Molly Hooper

[gerry]

I could speculate, but I'm not interested enough, lol.

i can totally relate to the lack of interest in Irene!

[Boton]

No I was shocked about Lestrade too. Mentioned it somewhere above. This wasn't less cruel than the things Sherlock said to Molly.

 

Hey, I think I've regained a train of thought!  Or jumped on a new train; who knows?   :D

 

I think all of Sherlock's deductions were pretty much equally cruel, but it is Molly as the target that becomes so painful.  Lestrade's deduction was pretty horrible, but we know that Lestrade is perfectly capable of fighting back if he wanted to.  He let it go, maybe just because that was the easiest way to shut Sherlock up.

 

The deduction of Jeanette was also horrible, but she's temporary.  Heck, even *John* can't remember stuff about her, and he's actually dating her!  So, horrible, but temporary.

 

Molly is defenseless, and that is what makes this hurt worse to watch.

 

FYI, I do think those were Irene's lips, and that Sherlock is suddenly seeing lipstick everywhere because he's got Irene in the back of his mind (if not the front).

 

Also, I sort of rationalize Sherlock being more or less OK during the violin performance because, hey, he's the center of attention!  It's the only part of the evening he actually enjoys!  (Or something like that.)

[bedelia1984]

 

I think where your suggestion that he is belittling her for her sexuality falls down is that his reaction is so different when he thinks she's trying to entrap a stranger, than when he thinks she's trying to seduce him- once the 'abstract' element is removed, on a human level, he connects with what Molly is really doing and feeling, and there isn't any contempt at all left by the end of the scene, not in my interpretation anyway.

Doesn't the fact that he was different after seeing the present prove that he was in fact belittling her during the personal attack? The entire deduction was full of contempt.

 

 

For me, no, it's the opposite. Initially, Sherlock was thinking that Molly was dressed up to impress some guy elsewhere, so what he was saying to her was supposed to demonstrate how good a read he had on what she was 'up to'- lest anyone think a woman could get anything by him. It wasn't designed to humiliate her right in front of the object of her affections, but unfortunately he was too ill-informed to realise what he was really doing. When he focused on her as a person, all the fire went out of him instantly, the part that was personal was the apology, the deduction was the impersonal part, which was why it was so unfeeling and cruel.

 

I think that scene hurts to watch both because we know how painful it must be for Molly to have him speak to her that way, and we know Sherlock is clueless as to why his words are so especially cruel. There's a point before he sees the gift label where it seems like he could just go on robotically, forever; time seems to stretch out- he's gone so far wrong none of the others can intervene and save him,... really, an extraordinarily well acted and written scene, I think one of the ones that especially drew me into the show.

 

 

...

 

Am I the only one who cringed almost as much when he announced that Lestrade's wife was sleeping with the P.E. teacher?  I felt really bad for Lestrade because he either didn't know, or was trying to save face when he told everyone they had it sorted, and Sherlock humiliated him.  And then when he corrected John when he said his sister was off the booze, I wanted to kick Sherlock under the table and tell him to stop ruining everyone's Christmas.

 

 

Yes, I think this is mean, and cringe-inducing on a similar level- the Lestrade thing, John's sister less so, but still very mean. I do believe that Sherlock was just on devastating-deduction auto-pilot during this scene, and had totally distanced himself from any human connection to the people he we talking to. Which is not an excuse, as his behaviour was all-round dreadful. I don't think he apologised to anyone else though.

 

I actually really dislike the staple they have of Sherlock making fun of Greg's love life. I get that the writers think it is hilarious, but for me its a marked case of people in glass houses. Does Sherlock really believe his own love life is so much better than Lestrade's that he's in a position to be taking shots at him?

[Artemis]

I think all of Sherlock's deductions were pretty much equally cruel, but it is Molly as the target that becomes so painful.

Molly was an easy target, and seemed even more so because we the audience knew she was soft on Sherlock.

 

Part of the reason it was so painful to watch is just because it was filmed to be.  Sherlock's deductions and insensitive comments are often quick, over in a flash.  By comparison, this one was dragged out, panning to different characters' expressions and clearly showing Molly's growing discomfort.  There are few other instances where we even have time to think to ourselves, "Sherlock, for the love of God, stop!"  (Norbury springs to mind.)

 

Also, I sort of rationalize Sherlock being more or less OK during the violin performance because, hey, he's the center of attention! It's the only part of the evening he actually enjoys! (Or something like that.)

It's also a good way to participate in social activity without having to talk, with the added bonus of simultaneously shutting everyone else up as well. :P

 

 

[Boton]

 

 

 

I actually really dislike the staple they have of Sherlock making fun of Greg's love life. I get that the writers think it is hilarious, but for me its a marked case of people in glass houses. Does Sherlock really believe his own love life is so much better than Lestrade's that he's in a position to be taking shots at him?

 

 

I dislike that too (and we all know that Moftiss have never met a joke they loved that they wouldn't repeat endlessly), but I think Greg can defend himself.  I think it is only iron control of will combined with a bit of affection for Sherlock that keeps Greg from saying, "I may be the butt of your joke here, but at least I've had sex in the past decade."  (And I think that would fly over Sherlock's head, because at this point he thinks it is his emotional distance that makes him superior, not any inherent criticism of infidelity.)

 

 

Molly was an easy target, and seemed even more so because we the audience knew she was soft on Sherlock.

 

Part of the reason it was so painful to watch is just because it was filmed to be. Sherlock's deductions and insensitive comments are often quick, over in a flash. By comparison, this one was dragged out, panning to different characters' expressions and clearly showing Molly's growing discomfort. There are few other instances where we even have time to think to ourselves, "Sherlock, for the love of God, stop!"

 

 

 

That was pretty much my exact reaction the first time I saw that.  It was like watching a slow motion car crash.

[Arcadia]

I just had a thought ... would anyone agree that when these scathing deductions occur, we are mostly laughing at Sherlock, not with him? And it's funny because it's unexpected and audacious, and because of how the victims react (Lestrade's resigned sigh in ASiB cracks me up) ... not because of what he says. Now that I think about it some more, I remember when I first started watching the show, I was surprised how often they made fun of Sherlock's personality ... and that was part of the charm, to me. They acknowledge he's a git and skewer him with it. At the same time, we're allowed to admire his genuine brilliance, so that he remains a likeable character. Pretty deft bit of characterization, that. Oh goody, I just reminded myself why I fell in love with the show in the first place!

 

Now I find myself hoping he's not too human after TFP ... might take all the pleasure out of poking fun at him.

[Boton]

I just had a thought ... would anyone agree that when these scathing deductions occur, we are mostly laughing at Sherlock, not with him? And it's funny because it's unexpected and audacious, and because of how the victims react (Lestrade's resigned sigh in ASiB cracks me up) ... not because of what he says. Now that I think about it some more, I remember when I first started watching the show, I was surprised how often they made fun of Sherlock's personality ... and that was part of the charm, to me. They acknowledge he's a git and skewer him with it. At the same time, we're allowed to admire his genuine brilliance, so that he remains a likeable character. Pretty deft bit of characterization, that. Oh goody, I just reminded myself why I fell in love with the show in the first place!

 

Now I find myself hoping he's not too human after TFP ... might take all the pleasure out of poking fun at him. :smile;

 

Totally agree, Arcadia.  Most of the time, the laughing is at his expense, or, at least, laughing because his technique is so tone deaf. That's the thing about the Sherlock Holmes character -- he is supposed to be someone that only Watson could love (platonic). This version of Sherlock has so far gotten the balance right most of the time; my other favorite, House, often went too far toward having a wholly unlikable "Holmes."  

 

So I'm with you.  I hope we don't have a newly human and emotionally-sensitive Sherlock to deal with, because that would be boring to watch.  

[Arcadia]

Yeah, I had to stop watching House after the first few seasons, I wasn't seeing the humor in him anymore. :(

 

I would say a big difference with this Holmes is that quite a few people end up loving him quite a lot, each in their own way. I wonder if that was the intent from the start, or if it just grew out of this particular portrayal. Never know, I reckon. Seems like no one ever asks that kind of question at the cons/interviews.

[Boton]

Yeah, I had to stop watching House after the first few seasons, I wasn't seeing the humor in him anymore. :(

 

I would say a big difference with this Holmes is that quite a few people end up loving him quite a lot, each in their own way. I wonder if that was the intent from the start, or if it just grew out of this particular portrayal. Never know, I reckon. Seems like no one ever asks that kind of question at the cons/interviews.

 

I understand about House; with something like 212 episodes, it could be hit or miss.  Unfortunately, some of the really great House and Wilson emotional growth moments took place in the later seasons, when I started finding the Team unbearable to watch, and the cases of the week were just awful.

 

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him.  I almost think that this is due to BC being perfect for this particular Sherlock Holmes portrayal.  I really don't think he's ever going to get another part that takes advantage of some of his natural acting assets quite as well.  But whatever.  The important thing is that we get to enjoy this Sherlock!

[Arcadia]

I know what you mean ... I'd kill (not literally ) to see BC in a comedy, I think he's a natural at it; but I don't think it's going to happen. Sherlock is probably the closest we'll ever get.

[bedelia1984]

 

.....

I understand about House; with something like 212 episodes, it could be hit or miss.  Unfortunately, some of the really great House and Wilson emotional growth moments took place in the later seasons, when I started finding the Team unbearable to watch, and the cases of the week were just awful.

 

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him.  I almost think that this is due to BC being perfect for this particular Sherlock Holmes portrayal.  I really don't think he's ever going to get another part that takes advantage of some of his natural acting assets quite as well.  But whatever.  The important thing is that we get to enjoy this Sherlock!

 

 

I also watched House, except I gave up for the last season, but I agree about the team, unbearable is the word! Hugh Laurie gave such a great performance, and so did Robert Sean Leonard, but a lot of the show fell apart for me before the end. And from day one, I think the supporting characters were a lot weaker than those in Sherlock.

 

I suppose it isn't fair to compare the two when House is clearly a formulaic typical network show- though it had some great breaks in form like the House's Head/ Wilson's Heart episodes. As a shorter mini series with the same cast (and a very whittled down 'team') I think it could have been a much better show, they had the ideas, just not, as you say 212 of them.

 

I suppose I would consider the Cuddy character as Irene, and that Cameron is more the Molly, although Cameron drove me round the twist in House.

 

Sorry for the House-related detour! I thought BC was magnificent in Parade's End too- not saying I prefer that role to Sherlock, but I do think there's a lot of life in his career yet- and as Arcadia suggests, for the love of God, someone need to cast BC in a comedy. Why is nobody making intelligent character-driven comedies for the cinema anymore? They are like gold dust.

[Boton]

 

.....

I understand about House; with something like 212 episodes, it could be hit or miss. Unfortunately, some of the really great House and Wilson emotional growth moments took place in the later seasons, when I started finding the Team unbearable to watch, and the cases of the week were just awful.

 

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him. I almost think that this is due to BC being perfect for this particular Sherlock Holmes portrayal. I really don't think he's ever going to get another part that takes advantage of some of his natural acting assets quite as well. But whatever. The important thing is that we get to enjoy this Sherlock!

 

I also watched House, except I gave up for the last season, but I agree about the team, unbearable is the word! Hugh Laurie gave such a great performance, and so did Robert Sean Leonard, but a lot of the show fell apart for me before the end. And from day one, I think the supporting characters were a lot weaker than those in Sherlock.

 

I suppose it isn't fair to compare the two when House is clearly a formulaic typical network show- though it had some great breaks in form like the House's Head/ Wilson's Heart episodes. As a shorter mini series with the same cast (and a very whittled down 'team') I think it could have been a much better show, they had the ideas, just not, as you say 212 of them.

 

I suppose I would consider the Cuddy character as Irene, and that Cameron is more the Molly, although Cameron drove me round the twist in House.

 

Sorry for the House-related detour! I thought BC was magnificent in Parade's End too- not saying I prefer that role to Sherlock, but I do think there's a lot of life in his career yet- and as Arcadia suggests, for the love of God, someone need to cast BC in a comedy. Why is nobody making intelligent character-driven comedies for the cinema anymore? They are like gold dust.

 

Agree with your analogy, especially regarding House's Head/Wilson's Heart. I also loved Wilson (the episode, as well as the character), and The C Word.

 

I think Cuddy is Lestrade, and Stacy is Irene. But I agree Cameron is Molly, and she became a huge example of how to ruin that kind of character. (To get us back on the Molly topic.).

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Carol the Dabbler]

I wonder if those two think they're even now. "I hurt you, you hurt me, it's all good now." I tend to think men think that way.

 

Yeah, I think it's called "bonding."  (As in "I can beat you up, you can beat me up, so now we can respect each other.")

 

 

Now for my newly-minted opinion on why Sherlock is so awful to Molly in the party scene:  First, it's a party -- there are people.  As has already been pointed out, he got to be the center of attention for a while without having to interact with anyone by playing the violin -- but he can get away with that for only so long.  So OK, he's already uncomfortable.

 

And then here comes Molly.  And she is so incredibly deducible (or so he thinks) that he just can't resist giving her an especially elaborate treatment.  Not just a sentence apiece, like he'd given Greg and John, but on and on and on -- until he makes one deduction more than he had expected to make.  (Hadn't thought of it that way before, but the phenomenon wasn't new in TSo3 after all.)

[Arcadia]

 

I wonder if those two think they're even now. "I hurt you, you hurt me, it's all good now." I tend to think men think that way.

 

Yeah, I think it's called "bonding."  (As in "I can beat you up, you can beat me up, so now we can respect each other.")

 

So true.

 

Now for my newly-minted opinion on why Sherlock is so awful to Molly in the party scene:  First, it's a party -- there are people.  As has already been pointed out, he got to be the center of attention for a while without having to interact with anyone by playing the violin -- but he can get away with that for only so long.  So OK, he's already uncomfortable.

 

And then here comes Molly.  And she is so incredibly deducible (or so he thinks) that he just can't resist giving her an especially elaborate treatment.  Not just a sentence apiece, like he'd given Greg and John, but on and on and on -- until he makes one deduction more than he had expected to make.  (Hadn't thought of it that way before, but the phenomenon wasn't new in TSo3 after all.)

Suddenly realizing the gift is for him, you mean? Or before that?

[Carol the Dabbler]

That, yes.  Not much of a deduction, admittedly, but certainly one he had not anticipated.

[gerry]

For me, no, it's the opposite. Initially, Sherlock was thinking that Molly was dressed up to impress some guy elsewhere, so what he was saying to her was supposed to demonstrate how good a read he had on what she was 'up to'- lest anyone think a woman could get anything by him. It wasn't designed to humiliate her right in front of the object of her affections, but unfortunately he was too ill-informed to realise what he was really doing. When he focused on her as a person, all the fire went out of him instantly, the part that was personal was the apology, the deduction was the impersonal part, which was why it was so unfeeling and cruel.

I'm not understanding your logic. Let's say for the sake of argument, that the deduction was correct and she was dressed up for some unforeseen guy, are you saying Sherlock still wouldn't have meant every belittling word he said? It seems like you're equating whether Sherlock was correct about the deduction with whether he was belittling her or not and that doesn't make sense to me. Realizing that he was the object of her affection doesn't suddenly mean he didn't mean what he said in the deduction. At least not to me.

 

Totally agree, Arcadia. Most of the time, the laughing is at his expense, or, at least, laughing because his technique is so tone deaf. That's the thing about the Sherlock Holmes character -- he is supposed to be someone that only Watson could love (platonic). This version of Sherlock has so far gotten the balance right most of the time; my other favorite, House, often went too far toward having a wholly unlikable "Holmes."

Can you give me an example of the type of Sherlock scene where you find this humor you're talking about? I guess I'm trying to understand how you can simultaneously laugh at Sherlock but feel bad for the victim of his deduction because I don't find any of them funny.

 

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him.

I wish I could see this vulnerability you reference because I found no vulnerability in the xmas scene, just an asshole.

[bedelia1984]

 

For me, no, it's the opposite. Initially, Sherlock was thinking that Molly was dressed up to impress some guy elsewhere, so what he was saying to her was supposed to demonstrate how good a read he had on what she was 'up to'- lest anyone think a woman could get anything by him. It wasn't designed to humiliate her right in front of the object of her affections, but unfortunately he was too ill-informed to realise what he was really doing. When he focused on her as a person, all the fire went out of him instantly, the part that was personal was the apology, the deduction was the impersonal part, which was why it was so unfeeling and cruel.

I'm not understanding your logic. Let's say for the sake of argument, that the deduction was correct and she was dressed up for some unforeseen guy, are you saying Sherlock still wouldn't have meant every belittling word he said? It seems like you're equating whether Sherlock was correct about the deduction with whether he was belittling her or not and that doesn't make sense to me. Realizing that he was the object of her affection doesn't suddenly mean he didn't mean what he said in the deduction. At least not to me.

 

Well, not that he didn't mean what he said, but that he didn't understand the context in which he was speaking and therefore didn't understand quite how cruel his words were, or what meaning Molly would take from them. 

 

Say, for contrast, Sherlock was talking to a male, heterosexual friend, and said, you must have a date because you're hiding your bald patch under a hat and wearing black to make you look thinner... to me, that's a less extreme version of what Sherlock was doing to Molly, whilst thinking that yes, she was overdressed and on the prowl but also that she wouldn't be that upset that he as someone not terribly important to her, made an observation about it. I'm using an example that removes the possibility of the person being attracted to Sherlock or especially sensitive to his remarks, because I think that's how Sherlock saw her- I think it was very blind of him, but I also think he has huge blinds spots anyway, especially when in deduction mode.

 

The mistake he made was about how much what he said mattered to her emotionally- because he never intended to make a spectacle of her feelings for him, but rather to show off that he's made another clever deduction about an acquaintance. To me the misstep is most in line with what happens in TST with Norbury before Mary is shot, he's so set on showing off his razor sharp deduction skills regarding human nature that he misses the bigger problem and ends up causing severe unintentional damage as a result. And we see how much he regrets his arrogance after Norbury- just as he regretted his words in Scandal.

 

There's that bit of character revelation in what Sherlock is saying to her in Scandal, because in order for him to start off in that vein and then change tack when he realises it is him that she likes, he initially couldn't have remotely considered the possibility that he really mattered to her at all.

 

For the record, I think its fine for us to agree to disagree, if you believe that his main aim was to demean Molly I can see where you would find cause, it just doesn't fit with my own reading of the character.

[Boton]

 

For me, no, it's the opposite. Initially, Sherlock was thinking that Molly was dressed up to impress some guy elsewhere, so what he was saying to her was supposed to demonstrate how good a read he had on what she was 'up to'- lest anyone think a woman could get anything by him. It wasn't designed to humiliate her right in front of the object of her affections, but unfortunately he was too ill-informed to realise what he was really doing. When he focused on her as a person, all the fire went out of him instantly, the part that was personal was the apology, the deduction was the impersonal part, which was why it was so unfeeling and cruel.

I'm not understanding your logic. Let's say for the sake of argument, that the deduction was correct and she was dressed up for some unforeseen guy, are you saying Sherlock still wouldn't have meant every belittling word he said? It seems like you're equating whether Sherlock was correct about the deduction with whether he was belittling her or not and that doesn't make sense to me. Realizing that he was the object of her affection doesn't suddenly mean he didn't mean what he said in the deduction. At least not to me.

 

Totally agree, Arcadia. Most of the time, the laughing is at his expense, or, at least, laughing because his technique is so tone deaf. That's the thing about the Sherlock Holmes character -- he is supposed to be someone that only Watson could love (platonic). This version of Sherlock has so far gotten the balance right most of the time; my other favorite, House, often went too far toward having a wholly unlikable "Holmes."

Can you give me an example of the type of Sherlock scene where you find this humor you're talking about? I guess I'm trying to understand how you can simultaneously laugh at Sherlock but feel bad for the victim of his deduction because I don't find any of them funny.

 

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him.

I wish I could see this vulnerability you reference because I found no vulnerability in the xmas scene, just an asshole.

I just rewatched the episode (boring Friday night and all), looking for specifics. In regard to your questions:

 

I found basically every deduction in the first 15-20 minutes of the episode simultaneously mean and funny. Almost every potential client with the exception of the Geek Interpreters was handled insensitively, especially the client from the boomerang case, who Sherlock ignored while explaining the guy had bad breath, no love life, a p*rn addiction, and a heart condition. Yet I still chuckled at all of them. Sherlock was just so oblivious to the hurt feelings he was causing, it was funny.

 

The vulnerability doesn't have to be specifically present in a scene for me to feel it. This Sherlock is written and acted as a character with some clueless mannerisms masking a vulnerable core, and that just comes through no matter what he does.

 

Finally, I tried to pay extra close attention to the Molly scene, and, juxtaposed with the Jeanette deduction like it was, I felt almost like someone had taken Sherlock aside before the party (probably John) and said, "You have to interact with people. Call them by name. Show an interest in what's important to them." And he proceeds to really communicate how little he cares about Jeanette while he tries to remember her name, and then he starts pointing out things about Molly that he thinks she finds important, like a new boyfriend. He's stopped, then, by the realization that the crush is him, and that realization is followed shortly by him thinking of Irene's red lips that also match a package for him. So I think there's a lot going on there, but I don't see malicious intent.

 

But I second what was said above that we don't all have to read the scene the same way, and I do understand how you can see it differently. <3

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SanaB]

 

 

Yeah, I had to stop watching House after the first few seasons, I wasn't seeing the humor in him anymore. :(

 

I would say a big difference with this Holmes is that quite a few people end up loving him quite a lot, each in their own way. I wonder if that was the intent from the start, or if it just grew out of this particular portrayal. Never know, I reckon. Seems like no one ever asks that kind of question at the cons/interviews.

Somehow this Sherlock has managed to project a vulnerability even at times that he was at his absolute worst, and I think that makes people want to protect him.

Right. The people close to him feel that he is vulnerable deep inside and they also feel that if something breaks through to it he wouldn't be able to deal with it in his current situation. His friends are people who are vulnerable too of course. But they are used to deal with it. They live their emotions every day. They can protect themselves, Sherlock doesn't. IT could destroy him.

[gerry]

For the record, I think its fine for us to agree to disagree, if you believe that his main aim was to demean Molly I can see where you would find cause, it just doesn't fit with my own reading of the character.

I don't think this accurately describes how I feel about Sherlock in that scene actually.

 

Sherlock judged Molly by how she was dressed and what her implied intentions were (using sexuality to impress/attract a man) the second he saw her. Hence the eye roll and his "oh dear lord". His deduction was only the verbal explanation for what he found contemptible about it complete with the mocking attitude. I don't think that was an act, he truly has no respect when a woman behaves that way. At the same time, I don't think he bothered to care about what the effect of sharing his opinion on the matter in that manner would have on Molly because he was too wrapped up in verbally expressing himself. In that vein, I do think it's consistent with the Norbury scene.

 

The difference for me is that when he apologized, I don't think it was because he suddenly respected Molly for trying to attract a man by making her breasts and mouth look bigger. I think he was apologizing because Molly said he was saying horrible things and she started to cry. He realized he hurt her so he apologized. It's like in TEH when he apologized to John because he hurt him and John was angry but not because he truly understood what was so painful about lying about his death for two years.

 

I also found Sherlock's disrespectful attitude towards Molly to be quite a double standard. His current fascination, Irene, actually uses her sexuality for her profession and Sherlock seems to have no problem with that but dressing to attract a man is somehow so much worse to him. There's something rather chauvinistic about it.

[gerry]

They can protect themselves, Sherlock doesn't. IT could destroy him.

Sherlock is so emotionally fragile that everyone around him should have to deal with his behavior, no matter how vile? And his horrible behavior therefore, is explained/excused by this fragile emotional state?

[J.P.]

I don't think that the Jeanette deduction is clueless. I would say Sherlock means to offend her by listing the long line of John's girlfriends. He's literally trying to put off everyone in the room with exception of Mrs H. Maybe he hopes they would leave him alone. Or does it without even realizing, because playing violin was all the social interaction he can take, but there is no escape from the situation.

 

Second thing - I don't think Sherlock is that much occupied by Irene. Meeting her is few months ago and he doesn't seem to answer her texts.

[bedelia1984]

 

Finally, I tried to pay extra close attention to the Molly scene, and, juxtaposed with the Jeanette deduction like it was, I felt almost like someone had taken Sherlock aside before the party (probably John) and said, "You have to interact with people. Call them by name. Show an interest in what's important to them." And he proceeds to really communicate how little he cares about Jeanette while he tries to remember her name, and then he starts pointing out things about Molly that he thinks she finds important, like a new boyfriend. He's stopped, then, by the realization that the crush is him, and that realization is followed shortly by him thinking of Irene's red lips that also match a package for him. So I think there's a lot going on there, but I don't see malicious intent.

 

 

Yes, I think that could explain a lot of his behaviour, and then again the way Irene is brought into it, everything is being swirled together in his brain in a way I think he's finding a bit distressing, and unfortunately Molly gets the brunt of it in what he is saying aloud, unfiltered because of all the other deductions going on in addition to the basic, visual-triggered ones he is currently spouting.

 

 

The difference for me is that when he apologized, I don't think it was because he suddenly respected Molly for trying to attract a man by making her breasts and mouth look bigger. I think he was apologizing because Molly said he was saying horrible things and she started to cry. He realized he hurt her so he apologized. It's like in TEH when he apologized to John because he hurt him and John was angry but not because he truly understood what was so painful about lying about his death for two years.

 

I also found Sherlock's disrespectful attitude towards Molly to be quite a double standard. His current fascination, Irene, actually uses her sexuality for her profession and Sherlock seems to have no problem with that but dressing to attract a man is somehow so much worse to him. There's something rather chauvinistic about it.

 

 

I don't believe he respected Molly more for the way that she dressed, I believe he respected her feelings when she knew that she had feelings directed towards him.

 

The last part of what you said there- I do think that some part of the fact that what Molly was doing reminded him of  Irene- even if it is just the colour of her lipstick. Then, I already believed that his experience with Irene played in to his views about women trying to get the upper hand over a man by the way they dress/ wear makeup.

 

I think it is one way that Irene was more on-point in her attempt to get his attention- she dropped any attempt to dress a certain way, disarming Sherlock of the opportunity to deduce her- which made her more mysterious and more interesting to him, and less easy for him to pigeonhole. In more of Irene's scenes with Sherlock she is less made up- wearing the robe etc, than she would be with other men- so I would guess she thinks that is what Sherlock would prefer, a woman with less artifice and distractions about her. And then the irony of that is that it is the opposite of Irene's personal style and closer to how we usually see Molly.

 

 

I don't think that the Jeanette deduction is clueless. I would say Sherlock means to offend her by listing the long line of John's girlfriends. He's literally trying to put off everyone in the room with exception of Mrs H. Maybe he hopes they would leave him alone. Or does it without even realizing, because playing violin was all the social interaction he can take, but there is no escape from the situation.

 

Yes I agree. I also think a small part of Sherlock wants to keep Baker Street for him, John and Mrs. Hudson only and basically scare everyone else away with the sheer force of his insensitive analysis.

[gerry]

I don't believe he respected Molly more for the way that she dressed, I believe he respected her feelings when she knew that she had feelings directed towards him.

Do you believe he would have apologized or respected her feelings if he wasn't the man she dressed up for?

[bedelia1984]

 

I don't believe he respected Molly more for the way that she dressed, I believe he respected her feelings when she knew that she had feelings directed towards him.

Do you believe he would have apologized or respected her feelings if he wasn't the man she dressed up for?

 

 

Yes, if he saw he had hurt her, he would have apologised anyway, though as the hurt was partly caused by the fact that it was him, it's hard to guess how the scene would have played if it hadn't been him. But if she had been hurt simply because she was embarrassed because of how he spoke about her appearance, and she had let him know, I think he would have been just as sorry as he was when he thought she was upset because of her feelings for him.