Would Sherlock really..?

[jesskayding]

 

 

7.  Often wonder why Lady Smallwood doesn't show mercy towards Sherlock.  He freed her as well, and she would have hated CAM.  Well, she did hate him, but after the suicide of her husband, she would have taken hate to a new level.  But she seems awfully calm in the final meeting, and that meeting can't be too long after the shooting.  Seems like she should have been grieving and far more conflicted.  I do think she is leaning towards mercy because she finds the "punishment"  to be "hardly merciful."

 

 

Yes. That confused me too @ 1st. But then Lady Smallwood was uncompromising. The suicide of her husband is evident that she didn't give into CAM's demands.

 

 

 

[jesskayding]

Something I didn't see until watching HLV for the thousanth time... One of CAM's guards removed the fire place cover for him. Suggesting that he's peed in other folks homes... Sherlocks flat wasn't his first desecration.

[Arcadia]

Hm, interesting point. I was looking at it the other way around; CAM publicized the scandal to punish Lady S. for involving Sherlock --- but I like your interpretation better, that he published it because she refused to give in to him.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

Hm, interesting point. I was looking at it the other way around; CAM publicized the scandal to punish Lady S. for involving Sherlock --- but I like your interpretation better, that he published it because she refused to give in to him.

 

  Which might amount to being one and the same thing. Lady Smallwood dares to involve a third party...someone who CAM knows and probably knows why it is that Sherlock hates him so. So now Lady Smallwood has "sinned" twice.  By daring to refuse to knuckle under to CAM and for enlisting the help of someone with as much backbone and hutzpa as she has.

[Elementary]

 

I don't think that Mofftiss will completely humanize Sherlock Holmes. They know the original to well. And even in canon Watson gives us cracks in that seemingly cold, heartless machine. It's not ruining him....just making him better known to us and more importantly, to a whole new generation of potential Holmesians/Sherloc

The 

kians and getting them into the canon.

Maybe it's because I haven't read all the stories yet, but so far I don't understand where the "canon" that Holmes is a cold, heartless machine comes from. I just haven't seen it in the stories I've read so far. Logical, rational, focused; yes. But those are not synonyms for cold and heartless. I don't get it....

 

 

Yes, Watson does point out that Sherlock is 'inhuman' and a 'machine' more than once in canon.

 

One of the first examples in The Sign of Four p.22:

 

"What a very attractive woman!" I exclaimed, turning to my companion.

He had lit his pipe again, and was leaningback with drooping eyelids. “Is she?” he said, languidly. “I did not observe.”

“You really are an automaton,—a calculating-machine!” I cried. “There is something positively inhuman in you at times."

 

I also think that Sherlock's act of murder should not be taken so gravely by fans. I was worried about it up until the point where Mycroft lightheartedly asked Sherlock if he enjoyed the 4 minutes of exile and asked him to return. This means that the old Sherlock is back - the enemy has been dealt with - and I doubt similar methods will be employed with Moriarty. 

[Arcadia]

 

Maybe it's because I haven't read all the stories yet, but so far I don't understand where the "canon" that Holmes is a cold, heartless machine comes from. I just haven't seen it in the stories I've read so far. Logical, rational, focused; yes. But those are not synonyms for cold and heartless. I don't get it....

 

Yes, Watson does point out that Sherlock is 'inhuman' and a 'machine' more than once in canon.

 

One of the first examples in The Sign of Four p.22:

 

"What a very attractive woman!" I exclaimed, turning to my companion.

He had lit his pipe again, and was leaningback with drooping eyelids. “Is she?” he said, languidly. “I did not observe.”

“You really are an automaton,—a calculating-machine!” I cried. “There is something positively inhuman in you at times."

 

Thanks! So I'm partly right; I haven't read enough of the stories yet. But even so, John said something similar in TRF -- and we all know it wasn't true. That was just Sherlock (successfully) misleading John ... and I would probably make the same interpretation in the quote above. So perhaps the problem is just me ... I don't believe Dr. Watson is a very accurate reporter! He sees, but he doesn't observe.

[Elementary]

 

Thanks! So I'm partly right; I haven't read enough of the stories yet. But even so, John said something similar in TRF -- and we all know it wasn't true. That was just Sherlock (successfully) misleading John ... and I would probably make the same interpretation in the quote above. So perhaps the problem is just me ... I don't believe Dr. Watson is a very accurate reporter! He sees, but he doesn't observe.

 

 

I guess I just like seeing Sherlock the way he is, logical with a cold demeaner and still logical and just a bit softer on the inside. I am ok with Sherlock developing a friendship with John (as is canon) but I really don't want him to become anymore "normal". What makes him loveable and hilarious and original is his social ineptitude, I hope it doesn't change too much.