The Psyche Behind The Character

[T.o.b.y]

I think he acts a lot like a schoolgirl who has her first crush on some guy her parents had better not find out about, there.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  I think Sherlock enjoyed the game until the old woman and 12 other people died, that was the game changer for Sherlock. He was intrigued by Moriarty's brilliance and intelligence but when people started dieing it was time to bring Moriarty out of the shadows, hence the stick as a "getting to know you gift".

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 No, Sherlock never "sold out" any actual secrets. In his "Last Bow" the package he carried turned out to be a book on bee keeping. There was another story, not sure if it's the "Naval Treaty" or "The Bruce Partington Plans"....."The Partington Plans" I think, where he did hold a few papers back and put them up for sale, but this was to flush out the true traitor and the buyer and Mycroft was in the know of it. Sherlock himself was not selling out his country but just baiting a trap for those who were.

[T.o.b.y]

Oh, I have not a shadow of doubt about the original Sherlock Holmes. Doyle made him quite patriotic, especially towards the end of his career when WWI was round the corner. He would never have dreamed of letting government material fall into strange hands. He was also a lot less annoyed by his brother - mildly amused puts it better, in my opinion.

 

But "our" Sherlock is a different story. His moral ambiguity (or rather obliviousness) when we meet him is another of the big improvements on the original, at least for me. The way he's portrayed in the first series I can imagine him taking the actual plans to the pool, probably with a plan on how to get them back, just to make the game more interesting.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  But even this younger version of Sherlock has his fingers in some kind of governmentle pies. He has contacts in the Home Office, and when he says "I will need equipment" Mycroft immediately and with out hesitation replies: "What ever you need."

[Selena]

 No, Sherlock never "sold out" any actual secrets. In his "Last Bow" the package he carried turned out to be a book on bee keeping.

 

Really? I always assumed that though most of the information he gave Von Bork was "thoroughly untrustworthy", some of it had to be real for the criminal to trust him.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 As stated in the original, Sherlock was not Bork's only spy, and Sherlock and the Home Office was slowly rounding those up, so I would imagine that what ever "real information" that Altamont, AKA Sherlock Holmes, gave to Bork would have been carefully hand picked by the Home Office and "The British Government", Mycroft.

[Selena]

 As stated in the original, Sherlock was not Bork's only spy, and Sherlock and the Home Office was slowly rounding those up, so I would imagine that what ever "real information" that Altamont, AKA Sherlock Holmes, gave to Bork would have been carefully hand picked by the Home Office and "The British Government", Mycroft.

 

Probably, yes.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

This discussion on Sherlock's character springs from a discussion on the series 3 news thread.

 

Karie posted the following link to a character analysis: http://earlgreytea68.tumblr.com/post/69449616532/thoughts-on-sherlock-in-the-trailer. Basically, the analysis points towards Sherlock hiding his true feelings, because he feels too much, and consequently has to distance himself from his emotions - otherwise, they become overwhelming.

 

I find it very interesting, and I'm sure many of us have had the same thoughts. I'm just not sure how true they are to Sherlock... Shall we discuss it?

 

In ASiB, John repeatedly tries to get Sherlock to open up about his feelings concerning Irene Adler. Sherlock is unresponsive. Why? I tend to think it's because he doesn't want to deal with his feelings; he thinks of them as a weakness, and he won't acknowledge weakness in himself. But his behavior also got me wondering... If Sherlock should open up to someone (like he does a bit with Molly in TRF), would John be a likely candidate? I think not. John is his best friend, and a strong man (not talking physically, though he probably is that too), which only makes it that much more difficult for Sherlock to demonstrate weakness with him.

 

Does Sherlock feel more than he lets on in front of his friends? I think we can easily answer that question with: Yes. Does he feel more than he lets on in front of us viewers? In other words; Do the producers of 'Sherlock' mean to portray the main character as a man who can't deal with his feelings and consequently denies them? To some degree, and in some cases, I think so. Like with Irene Adler. I don't think it is a complete portrayal of his character, though.

 

Take TGG, for example. Sherlock makes it very clear that unless his caring will help people, it is irrational, and he chooses to be rational; not letting himself be carried away by emotions. And now I come back to the origin of this discussion: How rational will Sherlock be when he faces John again in the first episode of series 3? Will he be sensitive to John's feelings (if not outwardly, then on the inside)? If he should behave all glib and 'Sherlock-y' (sorry for that expression, by the way), will it be an act, or does he not understand what he put John through, or what?

 

Personally, I think Sherlock is going to be rational about it. He can't help John by being sensitive to his feelings about the past, and he also knows that he himself did the right thing. In his mind, he did what was necessary. And as he didn't die, however John felt when he thought Sherlock was dead, it won't matter anymore. In fact, in Sherlock's mind it might just never have mattered, because he was never dead - so John's grief was based on nothing... Hmmm, or is that too cold? It might be... don't know.

 

What's really fascinating, is how much we love to discuss this part of Sherlock's character. Feelings that are supressed always seem stronger than when out in the open. Perhaps that's one of the main reasons why we love Sherlock so much...

[T.o.b.y]

 Basically, the analysis points towards Sherlock hiding his true feelings, because he feels too much, and consequently has to distance himself from his emotions - otherwise, they become overwhelming.

 

...

 

What's really fascinating, is how much we love to discuss this part of Sherlock's character. Feelings that are supressed always seem stronger than when out in the open. Perhaps that's one of the main reasons why we love Sherlock so much...

 

Yes, it is fascinating that we (at least you and me, and quite a lot of other people) spend at least as much time wondering about the title character's inner life as about the cases he works on. Of course, the cases are always solved eventually (even "The Fall", soon), but Sherlock's personality won't ever be fully explained (I hope!), and so leaves more room for speculation. Another reason is probably that we're women - and women in general do tend to be more interested in psychological issues, such as feelings, motivation and relationships, than "outside" action and suspense.

 

My own ideas on Sherlock are based on what Watson says about Holmes in the books. That's the Sherlock Holmes I know best and I have the impression that they are trying to do a fairly faithful adaptation, even though there are some differences.

 

There are quite a lot of clues in the stories, but the two most obvious ones are:

In "The Three Garridebs", Watson uses the expression "the great heart behind the great brain" to sum up Holmes' character. So his emotional side is supposed to be as strong as his intellectual one, it is just hidden behind it.

In "The Devil's Foot", Holmes declares he has "never loved" and states that it is for the best, because he doesn't know what he might not have done if the woman he loved had come to harm (he compares himself to the killer in that story, who murdered to take revenge for the death of his beloved and whom Holmes lets go free).

 

The latter bit I think comes to mind when Mrs Hudson is attacked in A Scandal in Belgravia. I do not want to imagine what Sherlock would have done to the American if the victim had been a girlfriend or wife...

 

I don't know whether they are trying to imply that Sherlock would be "overwhelmed" by his feelings if he acknowledged them, to himself or others, but I think that, again like the original figure, he considers them a hindrance in his work (caring for them does not help save people) and so has suppressed them or pushed them aside. Also, he's a guy, and to add another gender cliché to this post, I think a lot of men are not terribly in touch with their emotions. It's like when I ask my boyfriend "are you angry / sad / worried?" and he'll just answer "I don't know...."

[sherlockandjohn]

 

 

My own ideas on Sherlock are based on what Watson says about Holmes in the books. That's the Sherlock Holmes I know best and I have the impression that they are trying to do a fairly faithful adaptation, even though there are some differences.

 

 

I have to read the books! I am now more curious than ever about Sherlock's original character portrait.

[T.o.b.y]

I have to read the books! I am now more curious than ever about Sherlock's original character portrait.

 

Well, it varies a lot and Watson does not seem to be entirely sure what goes on in the funny head, there, either, but Holmes' characterization is surely the strongest feature in Doyle's writing and I wouldn't call his portrayal inconsistent. The only thing that bothers me is that I feel the author used his creation sometimes to make political or other statements of his own. But those are easy to ignore.

 

Generally, Holmes is described as "cold", "acerbic", "sarcastic" etc. and the word "machine" pops up somewhere, too, I think. Still, the reader gets plenty of glimpses at "the great heart" long before it's spelled out explicitly in that late story. At least half of the adventures have a passage in them along the lines of "I had never seen so much of his heart before", and I always giggle "yes, Doctor, you said that the last time."

 

One prominent trait of Holmes in the books is his supreme egocentricity. I think they've captured that very well with Sherlock.

 

[Arcadia]

I ran across this recently and thought some of you might find it interesting. Eris Maisel is a "life coach" who writes for Professional Artist Magazine, but other than that I have no idea what his actual credentials are, but much of this resonates with me. Another explanation besides Asperger's, sociopathy, etc. Because of where this article appeared, it refers to artists but no reason why it couldn't apply to anyone, even consulting detectives and their buds. Some excerpts:

 

The Smart Artist: 15 Challenges You Might Face

Are you pretty intelligent? And is that a problem for you? Here are 15 challenges that smart people regularly face.

1. Living in a society and a world that disparage smartness

5. Falling prey to physical ailments and bad habits such as ... cigarette smoking that arise as they try to focus hard on an intellectual or creative problem

6. Feeling alienated from and out of sync with their culture, their family and their friends

9. Dealing with a racing brain that, because it doesn’t come with an off switch, inclines itself toward insomnia, manias, obsessions, compulsions and addictions

10. Pining for productive obsessions — juicy intellectual or artistic problems worth real time and effort — but succumbing to unproductive obsessions instead (such as watching "crap telly? - me :-)

12. Defensively using their brain’s ability to reason so as to reduce the anxiety they’re experiencing

14. Experiencing life as sadder than other people do because of their ability to comprehend the facts of existence

 

Here's a link to the whole thing, which is really just an ad for his book. But I still found it interesting.

http://www.professionalartistmag.com/news/2014/feb/04/smart-artist-15-challenges-you-face/#.UvbejWXiWA4.facebook

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for posting that, Arcadia!  That does seem to fit Sherlock very nicely -- all the way back to being the "odd kid out" at school.

 

And come to think of it, since Mycroft had always told Sherlock how stupid he was, suddenly entering the "normal" world must have been a complete shock to him.  He had no experience dealing with people who considered him "too smart" or who thought he was "showing off."

 

[Caya]

There's a new quote from Steven Moffat about Sherlock's sociopathy or lack thereof:

 

“It’s funny how people are always wanting to prove me wrong on this one. They say: 'But he's not a high-functioning sociopath.'

I never said he was! Sherlock Holmes tells people he is. Why would you listen to him?

Nobody can define themselves.

That’s what he’d like people to think he is. And that’s it—and I think he probably longs to be one. I think he loiters around prisons for the criminally insane, envying them their emotional detachment.

He knows emotion is a problem to him.

A man who has decided to suppress all his emotions in order to be better at what he does clearly has an awful lot of emotion. That’s a very simple deduction. It clearly is a problem for him. So, in itself, that is an emotional decision.”

-

Steven Moffat

 

(source)

 

(the actual interview - it's in English, just Swedish subtitles)

[T.o.b.y]

I really like that. I like that concept of Sherlock and I do hope they'll go on unfolding it (unless it means sliding into a boring romance, but I hope we'll be spared that for the simple reason that it would be boring).

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Moffat and Gatiss....for all their preening and flouting how clever they are....do seem to know their Sherlock and like him...I really don't see them messing it up by giving him a serious on screen love life. Then it wouldn't be Sherlock....it'd be something else.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I get all steamed up over something Moffat said -- and then he comes up with something like that.  Damn the man!  Can't he let me stay angry with him? 

 

[T.o.b.y]

I don't quite know where to post this, but I guess this thread is as good as any other for it... I've been thinking (a bit too hard) about how I read a lot lately of people noticing the shift in John's priorities and the changing dynamic between "the boys". And if I look at it from my favorite perspective of "it's all real", this is what I make of it:

 

We look back on the time before The Fall now as "the good old days", but if I go back and look at those episodes, I notice quite a lot that is "not good". It's hilarious and a hell of a lot of fun to watch, but poor John. I mean, Sherlock takes him so much for granted, it's ridiculous. And John's entire life revolves around Baker St, it seems, to the point where he can't have a relationship (because he has to cancel dates to search Sherlock's room for drugs) and can't hold down a job (because Sherlock makes him do case work all night and he falls asleep at work). His main hobby seems to be writing the blog and we all know what that was mostly about. Sherlock seems contented enough, but he's getting away with murder, so to speak, and John never struck me as particularly happy, just not as unhappy and half dead as before he met Sherlock.

 

Then Sherlock tops his incredible appreciation of John's friendship off by using him as a witness for a fake suicide and just leaving for two years. Even though he was right there at the graveyard and must have seen what an effect his "death" had.

 

And then I suppose the following must have happened: John put a lot of effort into moving on and putting Sherlock and Baker St behind him. He even got the help of a therapist. It was the only sensible and healthy thing to do under the circumstances. So "living without Sherlock Holmes" is something he's become an expert on, I'd say, and who could blame him.

 

I think John is better off now (well, would be, if his wife hadn't turned out to be a former assassin with enemies still alive, but hey, John likes a bit of danger in his life, so I guess that's a drawback he can live with). And it's about time Sherlock learned to value his friendship properly.

 

In all, the dynamic in series 3 is actually an improvement in my eyes. At the very least, it's more fair.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Series 3 has actually turned out somewhat the way I had hoped -- in the sense that Sherlock's absence gave John a chance to build a life of his own, with a career and a real home and family.  I was kinda hoping he would get back together with Sarah, but of course Mary is canon (even though Sarah is more like Mary than Mary is).

 

[Caya]

Can't say I agree. While I'm glad that Sherlock probably learned his lesson and won't go putting potentially drugged sugar in John's coffee again (at least not very often ), John doesn't strike me as happier than before. S1 and 2 saw them having so much fun together at cases (remember the scene at the palace and afterward?) while the beginning of Vow sees John already antsy and dissatisfied with domestic life.

 

Also, compare John before and after Sherlock returned. Either he or Mary may claim that she was the best that ever happened to him, but he looked like a sad, old man, barely alive, before Sherlock turned up again. And then, off comes the mustache and the spring in his step is back.

[T.o.b.y]

Can't say I agree. While I'm glad that Sherlock probably learned his lesson and won't go putting potentially drugged sugar in John's coffee again (at least not very often ), John doesn't strike me as happier than before. S1 and 2 saw them having so much fun together at cases (remember the scene at the palace and afterward?) while the beginning of Vow sees John already antsy and dissatisfied with domestic life.

 

Also, compare John before and after Sherlock returned. Either he or Mary may claim that she was the best that ever happened to him, but he looked like a sad, old man, barely alive, before Sherlock turned up again. And then, off comes the mustache and the spring in his step is back.

 

Well, even Mary couldn't undo the fact that Sherlock was (apparently) dead and that his death was a big loss. I don't think John was better off than before while Sherlock was still gone, I mean he's better off now, as of the end of series 3. He's (more or less...) happily married and his best friend is returning once more to save England, an enterprise for which he will most certainly request John's help, so all is well, isn't it?

 

Okay, I fully understand anybody who thinks the situation with Mary isn't quite so great (personally, I think the Watson marriage is a very strange arrangement at the end of His Last Vow, but different story...). So I'll go back to The Sign of Three and say John is really well off at that point, and better off than during those "good old days" by far. Because he has his best friend back in his life and that friend now realizes and admits what their connection is worth and John has a family, a home and a job of his own now on top of that.

 

As for Sherlock, I might argue even he is better off. It's not a bad thing if you learn to properly appreciate somebody... And he needn't be lonely, really. I seriously doubt either John or Mary would mind if he walked into their house whenever he felt like it (well, depending how he behaved himself when he got there, but...). Janine would certainly go out with him again, I bet. Molly isn't engaged any more, so she has plenty of free time and we know she does a good enough job as an assistant at crime scenes. If he needs a chat at home, there's always Mrs Hudson - who also probably makes sure that Sherlock doesn't have to do his own shopping, cleaning or anything else in that category. If he gets into any serious trouble, one "please" directed at Lestrade will get him all the backup he could ever need plus a helicopter.

 

Actually, the man has a whole hoard of people who love him and will do anything for him at a moment's notice. He's just a moody drama queen who likes being alone and sad and tragic once in a while, I think. Like me... I can totally identify with that!

 

[Caya]

Yeah, Sherlock's so great off, really - he can visit the man who didn't have more than a tepid handshake when he flew to his death for him any time, and the woman who murdered him too, and it's even convenient for him since they live in the same house - saves on cab fare. And if they don't have much time for him, no worries, he'll just walk away alone like at the end of Sign, it's not as if anybody noticed then except for Molly.

 

As for John, yeah, he might have been happy at the end of Sign, but that was an empty illusion - he wasn't married to who he thought he was. His happiness, such as is now, is built upon firmly closing his eyes to the truth.

[T.o.b.y]

Yeah, Sherlock's so great off, really - he can visit the man who didn't have more than a tepid handshake when he flew to his death for him any time, and the woman who murdered him too, and it's even convenient for him since they live in the same house - saves on cab fare. And if they don't have much time for him, no worries, he'll just walk away alone like at the end of Sign, it's not as if anybody noticed then except for Molly.

 

As for John, yeah, he might have been happy at the end of Sign, but that was an empty illusion - he wasn't married to who he thought he was. His happiness, such as is now, is built upon firmly closing his eyes to the truth.

 

Oh dear, Martina, you do have a way of putting things...

 

The bit about firmly closing his eyes to the truth is what I meant by the Watsons' marriage being a strange arrangement. I have a hard time accepting them as such a lovely couple when the husband will toss anything that threatens to mar the perfect image of a woman he fell in love with into the fire and the wife will rather shoot his best friend in the chest than tell him the truth about herself, but oh well, okay, fine, whatever makes them happy. At least they've both openly agreed on living a lie now, haven't they, so I suppose they (think they) know what they are doing.

 

Sherlock really doesn't seem to mind the shooting nor hold a grudge against Mary. Curious, isn't it? Especially since he doesn't seem to have come up with the "surgery" theory until after he woke up again, since inside his mind, right after the shot, his "inner Mycroft" speaks quite clearly of him having been "murdered".

 

*Sigh*... how I do love that whole mind palace sequence. A killing from the perspective of the victim - while that might not be a completely original idea, it was certainly brilliantly executed and finally, finally, we got a good glimpse inside Sherlock's funny old head.

 

Speaking of which, Sherlock has an interesting attitude towards (his own) death. He doesn't strike me as suicidal, but on the other hand, he doesn't seem to go to any great lengths to avoid dying, either. Self-preservation doesn't appear to be his first priority... the thrill of the game is more important, I guess, and besides, if he lives to grow old and creaky and forgetful, it would probably be torture for him. He doesn't start to really fight for his life until he remembers that it would be a bad time to die because John is in danger.

 

Poor Sherlock... somebody is always needing him. If it's not John, it's England at large. He'll never be allowed to die in peace. I hope!

[Carol the Dabbler]

... the beginning of Vow sees John already antsy and dissatisfied with domestic life.

 

 

Minor nitpick:  That's Sherlock's interpretation, and we all know what a great judge of human nature he is. 

 

What we actually see is John being awakened out of a sound sleep -- so no wonder he's cranky and disoriented.  But he is above all a good man, so once he understands that Isaac is in both medical and physical danger, what else can he do but offer the help that he's uniquely qualified to provide?