I love this character on her own: her confidence, her smarts, her sexy appearance and wit, but that story just fucks her over. Jodie: Yes, the particular changes made to this story and to Irene Adler’s character are what trouble me the most.
In a series that was already problematic when it came to women's roles, what does a change like this signal? I'm no exception, of course, but I have to pause and ask why the writers felt that it was necessary to change the one thing that made Irene such a memorable character in the first place - the fact that she outwitted Sherlock Holmes. Although I'm really not a fan of people hating on female characters who lack confidence (because, after all, we insecure women do exist, and I'm really suspicious of "you're bringing us all down!" lines of reasoning), it's definitely nice to see more diversity of representation.Īnyway, I would guess that most "Sherlock" fans are people who are comfortable with changes to canon - updating the Victorian setting to a contemporary one, after all, is a pretty major change. Still, without valuing Irene Adler’s approach to life above the way that other female characters live, it is always nice to see a character introduce some diversity into the way women are represented.Īna: Yes.
As a person who often lacks confidence I understand that there are plenty of reasons why this character type persists and remains useful to readers. There do seem to be so many female leads around right now who lack confidence. I also loved Irene Adler’s confident, sexy, smart characterisation. Jodie: Let me just elbow my way in here to say that I love your reading of this particular incarnation of Irene Adler as a character 'who was supposed to defy the intellect versus looks/sexuality dichotomy.' I did not even think of that reading, but that's such an exciting interpretation! The big problem, of course, is that in the end she wasn't allowed to be that, and all we were left with was yet another story where a smart, independent woman who is confident about her sexuality is put in her place. She was a beautiful woman who knew she was beautiful, who was sexually aggressive, but who was also Sherlock Holmes' intellectual equal. Before I go any further, I want to clarify that I liked Irene as a character - although a lot of the dominatrix elements were unnecessarily played for titillation, I liked that for once we had a character who was supposed to defy the intellect versus looks/sexuality dichotomy. The first season of the BBC series "Sherlock" didn't have the best track record when it came to female characters, but I still had hopes that the inclusion of Irene Adler in the second season would signal a change. The fact that this person is a woman is of course very exciting and ripe for feminist readings - whether or not this is what Conan Doyle intended isn't really relevant, as texts, after all, belong to their readers. If you haven't watched the series yet, we should warn you that this discussion contains spoilers for the first episode of season two.Īna: The Conan Doyle story that inspired “A Scandal in Belgravia, "A Scandal in Bohemia", is famous for featuring Irene Adler, the only person to have ever outwitted Sherlock Holmes. In the following conversation, Jodie and Ana attempt to do just that. However, we were presented with an episode that left us with many complicated feelings to sort through. The first season had ended with a painful cliffhanger, and we couldn't wait to find out how Sherlock and Watson would find their way out of the huge mess they were in. And this is just losing.There was much excitement here at Lady Business headquarters about the airing of the first episode of the second season of the BBC series "Sherlock" on the first day of the year. Irene Adler: Everything I said - it's not real. You could have chosen any random number and walked out of here today with everything you've worked for, but you just couldn't resist it, could you? I've always assumed that love is a dangerous disadvantage. This is your heart, and you should never let it rule your head. The combination to your safe: your measurements - but this.
When we first met, you told me that disguise is always a self-portrait how true of you. I imagine John Watson thinks love's a mystery to me, but the chemistry is incredibly simple and very destructive. because I took your pulse: elevated your pupils: dilated. You don't actually think I was interested in you? Why? Because you're the great Sherlock Holmes, the clever detective in the funny hat? Irene Adler: Sentiment? What are you talking about? sentiment is a chemical defect found in the losing side. Sherlock Holmes: Oh, enjoying the thrill of the chase is fine, and creating the distraction of the game I sympathize entirely, but SENTIMENT.