Regarding Sherlock, the character
Dec. 12th, 2010 12:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
eumeliaI've just re-watched BBC's Sherlock ep "A Study in Pink" and found I still couldn't watch it as critically as I wanted.
Too much fun!
I did however, try to be more attuned to the details that I think has captured fandom's imagination.
I'd like to state, before I start spieling my own thoughts, that everything I say here is personal opinion and interpretation of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson (2010) as characters - interpretations in fandom may differ - it's what makes it all the more fun, but I've found that without the proper disclaimer things tend to get fiery.
And so, without further adieu.
For one, that Sherlock is a sociopath. I know, it's fascinating, isn't it? That someone marked to be a villain via psychology actually works with the police and is actually willing to help people for the sake of "not being bored".
I discussed the alleged sociopathy with a friend (a fellow Sherlock enjoyer) who has a working knowledge in psychology and is currently working on her MA in Sociology - so I trust her judgement is discussing Sherlock's psychology and social behaviour, not to mention my own experience with therapy. Also, we're both lit theory nerds... so yeah :)
Let's begin with the fact that Sherlock is called a "psychopath" (twice) in the episode as an insult. Sherlock quite clearly shuns social convention, duh, no surprise there. But along with social convention he very likely rejects social labelling, meaning, if someone tried to tell him what he is, who he is, etc. he'd likely turn it around, appropriate and re-label himself as he saw fit.
So, if someone were to call him psychopath (as was done) he says "high functioning sociopath" - reaffirming both his anti-social behaviour and his own subjectivity in that anti-social behaviour.
I'd like to point out that the exchange in which he was called a psychopath (for the second time) happened during the alleged drug bust and he was name called (to his face) by Anderson. The first time he's called "psychopath" is by Donovan and she says it to John, behind Sherlock's back.
The drug bust is also the one point in the episode in which Sherlock has no control over the situation what so ever. He's under stress and he's embarrassed, "Shut up!" he shouts multiple times: at John (who disapproves of substance abuse), at Mrs. Hudson (who is just trying to get his attention, poor woman), at Anderson (who is badgering him).
Sherlock's faux-pas regarding the lingering of grief seems to me to be a true moment of foot-in-mouth disease, as he seems quite awkward after saying such a thing - but I may simply be charitable (and sympathetic, as I am a fellow sufferer of foot-in-mouth disease).
Clearly, he's lying.
Here's why I think he is lying when he calls himself a "high functioning sociopath":
His brain doesn't do normative.
The fact that he enjoys puzzles and recognises patterns in places other people can't make those around him comfortable (except John, who thinks it's amazing, if frustrating).
If all Sherlock cared about was solving puzzles he could have stayed in his lab and worked on formulae forever.
Sherlock wouldn't work with the police (or any authoritative establishment) if he didn't consider the fact that his "puzzle solving" helped people. He seems tohate dislike authority as a rule - hence working freelance.
Not to mention that in his history he's helped at least two people (Mrs. Hudson and Angelo) both of whom seem to like him well enough. Yes, he's a manipulative bastard, but keeping social niceties is tedious and most psychopaths and sociopaths have a superficial charm which, uh, with Sherlock, is hit and miss.
Damn, I've run out of steam.
Next time, some more on Sherlock (not sure what, but probably sexuality) and possibly John. I might go the other way around. But we shall see.
Too much fun!
I did however, try to be more attuned to the details that I think has captured fandom's imagination.
I'd like to state, before I start spieling my own thoughts, that everything I say here is personal opinion and interpretation of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson (2010) as characters - interpretations in fandom may differ - it's what makes it all the more fun, but I've found that without the proper disclaimer things tend to get fiery.
And so, without further adieu.
For one, that Sherlock is a sociopath. I know, it's fascinating, isn't it? That someone marked to be a villain via psychology actually works with the police and is actually willing to help people for the sake of "not being bored".
I discussed the alleged sociopathy with a friend (a fellow Sherlock enjoyer) who has a working knowledge in psychology and is currently working on her MA in Sociology - so I trust her judgement is discussing Sherlock's psychology and social behaviour, not to mention my own experience with therapy. Also, we're both lit theory nerds... so yeah :)
Let's begin with the fact that Sherlock is called a "psychopath" (twice) in the episode as an insult. Sherlock quite clearly shuns social convention, duh, no surprise there. But along with social convention he very likely rejects social labelling, meaning, if someone tried to tell him what he is, who he is, etc. he'd likely turn it around, appropriate and re-label himself as he saw fit.
So, if someone were to call him psychopath (as was done) he says "high functioning sociopath" - reaffirming both his anti-social behaviour and his own subjectivity in that anti-social behaviour.
I'd like to point out that the exchange in which he was called a psychopath (for the second time) happened during the alleged drug bust and he was name called (to his face) by Anderson. The first time he's called "psychopath" is by Donovan and she says it to John, behind Sherlock's back.
The drug bust is also the one point in the episode in which Sherlock has no control over the situation what so ever. He's under stress and he's embarrassed, "Shut up!" he shouts multiple times: at John (who disapproves of substance abuse), at Mrs. Hudson (who is just trying to get his attention, poor woman), at Anderson (who is badgering him).
Sherlock's faux-pas regarding the lingering of grief seems to me to be a true moment of foot-in-mouth disease, as he seems quite awkward after saying such a thing - but I may simply be charitable (and sympathetic, as I am a fellow sufferer of foot-in-mouth disease).
Clearly, he's lying.
Here's why I think he is lying when he calls himself a "high functioning sociopath":
His brain doesn't do normative.
The fact that he enjoys puzzles and recognises patterns in places other people can't make those around him comfortable (except John, who thinks it's amazing, if frustrating).
If all Sherlock cared about was solving puzzles he could have stayed in his lab and worked on formulae forever.
Sherlock wouldn't work with the police (or any authoritative establishment) if he didn't consider the fact that his "puzzle solving" helped people. He seems to
Not to mention that in his history he's helped at least two people (Mrs. Hudson and Angelo) both of whom seem to like him well enough. Yes, he's a manipulative bastard, but keeping social niceties is tedious and most psychopaths and sociopaths have a superficial charm which, uh, with Sherlock, is hit and miss.
Damn, I've run out of steam.
Next time, some more on Sherlock (not sure what, but probably sexuality) and possibly John. I might go the other way around. But we shall see.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-12 09:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-12-12 09:22 pm (UTC)Just, it frustrates me; because one of the things about fandom and fanworks in general is recontextualising characters and text in general in a way that may or may not be critical, but always re-imagined in a certain way.
The fact that we (fandom) just accept text as given and the creator's intention as "Word of God" goes against what I consider fandom to be.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-13 04:20 pm (UTC)