Sherlock, or The Revenge on Intelligence
A recent article by The Guirdaan claimed that Sherlock is, in fact, the most featured character in history – which came as a bit of a surprise: what, more than Hercules? Jesus? The Devil? Dracula? Robinson? Superman? Emmanuelle? ...Apparently so. The rationale for it being that Sherlock demonstrates what a normal man can achieve through sheer deduction instead of succeeding thanks to (unfair) superpowers – in other words, he is someone we can relate to and, with a tiny amount of stretch, could find ourselves emulating if only we exercised “our little grey cells” (but, oops, that will be Hercules Poirot that is).
I don't buy it.
To start with, the idea that Sherlock is just a normal bloke who simply happens to concentrate every now and then is laughable enough.
I think, in fact, Sherlock embodies a trope that has been presented and recycled in countless stories (point number one); I also propose that his appeal is tainted by an almost unconscious feeling of jealousy and instinct for revenge (point number two).
Point Number One: Sherlock represents pure emotionless, tactless, sociopathic intelligence. He is generally presented as a bit of a loner devoid of tact and good manners. Doesn't that ring a bell? That's right, there are countless other examples of this mind / humanity divide: Spock in 'Star Trek', the obsessive girl scientist in 'Bones', Ozymandias in 'Watchmen', Monk in the wonderful, er, 'Monk'; the Canadian mountie in 'Due South', the autist savant (en-français-dans-le-texte) in the 'Astrid et Raphaelle' French series, 'The Big Bang Theory', 'Fringe', 'DeathNote', 'Eureka', the Terminator, etc. etc. etc. (Feel free to find other examples, I am ready to bet they exist.)
To put it another way; nope, he is not just anyone. Sherlock is extraordinarily gifted. His powers of observation and deduction are a superpower in its own right.
Point Number Two: he therefore needs to be cut down to size. Sherlock needs to atone for his superpower and this is where his other main feature comes into play (reader's voice: “Main feature? What the??”).
Question: does Sherlock Holmes act on his own? Everybody knows this is not the case: Sherlock is counterbalanced by his foil, his sidekick, his partner – Dr. Watson. Now, Dr. Watson is traditionally presented as the reasonable -not to say boring- one. He is the one who keeps Sherlock grounded, handles the dealings with the police, probably takes care of the gas and water bill, pacifies their lodger, and prevents Sherlock from flying off the handle.
By contrast, numerous adaptations (such as the terrific Moffat/Gatliss BBC series or the refreshing Guy Ritchie romps) have made a point of showing Sherlock as an immature “geek”, “nerd” -an “otaku” under any other name. He is messy, self-obsessed, grumpy, and borderline adolescent (remember his going gaga at the sight of miss Adler). Of course, everyone also knows that Sherlock is a junkie.
According to this reading, Dr. Watson is a bit of a father figure or a no-nonsense wife (choose the analogy you prefer), whereas Sherlock is a bit of a weirdo and here is my second point: we are somehow invited to feel socially superior to him.
Sherlock is a maniac, he only seems to live for his passions (solving riddles or, failing that, practising the violin and playing with chemistry within the confines of his bedroom). He does not care much for wealth or popularity; he is often tortured, lost in his thoughts; he does not have friends apart from Dr. Watson. To all intents and purposes, he is a recluse and a one odd out off the QI scale who finds it impossible to relate to anyone else - apart from Mycroft (whom he may actually be jealous of), the aforementioned miss Adler, and Moriarty. Ask yourself: given the abundance of evidence of mania and eccentricity laid at Sherlock's feet, would you like to live his life...? Just compare-and-contrast his case with James Bond (he who gets the girls and lives the life every time) and there you have it.
And if now expect me to conclude with “elem... etc”, tough luck! Ask for your money back huh.
