fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4994 ]

[ SECRET POST #4994 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4994 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 26 secrets from Secret Submission Post #715.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

01. https://i.imgur.com/qy6THfj.png

I agree 100% with #3, for sure.

In regards to 2, just because someone is more non-traditional areas doesn't mean they are non-traditional in all places.

full disclosure, this is the first I'm hearing of this product and idk if OP's assessment is spot on but

it's not so much that Holmes is traditional/non-traditional, it's that he comes off as an aloof person in the original canon. so if there was anyone else besides his known brother in his life, my reading would be that he would be generally aloof about them as well. like, regardless of antyhing he'd be thoroughly hands-off, you-do-you, whatever I don't care I'm Sherlock Fucking Holmes about them. so if tradtional/non is not the correct way to state it, it's still...yeah, no, Holmes would not insist that a younger sibling do anything by a certain rote path, while he also might not necessarily say they have to do things by the non-traditional path. he'd probably have to say "what the fuck I have nothing to do with how you life your life" so if their parents wanted them to go to certain schools or follow a certain career, he would not interfere, but also not discourage if the sibling said they wanted to do something wild and wacky.

idk the more I'm hearing about this series, the more I feel like the author really doesn't understand Victorian authors nor Sherlock Holmes as a character at all. probably should have just written their own take on An Victorian Lady Detective without connecting it to the Holmes mythos.

I think I agree with this, although full disclosure that my most enduring perception of Holmes is due to his portrayal in the Granada series.

That's not a bad take, honestly. The Granada series came the closest to capturing the spirit of the ACD stories.

(no subject)

silverr - 2020-09-07 22:50 (UTC) - Expand

They did the research, which is an essential. Assumptions about Holmes and Victorian culture are death to adaptations

This is true, but there's no reason to think Holmes in particular would be traditional in this specific sense when canonically he hasn't shown a great deal of investment in traditional anything, much less gender roles.

WRT 1 and 2, is it even supposed to be realistic? Are the original Holmes stories even necessarily realistic? What's the use of the stories being plausible?

WRT 3, I 100% agree, that's just dumb

"What's the use of the stories being plausible?"

... huh? I don't understand this question. The original stories and this series isn't fantasy, it's historical mysteries. There's some flexibility for incredible things happening, but it's still set in the real world, so of course there has some be some level of plausibility. That's why you don't read about Watson suddenly sprouting wings and flying away, or Holmes stumbling upon the Cloak of Invisibility.

The most anything has to do is be internally coherent. Strict historical realism is one way of being internally coherent, but it's basically just one style among many. You absolutely could have a Holmes + Watson iteration where Watson suddenly sprouts wings and flies away, just the same way we can have things set in the modern day that are still recognizably Holmes and Watson, even though they have a recognizably different setting and aesthetic approach.

And the original Holmes stories aren't historical mysteries - they were contemporary stories at the time they were written, and they're also pretty obviously wildly unrealistic for what life was actually like at the time they were written. Why should a modern writer in the present day strive to be more realistic than Doyle did?

Of course probably OP just like s that kind of thing

We're not disagreeing here. I'm merely pointing out that in the canonical genre, you wouldn't have the wings, etc. because it's not plausible for that universe.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2020-09-07 22:47 (UTC) - Expand

I could believe #2 if only because it would be a culture thing, but I absolutely 100% agree with #3! Flower language is not exactly common, but not completely obscure either, he would absolutely know it.

Even if it were really, really obscure, Holmes would still know it, because he's Sherlock Holmes. It's established that if it's related to crime, he has a vast mental library of knowledge.

ayrt

very true.

Regarding #3, Holmes does have gaps in his knowledge when a subject doesn't interest him or strike him as relevant to his work, so I can sort of see why someone might characterize him as making that judgement regarding flower meanings, but at the same time, I agree with you saying it seems like the type of thing he *would* find interesting and relevant! IDK, I haven't read the series in question, but all the points you've made here seem like fair criticisms.

Oh, he absolutely does have gaps in his knowledge - or at least, he purports now to know about certain areas that aren't, in his opinion, related to crime and solving crimes. But a secret code would definitely be something he knows about.

1. Probably not, but I would be willing suspend some disbelief.

2. I could see him accepting, or even arguing for, boarding school simply because then he wouldn't have to be bothered with any of the ins and outs of educating and caring for a teenager, many of which he would probably find tedious. But I don't think he would care much about tradition.

3. Since he has at least some knowledge of botany (especially when pertaining to poisons), is a cryptanalyst, and does beekeeping, I would think this would absolutely be knowledge he would have.

1. If she has money, I completely suspend disbelief. She can just pay someone to bother with the day-to-day things.

2. Yeah, I can absolutely see him saying "Oh, what do you do with a teenager? Boarding school, that's it," without any particular interest in said teenager's education or personality. Not because it's traditional, just because that's what you do with teenagers. Whatever girls' school his mother went to, probably that one (or the sister school of his school, if there was one).

3. Unless it's a specific meaning in a certain circle of women that Holmes didn't have access to, he absolutely knows flower language, come on.

DA re: #2

Yeah, I can even see it generally falling into tradition. Not so much "girls must always do X," but an "our family always does X. You do it; you move on" rite of passage.

ACD Holmes proudly bucked tradition, but much in the way that rich kids from hidebound families buck tradition.

I dunno, Holmes is pretty sympathetic and respectful to young women earning their own living. I think he'd want her to have a decent education (though, OP, why pick out French as a frivolous thing for her to learn? Foreign languages are practical in their own right and a classic subject for someone who might end up becoming a governess to want to study).

Re: Yeah.

(Anonymous) - 2020-09-08 11:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Yeah.

tree_and_leaf - 2020-09-08 13:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Yeah.

(Anonymous) - 2020-09-08 13:15 (UTC) - Expand

Suspension of Disbelief can carry me through 1 and 2, but 3 is unforgivable.

In one of the stories Sherlock waxes lyrical about how lovely roses are so he absolutely would know the secret language of flowers. Sherlock is a little...dismissive of women so I think he has a more 'traditional' (for a Victorian) view.

Mycroft is a bit of a mystery because there's very little information about him in the books. He's a civil servant and there were women working for the civil service and I imagine he might have clocked that women made good spies (maids can come and go from rooms and no one pays them any mind) but it's hard to say what Mycroft's attitude towards women is.

Yet one of the few women to earn his admiration (THE woman, in fact) is extremely unconventional...

I think to him she's sort of the exception that proves the rule. He goes into the case expecting it to be super easy because she's a woman, he completely underestimates her because she's a woman. If he'd gone into the case believing she was in any way equal to him, I think the case would have had a completely different ending.

Everyone fixates on Irene Adler and forgets about Violet Hunter, who Watson was disappointed that Holmes didn't get together with...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only