![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bloodyrosemccoyI have discovered that it's probably a bad idea to start watching the BBC's Sherlock right after rereading the Enola Holmes series.
It's not that Sherlock is bad. I suspect that Holmes himself is going to start getting annoying as I keep watching--as![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fadethecat pointed out, the Brilliant Asshole character is getting old. But it's also clear that the writers are huge fans of original flavor Holmes, and a lot of the nods to it are pretty fun.
But in my opinion, Nancy Springer managed to get a lot of the original stuff down--including an alternative view of Victorian London, so that you can see things that a white upper-middle-class Victorian doctor might not have focused on. She keeps pretty close to Holmes's original character--that is, he's friendly enough, but he is eccentric, somewhat arrogant, logical, and with his own blind spots. And she also keeps him in the background, focusing on her fascinating original character. Enola's adventures highlight how clever Victorian ladies were at getting around social restrictions--and Enola herself has social savvy, which is really refreshing. Plus, I love that Sherlock's total dismissal of anything feminine can be used against him. All sorts of clever codes and ciphers pass right by him because, y'know, flowers and fans and elaborate undergarments are ladyface nonsense.
Which kind of highlights something else--that while I like some reinterpretations well enough, it's impossible to really dislodge Sherlock Holmes from his natural habitat of Victorian London. Yes, he's fun to put in modern times, and Sherlock does exceedingly well in incorporating updated things like text messages and internetting and cars and how to tackle three-pipe problems when you can't be seen smoking on TV* and such into his stories, but a lot of my joy with the Holmes stories comes from their setting. It's the same reason I read any other sort of story set in a place other than my own modern one--because the setting is FASCINATING. Original Holmes gives us a glimpse at that setting; my favorite Holmes spinoffs are the ones that do the same.**
So yeah, the BBC's new take is interesting. But I think I'll have to watch it when I'm less steeped in Victorian Holmes.
*Okay, yes, the "three-patch problem" made me snort.
**Actually, though, I am not a huge fan of any of the old Masterpiece Theater ones. Didn't like Jeremy Brett or Basil Rathbone. And while I am perfectly okay with Dawson from The Great Mouse Detective (and am perfectly in love with Professor Ratigan even though I fucking HATE the Moriarty nonsense), do not get me STARTED on Jam Watson.
It's not that Sherlock is bad. I suspect that Holmes himself is going to start getting annoying as I keep watching--as
fadethecat pointed out, the Brilliant Asshole character is getting old. But it's also clear that the writers are huge fans of original flavor Holmes, and a lot of the nods to it are pretty fun.But in my opinion, Nancy Springer managed to get a lot of the original stuff down--including an alternative view of Victorian London, so that you can see things that a white upper-middle-class Victorian doctor might not have focused on. She keeps pretty close to Holmes's original character--that is, he's friendly enough, but he is eccentric, somewhat arrogant, logical, and with his own blind spots. And she also keeps him in the background, focusing on her fascinating original character. Enola's adventures highlight how clever Victorian ladies were at getting around social restrictions--and Enola herself has social savvy, which is really refreshing. Plus, I love that Sherlock's total dismissal of anything feminine can be used against him. All sorts of clever codes and ciphers pass right by him because, y'know, flowers and fans and elaborate undergarments are ladyface nonsense.
Which kind of highlights something else--that while I like some reinterpretations well enough, it's impossible to really dislodge Sherlock Holmes from his natural habitat of Victorian London. Yes, he's fun to put in modern times, and Sherlock does exceedingly well in incorporating updated things like text messages and internetting and cars and how to tackle three-pipe problems when you can't be seen smoking on TV* and such into his stories, but a lot of my joy with the Holmes stories comes from their setting. It's the same reason I read any other sort of story set in a place other than my own modern one--because the setting is FASCINATING. Original Holmes gives us a glimpse at that setting; my favorite Holmes spinoffs are the ones that do the same.**
So yeah, the BBC's new take is interesting. But I think I'll have to watch it when I'm less steeped in Victorian Holmes.
*Okay, yes, the "three-patch problem" made me snort.
**Actually, though, I am not a huge fan of any of the old Masterpiece Theater ones. Didn't like Jeremy Brett or Basil Rathbone. And while I am perfectly okay with Dawson from The Great Mouse Detective (and am perfectly in love with Professor Ratigan even though I fucking HATE the Moriarty nonsense), do not get me STARTED on Jam Watson.
