Art Rec: Untitled Portrait of Sherlock Holmes in Retirement

[chapbook.livejournal.com]

Title: Untitled Portrait of Sherlock Holmes in Retirement
Artist: Johix
Pairing: Gen
Rating: G
Warnings: none
Verse: Books

Author's summary: …after my withdrawal to my little Sussex home, when I had given myself up entirely to that soothing life of Nature for which I had so often yearned during the long years spent amid the gloom of London.

- Sherlock Holmes The Lion’s Mane

Reccer's comments: A melancholic yet lovely portrait of Holmes in the Sussex countryside. I could easily imagine this as a stained glass window, not just because of the stylization of the background and how the coloring is handled, but also because Holmes is presented as a saint. "Saint of what?" you might ask. Perhaps a Saint of Detecting, or of Deduction? The artist is wisely silent on this; wise because it gives the reader room to imagine not only what type of saint he might be, but also Holmes's reaction to being "canonized". :) Whatever title you assign him, it's the placement of the sun or moon behind his head that evokes a saint's halo. Add to that the pensiveness of his expression and his clasped hands and the similarity to portraits of Christian saints is quite obvious. Joking aside, I love this conceit, for it suggests the power of Sherlock Holmes on the human imagination, a power which has inspired many incarnations and a century of fannish creativity.

The melancholy comes in with who is missing from this portrait, coupled with a quote from "The Lion's Mane". No John Watson. Holmes may love the countryside of the South Downs, with its abundance of growing things, bees, and the nearness of the sea, but his Boswell is not with him in TLM. No, the good Watson only visits very occasionally, according to TLM!Holmes. We are left to imagine Holmes alone at the end of his life, bereft of the things which seemed to give him so much pleasure in the past. It may very well be that he is quite content in his solitude. Or. We might rebel, considering the controversy that surrounds TLM, and therefore might imagine it a cover to protect both men in a culture hostile to same-sex relationships of any stripe. Dr. Watson may be out of frame, perhaps standing behind him, or sitting on the same seat, facing the opposite direction. What do you think? Choose your adventure.

Meta Recs: "The Lie of His Last Vow" and "Response to ArchipelagoArchaea's...meta on Mary Morstan"

[chapbook.livejournal.com]

Title: The Lie of His Last Vow and Response to ArchipelagoArchaea's recent meta on Mary Morstan
Author: ArchipelagoArchaea and Marta-Sherlock
Pairing: Gen
Length: 4,563 and 2,303
Rating: PG
Warnings: none
Verse: Sherlock BBC

Author's summary: 1) It’s time to take down the surface reading of His Last Vow. This is the episode that purports to end with Mary’s past revealed, her lies and actions forgiven, and her role in John’s life firmly established, while Sherlock’s role is diminished by a combination of unborn child and his new criminal record. The casual viewer will probably take it at face value, sweeping any inconsistencies under the rug. However, there’s ample evidence they shouldn’t.

2) Let me be absolutely clear upfront that I haven’t been able to put anywhere near the amount of thought or writing effort into this piece that Archaea has. This is a reaction, not an original meta, and I don’t want to detract from her piece. I think in a lot of ways I agreed with her, and certainly felt my own more kinder!gentler!Mary (which isn’t the same as wanting her to go on as Mrs. Watson) interpretation more challenged (in a good way!) than I have by most other opposing views. Even if you like the idea of a Mary who doesn’t become a villain, even if you want her and John to go on to their stereotypically heterosexual happily-ever-after of a kid and a house in the suburbs (I put myself in the first camp but not in the second), I still really encourage you to give it a read. It’s thought-provoking and just fun to work through.

All that said… let me try to reply critically.

Reccer's comments: Note: I included both metas, not only because they are clearly linked, but also because the authors kept the discussion polite and respectful, something in short supply over on the Tumblr side of Sherlock fandom. I'd also recommend several of the substantive replies in the posts' notes, as they make interesting points and retain the same level of decorum.

I chose these meta because they both address issues in HLV that have puzzled, angered, or otherwise disappointed many fans and do so by combing carefully through that episode, as well as by looking back to previous episodes when exploring character continuity. Using clear, careful language, ArchipelagoArchaea and Marta-Sherlock agree that much of HLV appears to not work logically if one uncritically accepts the surface, taking the dialogue and action at face value. Neither sugarcoats the characters' actions, agreeing for example that Mary Morstan has not made any attempt yet to redeem herself (redemption is not the same as forgiveness, for it is an impulse that comes from within and is then made concrete through atonement), but do disagree on whether there may be space in S4 for her possible redemption. AA feels that, as a secondary character, there may not be time enough to make Mary more complex; there were many opportunities to signal that in S3, but instead the writers clearly positioned her as an antagonist in HLV. M-S counters that there still may be redemption for Mary; the writers may want to keep her redemption a surprise and therefore did not show their hand in HLV (in effect misdirecting the viewers).

M-S also differs from AA on the "Mary as Moran" theory that some fans have picked up on. There are clear parallels between Sebastian Moran and BBC's Mary Morstan in HLV, but, considering how much canon is jettisoned in this series, we cannot be sure that these parallels won't be subverted in some way next season and that subversion could lead to a more character than a villain.

AA makes additional points not discussed by M-S (this is not a criticism of M-S, just noting that M-S's meta is primarily focussing on one character and on things she disagrees with, rather than a point-by-point review). At the beginning of the body of AA's essay, for example, she marshals pragmatic reasons, genre expectations, and characterization to dispel fears that the Watson baby is going to play much of a role in future seasons of Sherlock.

AA also points out that Mrs. Hudson's morally ambiguous past serves as a mirror for Mary's. If one compares the actions of the two women, Mrs. Hudson comes out as gray, but not dark, because she does make some positive choices, such as confessing what she's done and decisively leaving that part of her life behind. Mary, however, does not volunteer detail on what she has done (apart from the USB stick that she tells John not to read), nor has she put aside her assassin's gear or her willingness to mortally wound or kill even an unarmed man who is offering to help her. These differences, which were decided upon by the writers, do make it easier to paint Mary as a villain at this point in the show.

John and Sherlock's dialogue and behavior also come under scrutiny. AA notes that if we accept the surface reading of HLV, then the characterizations of Sherlock and John, the two central characters, is not just inconsistent, but would be flattened, leaching them of their richness and complexity. A comparison of how they act in TSoT vs. HLV illustrates those inconsistencies quite well. AA therefore argues that it is probable that Sherlock has some sort of plan going on in the background that necessitates his keeping Mary relatively content as he tries to figure out her past and neutralize any danger she might present to John. Considering Sherlock's history of protectiveness toward John, I doubt anyone would object to the assertion that John's safety has become paramount to Sherlock, nor to the theory that any plan Sherlock might be concocting would maintain that as one primary goal.


I am not trying to push you to agree with one or the other author (or either!), but I do want acknowledge not just the tone of these meta, but the authors' attempts to base their arguments on relevant evidence from the series. I hope both ArchipelagoArchaea and Marta-Sherlock continue to engage thoughtfully with the show and (along with some other stellar models) inspire other fans to treat each other respectfully, even when they disagree.