Irene Adler on "Sherlock"

[stealthjedi21]

Hello all,

For all you fellow "Sherlock" fans, I have an important question regarding the Irene Adler character in "A Scandal in Belgravia" that I am trying to settle - specifically, regarding her sexuality. Although in her "professional" activities she works with both men and women (we don't know exactly how far she goes with them), she states that she is gay. The exact line is in response to John when he says, "for the record, if anyone out there still cares, I'm not actually gay." To which she replies, "Well I am. Look at us both." On the other hand, as we know by the end, she is clearly interested in Sherlock. So...what do y'all think?

On a separate note, I still after several viewings do not understand the following line, which comes directly after the preceding one, after Irene and John hear Sherlock's text noise and realize he is there. John makes to go after him but Irene holds up a hand to stop him and says, "I don't think so...do you?" What the heck is she talking about? For anyone interested in watching the scene during which these lines appear, they start at about 55 minutes on my copy.

Thanks,
Alex

 

P.S. If for whatever reason you were to use Sherlock Season 3 spoilers to answer my post, please don't!    Thanks

Edited November 13, 2013 by Carol the Dabbler
Repaired text-color code

[Carol the Dabbler]

Just because a person self-identifies as gay, doesn't necessarily mean that they have zero sexual/romantic interest in the opposite sex, and (as you say) Irene obviously already has some sort of sexual experience with men as well as women.  I think Irene's interest in Sherlock may have started out as intellectual fascination, but (as she said) "Brainy is the new sexy," so her interest soon expanded beyond just the intellectual.  At least that's my take on it.

 

As for her "I don't think so" line, I believe she means something like "I don't think it'd be a good idea to interrupt him just now, let him digest this (the fact that I'm alive) first."

 

Welcome to Sherlock Forum, Alex!    We hope you have a good time here.

 

[Caya]

Hello and welcome to the forum, Alex! So among all the Trekkers here there's finally a Jedi, too .

 

I think what Irene means is related to John's sentence. He says, "I'm not gay, ergo, I can't be interested in Sherlock" and she counters with, "Well, I'm a lesbian and that doesn't stop me, now does it?" claiming that Sherlock's magnetic enough to make people ignore their usual orientation.

 

For what it's worth, I checked tvtropes if they have that exchange listed under If It's You, It's Okay and there it was.

 

As for the "I don't think so" line, I think Carol's interpretation is spot-on.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 Welcome to the Forum, Alex!

[T.o.b.y]

I think Irene has no other way of connecting to people than through sex. Maybe she generally prefers to sleep with women, but I don't think she's strictly "gay". She felt attracted to Sherlock and that, in her stunted emotional dictionary, means "want to go to bed with him".

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Very nice posts, T. o.b.y! And welcome to the Forum!  Glad you found us and hope you come often.

[T.o.b.y]

Very nice posts, T. o.b.y! And welcome to the Forum!  Glad you found us and hope you come often.

 

Thanks! Glad to find you... My small social circle is sick and tired of me raving about Sherlock, so I decided to inflict my opinions on the world elsewhere.

[Karie]

Everyone else here has pretty much said what I think on this issue, but I'll put it another way.

 

I think it's very possible to become attracted to someone you wouldn't normally be attracted to, because of some aspect of their personality that draws you in and gradually makes your physical response to them grow.  For example, maybe you're not into redheads, but you have a friend who is a redhead who is super independent, which is a quality you find attractive, and that grows until you realize that you do actually find that person sexy after all.  

 

I've known many people who fell in love with people who weren't what you would consider conventionally good looking, and they always say that "he was so funny" or "she was so wonderful and compassionate" that as their feelings grew, the sexual attraction came with it. 

 

That being said, I don't see why that kind of thing couldn't also transcend the sexual orientation labels. If Irene is a woman who prefers to be with other women, does that mean that she can't start to feel sexual attraction toward someone who is very interesting and intelligent (a quality she professes to find sexy), just because that person happens to be a man? 

 

I also think that, given her line of work, Irene is a woman who enjoys sex thoroughly and, even if she may prefer one gender romantically, that doesn't mean she would lock herself in a box and deny herself what she assumes would be a very good time. 

 

As for the second part of your question, I also had to watch that scene several times because I thought I'd missed something. When she held up her hand and said,"I don't think so, do you?" I thought maybe there was another part of her conversation to John that she was following up on.  But after seeing it again and again, I agree that she was probably just saying,"I don't think it's a good idea to follow him just now, do you?" 

 

I'm still wondering why Sherlock was following John in the first place.  What reason did he have to be suspicious about where John was going that day? He clearly didn't expect him to be meeting with Irene, since he seemed very shocked to find her alive.  Was he that bored? Or did he expect John and Mycroft were plotting to get him out of his funk? 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I'm still wondering why Sherlock was following John in the first place.  What reason did he have to be suspicious about where John was going that day? He clearly didn't expect him to be meeting with Irene, since he seemed very shocked to find her alive.  Was he that bored? Or did he expect John and Mycroft were plotting to get him out of his funk? 

 

Hmm, never thought of that.  Damn good question.  Maybe Sherlock saw John getting into the car, but (unlike John) knew that the woman wasn't any of Mycroft's people, and thought he'd better make sure John wasn't in any danger.

 

[Karie]

 

I'm still wondering why Sherlock was following John in the first place.  What reason did he have to be suspicious about where John was going that day? He clearly didn't expect him to be meeting with Irene, since he seemed very shocked to find her alive.  Was he that bored? Or did he expect John and Mycroft were plotting to get him out of his funk? 

 

Hmm, never thought of that.  Damn good question.  Maybe Sherlock saw John getting into the car, but (unlike John) knew that the woman wasn't any of Mycroft's people, and thought he'd better make sure John wasn't in any danger.

 

 

 

Very possible. It's funny, I guess John would naturally assume that a pretty lady waiting and a black car sent to pick him up meant he was being collected for Mycroft, but my immediate thought when he saw her standing there was "Who is this chick? She's not one of Mycroft's!" 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

  Or it could have been a play on John's comment: Sherlock doesn't follow me everywhere. When, in fact, maybe he does.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Oh, it was definitely a joke, but that was for us.  Sherlock presumably had some in-universe motivation.

 

Sherlockology's latest Metro blog speculates on the possible return of Irene Adler, by the way.

 

[Karie]

On the subject of Irene Adler -and forgive me if this has been discussed previously, I'm new to the game- I've been wondering, as I rewatch ASIB for the tenth time, what the general consensus is on her solving of the boomerang case. 

 

At first I thought that she had cleverly figured it out on her own, but after watching it over and over, something occurs to me... 

 

When Sherlock was seeing her make this revelation, he was completely drug-addled and hallucinating. So, did she really figure it out, or did his drugged brain imagine that she did because he wanted her to be that clever, because he was intrigued by her? Some might say that she was whispering it to him while he was in bed, still half out of it, before she said the bit about returning his coat. But the boomerang monologue seems to come before he was deposited back in his bed.  

 

So, I know where I'm leaning, but what does everyone else think? Did she really figure it out? Is she really that clever, or did Sherlock just want her to be? 

[Janie]

I think that she really figured it out. We don't know when exactly Sherlock got to his bed so I think he might have been there for some time before Irene went there to return his coat. Then she told him the boomerang story, he heard it in his half-sleep imagining it all in his head and then she left while he was slowly waking up. (I hope it makes sense  )

[aely]

 

 

I think it's very possible to become attracted to someone you wouldn't normally be attracted to, because of some aspect of their personality that draws you in and gradually makes your physical response to them grow.

 

I'll agree with this! I have a fairly 2 specific 'types' that I find attractive (think Colin Morgan and Katie McGrath from Merlin and also Peter Wingfield - dark hair, cheekbones, fair skin and not-brown eyes - and red-headed kick-arse women such as Dana Scully and Black Widow from the Avengers movies). Rupert Graves as Lestrade doesn't fit in with either of those types and yet I found something incredibly compelling about him that makes me go wibble, much more so than BC as Sherlock, who ticks more of my 'type' boxes.

 

I have since been attempting to catch up on some of the rest of Rupert Graves career, and while I think he's a marvellous actor it's definitely Lestrade who I fancy the pants off (and Prentice from Different for Girls, but that's probably got a lot to do with the motorbike and leather).

 

Irene Adler is another character I find absolutely fascinating and I find her deviousness both terrifying and delicious.

 

As for John Watson/Martin Freeman - I don't find John or Martin ping my 'I find this person attractive' buttons in the slightest but I adore John as a character and more often than not, he is my muse if I'm writing. If John Watson asked me out, I'd say yes even if I didn't fancy his looks (though he has nice eyes) because I like HIM and his personality.

[Carol the Dabbler]

On the subject of Irene Adler -and forgive me if this has been discussed previously, I'm new to the game- I've been wondering, as I rewatch ASIB for the tenth time, what the general consensus is on her solving of the boomerang case. 

 

... did she really figure it out, or did his drugged brain imagine that she did because he wanted her to be that clever...?

 

Oh, I just love having new people on this forum!  You guys come up with such interesting questions.  No, I don't recall ever seeing that issue raised before, and I don't believe it's ever occurred to me to ask -- so this is new territory for me.  I'm going to post that entire scene (from Ariane DeVere's transcript), so we can readily refer to the clues in it.  This is immediately after Irene escapes out her bathroom window:

 

(As [sherlock] lapses into unconsciousness, he finds himself – inside his own mind anyway – back at the crime scene in the country and sitting in the driver’s seat of Phil’s car. Irene is standing outside clinging onto the ledge of the rolled-down window and looking in at him urgently.)

IRENE: Got it!

(Blinking and trying to clear his head, he turns as if to get out of the car but she holds up a finger.)

IRENE: Oh, shush now. Don’t get up. I’ll do the talking.

(She goes around to the rear of the car and bends down to look more closely at the exhaust pipe.)

IRENE: So the car’s about to backfire ...

(She stands up again and suddenly she and Sherlock are standing near the hiker in the field as he stands frozen and staring upwards at a forty-five degree angle.)

IRENE: ... and the hiker, he’s staring at the sky. Now, you said he could be watching birds but he wasn’t, was he?

(She walks around to the front of the hiker, following his gaze.)

IRENE: He was watching another kind of flying thing. The car backfires and the hiker turns to look ...

(The hiker turns his head to look back towards the car and at the same moment an object flies in so rapidly that we can’t see what it is. It strikes him on the back of the head. The man falls backwards and – for a brief moment – Sherlock is back in Irene’s bedroom and falls backwards to the floor. Then he’s back at the crime scene and he and Irene look down at the ground just in front of the hiker.)

IRENE: ... which was his big mistake.

(She looks towards the road again.)

IRENE: By the time the driver looks up, the hiker’s already dead. What he doesn’t see is what killed him because it’s already being washed downstream.

(Nearby in the stream is the most unlikely item you’d ever expect to see – a boomerang.)

IRENE: An accomplished sportsman recently returned from foreign travel with ... a boomerang. You got that from one look? Definitely the new sexy.

(She turns and smiles at Sherlock.)

SHERLOCK (vaguely): I ...

(He blinks, looking around in confusion.)

SHERLOCK: I ...

(Behind him, a bed rises up to meet him. The angle changes and he sinks down onto the bed and a sheet rises up to wrap around him. His eyes close.)

IRENE: Hush now.

(She leans down over him. She’s no longer in the field but inside a room.)

IRENE: It’s okay. I’m only returning your coat.

(Sherlock jerks back into consciousness and finds himself alone and in bed in his own bedroom, fully clothed and covered with a sheet. He lifts his head.)

 

I've always assumed that it's meant to be taken literally, though Sherlock's condition makes it difficult to be sure.  He clearly imagines or hallucinates their surroundings, but if he'd imagined the entire thing, wouldn't he have allowed himself to come across a little better?  Then again, if he's hallucinating rather than imagining, that objection doesn't necessarily apply.

 

If Conan Doyle's Irene Adler has any bearing at all on this, then she really did figure it out.  But that's a pretty big "if"!

 

I'm still not sure, but I'm continuing to lean toward "she really figured it out."  How about the rest of you?

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I have a fairly 2 specific 'types' that I find attractive .... Rupert Graves as Lestrade doesn't fit in with either of those types and yet I found something incredibly compelling about him that makes me go wibble, much more so than BC as Sherlock, who ticks more of my 'type' boxes....

 

As for John Watson/Martin Freeman - I don't find John or Martin ping my 'I find this person attractive' buttons in the slightest but I adore John as a character and more often than not, he is my muse if I'm writing. If John Watson asked me out, I'd say yes even if I didn't fancy his looks (though he has nice eyes) because I like HIM and his personality.

 

Thanks for posting that, aely!  I've been pondering it while puttering in the kitchen just now, and think I may finally understand why I don't seem to have a "type" (other than male and in reasonably good physical condition).  I've dated men from all the major races (more or less in proportion to who I meet), blond and dark, from 5'3" to 6'4", and have had crushes on a fairly random-looking assortment of tv/movie characters as well (for example, my all-time favorites are Nimoy's Spock and Freeman's Watson).

 

Apparently I'm more drawn to a personality type than to a physical type, but I'm still figuring out the details.

 

[Karie]

Thanks for the input, Carol and Janie! I agree, it's so much fun to speculate these things!
 

I really must get to reading the books. T.o.b.y. sent me some info on where I should start, I'd love to see how the characters stack up against Moff/Gat's versions. Sounds like Irene was very clever in the books. 

[T.o.b.y]

When Sherlock was seeing her make this revelation, he was completely drug-addled and hallucinating. So, did she really figure it out, or did his drugged brain imagine that she did because he wanted her to be that clever, because he was intrigued by her? Some might say that she was whispering it to him while he was in bed, still half out of it, before she said the bit about returning his coat. But the boomerang monologue seems to come before he was deposited back in his bed.  

 

So, I know where I'm leaning, but what does everyone else think? Did she really figure it out? Is she really that clever, or did Sherlock just want her to be? 

 

Interesting question!

 

I like to believe she figured it out. She really is that clever and that is why Sherlock is attracted to her, not the other way round.

 

We see the scene the way it looked for Sherlock on the computer screen, because we see the inside of his (drugged) mind while she tells him what her deductions are, so basically what is shown is the illustration Sherlock's brain paints to her story.

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

I really must get to reading the books. T.o.b.y. sent me some info on where I should start, I'd love to see how the characters stack up against Moff/Gat's versions. Sounds like Irene was very clever in the books. 

 

She was. Also, she was certainly different from the Irene we were shown on Sherlock - which is why I, who was not too impressed with the original, love her, and Carol, if I understood her correctly, is not very happy with the modern version.

 

Let us know what you think after you've had a peek at "A Scandal in Bohemia"!

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

She ... was certainly different from the Irene we were shown on Sherlock - which is why I, who was not too impressed with the original, love her, and Carol, if I understood her correctly, is not very happy with the modern version.

 

You've got me pegged correctly, T.o.b.y.  I had made the "mistake" of reading the original story before seeing the episode, and was somewhat fond of that Irene -- and needless to say, Moffat's Irene is nothing whatsoever like her!  Obviously, there are people here who prefer one or the other, and I believe there are also people who think they're both good, just different.  So, Karie, please do let us know what you think of both!

 

We see the scene the way it looked for Sherlock on the computer screen, because we see the inside of his (drugged) mind while she tells him what her deductions are, so basically what is shown is the illustration Sherlock's brain paints to her story.

 

Oh, right!  That makes sense -- the same way we "see" how Watson imagines Holmes and Moriarty falling in the Granada productions of "The Final Problem" and (the beginning of) "The Empty House."

 

[Janie]

I read the original "A Scandal in Bohemia" after watching the episode and I found the original Irene quite boring. Not that I had expected her to be a dominatrix or something like that   but I remember being slightly disapointed after I finished reading the book. Or maybe I should read it again to completely understand her character. 

[T.o.b.y]

I don't think there's a lot to understand... The original Irene certainly was not sinister the way "our" Irene is. She was not a villain in any sense, just a smart, attractive, saucy, playful woman. She also does not seem to have caused Holmes any heartbreak. He admired her and remembered her fondly ever after, that was it. Being forced to attend her marriage did not make him jealous, he just laughed his head off when he got home.

 

I like how "A Scandal in Belgravia" starts out on a similarly lighthearted note and then gradually drifts into darker and deeper waters.

[Sherlock_luvr]

Irene is my favorite of the guest stars in Sherlock. She's a perfect foil for Sherlock. After all, sentiment can lead down a dangerous and never/rarely indulged (in Sherlock's case) path. And I would love to see more of her. At odds or working together to thwart a new baddy in another series. I love their dynamic. Their attraction. They're very smooth together. And they ruffle one another's feathers. She's THE woman. The only one who can get under his skin and drag out that long ignored 'sentiment'.

 

And I seriously believe she rid the poor man of Moriarty's rediculous nickname when he rescued her in Karachi...

[sfmpco]

Okay, this quote just came from I think Vanity Fair regarding Irene Adler and Sherlock from Mr. Cumberbatch himself:

 

Sherlock is similarly stymied, he says—definitely abstinent, though, Cumberbatch says, not asexual. He’s convinced Sherlock did consummate his relationship with the whip-smart dominatrix Irene Adler: “Yeah, I think they were definitely at it after he ­rescued her from the beheading in Pakistan,” says Cumberbatch. “I’m sure they were. I’m convinced of that.” But “I think he’s been burnt in the past. I think he also realizes he can’t beat female intuition. He can read women if he’s not attracted to them or involved with them, and he knows that he’ll get very confused if he’s starting to feel something for someone. So to embroil himself where he might be enslaved through adoration or sexual desire or any kind of power or chemistry to do with love is too big a risk for him, for what he wants to achieve. That doesn’t make him gay, and it doesn’t make him asexual; it means, you know, he’s purposely abstaining for the sake of his craft. Not something I do.”