entertainment at his bachelor party and is significantly the worse for wear at his wedding the next morning. The doc is generally a temperate person, in comparison to his flatmate's excesses, but occasionally he gets bit by the gambling bug, which is why SH has to keep his checkbook locked up in the desk. And also, the impressive mustaches. Burke and Brett were the same age when the series commenced (49), and Edward Hardwicke was only 2 or 3 years older. Yet visually, he seems like a much older Watson when we meet him in The Empty House episode.
  13. Having recently watched Jeremy Brett as Maxim deWinter in the 1983 television version of Rebecca, it was brought home to me again how very perfectly Jeremy inhabited the skin of Sherlock Holmes, even though he was a very reluctant Holmes at first. It seems quizzical to us, but JB did not consider himself a 'Holmes type'. He viewed himself as a classical actor: robust romantic leading man and all-arounder, having a very fine singing voice and of course, impeccable stage training. Which he was. But he was also Holmes to a tee. Perhaps Holmes embodied too many of the darker, neurotic qualities that were manifestations of Brett's mental illness and which he tried to quash strenuously. Maxim deWinter and Holmes share some similar dark qualities but watching JB in leading man mode was a little unsettling--it felt rather that Sherlock Holmes had slipped into 1930s Monte Carlo as his younger self and was wearing another man's clothes and haircut. This movie came out the year before JB assumed the mantle of the pipe and deerstalker. I came to the Granada Sherlock series late, but I can certainly understand why Brett's portrayal is so widely praised. He's got great chemistry with both of his Watsons--David Burke (Watson 1.0) and Edward Hardwicke (Watson 2.0). Jude Law's Watson is firmly in the David Burke school of Watsons. I am less familiar with Basil Rathbone's ouevre, having only caught snippets here and there on YouTube or some late night matinee on TV. I think for better or worse, Rathbone & Nigel Bruce remain the popular conception of 'classic Holmes and Watson'. Poor Watson comes off much the worse for it there, since Bruce portrays him as an all-around buffoon. The greatest mystery ever facing this pair would have been how such a Class A idiot could have graduated medical school and been given the rank of Captain in Her Majesty's Army. One certainly wouldn't want to put one's life in his hands. Rathbone looks like an elegant bloodhound. Hardcore 'Rathbonians', as I have been informed is the collective who regard him the top Holmes object to Brett's characterization as too prissy and neurotic, evidently. But I think he's damn close to the part as written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who furthermore gave Holmes a high, reedy, querulous, nearly womanish speaking voice that grated on Watson's nerves. As it would do. Thankfully none of our Sherlock purveyors have gone this route. JB has a wonderful baritone voice. Our Benedict wins top honors as a modern Sherlock Holmes, channeling everything that's great about JB's portrayal into a contemporary package--the style, the voice, the jumped-up energy, the needling of his Watson. Johnny Lee Miller over on Elementary comes closest to the peevish voice envisioned by Conan Doyle and perhaps closest to some of Holmes's more off-putting personality features. ACD envisioned a superior misanthrope who keeps everyone but Watson at arm's length. Most of our Holmes interpreters have been charismatic and physically appealing guys who break down this barrier between Holmes and his audience, even as they pretend to be haters of mankind in general. People are drawn to SH, even if he's not drawn to them. I'd be more than happy to give JLM's pissy Holmes a wide berth and that goes double for his Watson. If you haven't had a chance to check out Miss Sherlock (HBO-Asia, available on Amazon Prime), I can highly recommend this female-female version of Holmes and Watson. Sadly series star Yuko Takeuchi took her own life recently, so there will be no more episodes. The feeling is very like a Japanese femme take on Cumberbatch/Freeman. R.I.P. Yuko-san.
  14. Haha. Better, I should think. Judge for yourself!
  15. To add insult to injury, the studio let Audrey record Eliza's numbers, recording secretly with Marni Nixon, until informing Miss Hepburn at the last minute that her singing would not be used. A dirty trick. No reason to assume that a similar stunt wasn't pulled on JB, though Freddie had fewer songs. Jeremy could sing very well, having studied voice during his training, but as he was only 'an actor who sang' as opposed to a 'singer who acts' (Ms. Nixon would qualify, since they let her into the Sound of Music with a speaking role as one of the nuns) the choice was made to go for professional singers in both cases. Audrey could sing, too--she did Moon River--but her voice was deemed not up to the vocal demands of the role. Ironically, of course, they had refused to hire the then-unknown Julie Andrews, who had originated Eliza onstage in favor of a big star who couldn't sing to cast album standards. Julie had done hundreds of performances with Rex Harrison (who didn't sing either, but no such problems for him) and they were already comfortable working together. Hiring Hepburn for her marquee name and then deceiving her about using her singing was just low. Hepburn's costumes as Eliza are iconic, but one wonders what might have happened if the studio had taken a risk on Andrews. Julie was destined to be a star no matter what--but her breakout role as Mary Poppins required her to wear an unflattering brunette wig. If Hepburn and Nixon had done Mary Poppins instead and Andrews had been given My Fair Lady . . how might have each film turned out?Hepburn had already established a reputation as a refined lady from the upper class, or at least aspiring to it--Roman Holiday; Sabrina--and while she is quite charming as Eliza Doolittle, I feel perhaps the 'guttersnipe' portions are a bit forced. Eliza's transformation might have been more surprising and therefore effective if Julie Andrews--now an equally iconic 'lady', but back then, an unknown quantity--had played her. And without question, Jeremy should have been allowed to sing Freddie's songs.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of UseWe have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.Privacy PolicyGuidelines.