Overall I did enjoy watching Elementary. However, I believe now that I have read the Holms stories I am now able to compare it to the original plot and characters. I can say now that as Elementary had all the aspects needed to be a great T.V show I could see myself binge watching, but the original Sherlock has ruined this spin off for me. For starters, the fact that Dr. Watson is an attractive woman was strange. Before reading the stories I most likely would have enjoyed that there was also a female lead, but now I cannot get past it. I feel like the strong friendship that Sherlock and Dr. Watson shattered in the stories simply does not work with the female character. It almost seems to be a set up as a possible love interest of Sherlock which would ruin the whole thing for me. Crazy how reading the original stories has changed how I watch the spin offs.

Then there is the issue I had with Sherlock himself. I have only watched one or two episodes of the show Sherlock on Netflix. However, Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays Sherlock is exactly who I picture after reading the stories. The actor picked to play Sherlock in Elementary just wasn’t exactly working for me. For starts the rich daddy he refers to isn’t exactly a new aspect I enjoyed. Also, I didn’t find him pale, tall, and skinny enough compared to what I pictured while reading the stories. Benedict Cumberbatch is exactly what I picture Sherlock to be like especially after reading the originals. Now I understand why people always hate movies or shows made that are based on books plots. Usually I embrace the difference between a good book and the movie made based off of it. However, this Sherlock spinoff I just cannot see myself enjoying after reading the original stories.

I am almost a little upset that the changes made in this show I did not care for because the crime scenes were great. I thought it was really cool how he solved they mystery. The details he used to solve the crime kind of blew me away. It was also really cool how in the end he revealed that the “evil twin” was also going to try to kill her kindhearted sister as well. I completely did not see that coming. Over all the show has its perks but it is not one I will continue to watch.

I'm not even old but you all made me feel old.

So, I've always been really into game shows, and I'm not just talking about "Jeopardy" or the "Price is Right" (though I do still love watching those). I mean all the game shows. I grew up watching them. I would go to my grandmas when I was little and get really excited to watch and play "Shop Till You Drop." When I was home sick from school, I was always watching Game Show Network--"Card Sharks," "Press Your Luck," "$100,000 Pyramid," "Password" and more. I absolutely love them. I guess I'm an old lady at heart. So, yesterday, when people seemed confused about the activity, all I could think was, "This is just 'To Tell the Truth'," but nobody even knew about it. From wikipedia, I've gotten so basic info--most important being that the show has been airing since 1956, and that "the show is one of two game shows in the United States to have aired at least one new episode in at least seven consecutive decades." I've included an old episode below, with an all time favorite--Dick Van Dyke.

So, you can see, the activity that we participated in yesterday was basically the same thing. We used the same investigative tools that the celebrity panel uses.

But I didn't want to make this post just to point out the game show. That would give us nothing to even talk about when it comes to this class. So I just want to talk about game shows in general. Every game requires a certain amount of knowledge, a certain amount of investigation, and a certain amount of strategy. "Jeopardy" requires trivia knowledge, "Password" requires vocabulary knowledge, "The Price is Right" requires product knowledge, and "Card Sharks" requires knowledge of probability. No one goes into these games unprepared, sometimes, even the audience is included in this statement.  

Like Sherlock Holmes, game shows were created with the express purpose of entertainment after the day to day drudge. Like Sherlock Holmes, the reader/viewer has the opportunity to participate. When Sherlock is compiling information about the human anatomy, contestants on "The Price is Right"are compiling information about the prices of every day items. Sherlock must observe small details at crime scenes, while contestants need to observe the prices of items that they might not even be buying. The contestants start to use reason to understand why some things cost more than other, and more. I know it's hard to think of the overly-excited contestants on "The Price is Right" or other game shows as Sherlock-like characters, but in many ways they are.

Sheerluck Holmes and the Golden Ruler is better

I’m sorry y’all this one isn’t going to be as funny. I don’t have any animosity towards Sherlock Holmes. But if I was to meet him in real life that would be a different story.

Before this class, I haven’t really had any formal interaction with the real Sherlock Holmes. But I actually enjoyed this section of readings. When I was younger I watched every single Veggie Tale movie in the world. Upon reading, I remembered there was a Veggie Tale movies named Sheerluck Holmes and the Golden Ruler. This was my very first encounter with a Sherlock Holmes rendition. I absolutely loved it! I actually love mysteries. In the movie Larry the Cucumber was the character Sheerluck Holmes and Bob the tomato was Dr. Watson. They were trying to solve the case of the missing Golden Ruler. Sheerluck took all of the credit for solving the mystery, leaving Dr. Watson looking like he didn’t help at all. In the end, this movie was about the Golden rule “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” Matthew 7:12 and also friendship. Yeah this isn’t a conventional rendition of Sherlock Holmes, but it’s my absolute favorite. I recommend you watch it, it’s cute, educational, and offers a message about friendship. 

                I actually like the character of Sherlock Holmes. He doesn’t do things the way other people do them, he’s more of a rebel in a sense. I love that about him. I also like hos he is an introvert and he only talks when he absolutely has to say something. Dr. Watson and Irene are the only other two people who cares for Holmes as much as Holmes cares for Holmes. Irene and Holmes get along because she shares almost the same intellectual thinking level as him.

                I think I like how odd Holmes is. He’s so smart that he doesn’t always know how to fit in. He’s more book smart than he is people smart. But honestly if I was to meet him in real life, I don’t think we would get along. I tend to get smart with people who think they know everything. Like we tend to not get a long AT ALL. I know I’m wrong about some things, but you don’t have to rub it in my face in such a rude way.

Sherlock and his wild adventures

Prior to this class I have really had no experience with any type of Sherlock Holmes stories, I’ve seen bits and pieces of the Robert Downey Jr. movies but never the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle writings. One of my favorite things about the Sir Arthur writings are how they are all relatively short stories but are still very entertaining and intriguing to read. It reads so much better than an ordinary chapter book, or even plays for that matter. Almost the entire story line is changed every 60 or so pages which keeps everything fresh and the reader engaged the entire time.

The character of Sherlock is someone that makes these stories so enjoyable, he isn’t someone that goes by the books by any means, and is someone who always has trouble following him. Holmes is very very much an introvert always trying to avoid companionship and never goes out of his way to talk to people, even when they are in his way he still doesn’t want to be near them. There is really only one person, besides Watson, that Sherlock cares about and that is Irene Adler. She is able to connect with Sherlock because she is near the same intelligent level, if not smarter, than Sherlock. He tries to avoid all contact with people unrelated to his case and only speaks to them when absolutely necessary, avoiding small talk.

Holmes is such a strange person, being extremely smart and a master in a bunch of different subjects (boxing, swordplay, chemistry, anatomy and literature). He also likes to disguise himself a lot, as well as act like he is sick or injured, just to try and catch the criminal. You just know that he will try and pull out all the stops trying to find his crook. There is nothing that Holmes wouldn’t do to try and catch someone, I mean he really doesn’t have many boundaries to start with, and is extremely determined. There is really never much of a dull moment with Holmes, either it is strangely awkward with his semi-narcissistic nature, or looking at every specific detail in a room, down to the color of the nails on the floor, you seem as you are always pulled into the story in some way.  

RIP Holmes....jk

Similar to many of my classmates, I have not read any Sherlock Homes stories until now. I really enjoyed the first two stories we read, which I was pleasantly surprised about. Then, I read “The Speckled Band”, and loved it, even though the ending was somewhat anticlimactic for me; anyone agree?

Next, I read “The Final Problem”… and he DIED? What? I was definitely not expecting that to happen. I never expected that, and assumed if I had a problem accepting this after only reading four stories, other people must have been pissed when the story came out. I did some researching to see… turns out they were in fact pissed. Apparently a lot of people even canceled their subscriptions to The Strand, the magazine that published the stories. So I bet The Strand was also pretty pissed at Conan Doyle.

Furthermore, he did not really die. In the afterword we read that he “foiled Moriarty” by faking his death. Spoiler if you want to read the story “The Empty House”, sorry. I suppose if anyone could successfully pull of faking their own death, it would be Sherlock Holmes. I would be interested in reading “The Empty House” if it explains how Holmes pulled that off. I have to wonder if Conan Doyle always planned on bringing Holmes back. I think he did, because he added the detail that “recovering the bodies was absolutely hopeless”. If he did not plan on continuing the story of Homes why include the detail of never recovering his body.

            Next I read “The Dancing Men”, which I found just as interesting. I enjoyed the plot line of this one. The reader really got to see all the skills Homes has, other than observing. He deciphers what seems like an impossible code.

really who makes a code made out of stick figures, that’s just plain dumb

He also catches where a third bullet was shot, a fact that the authorities missed. Who needs the cops when Holmes is around?

            Lastly, I attempted to read “Charles Augustus Milverton”. This story I found confusing, so I am hoping someone can comment and explain it to me. I understand that there was a man threatening Lady Eva with letters, but why was he bothering her? Did they have history or is he just a jackass? Also Homes kinda gets engaged? What? Then, Watson and him witness a murder… later recognize who the shooter was… and did NOTHING? Help please!!

Sherlock is actually pretty cool.

            I’ve come to terms with myself, and I actually enjoy Sherlock Holmes more than I expected. Throughout the first couple paragraphs I couldn’t get into it, but as the crimes came along it got interesting for me. The stories are fairly understandable and captivating. I was never introduced to Holmes in high school and I’m not sure why. I think teachers should teach about him in school, so that way students have some background knowledge and understanding of who he is, but I’m pretty sure most people know that he’s a detective.

            I know a lot of people that find Sherlock Holmes kind of quirky, which is true, but I feel that his characteristics is what makes it interesting. Watson of course is included in that as well. I’ve always been interested in crime shows and the suspense part of movies. I’m pretty sure that’s why I enjoy Holmes so much. Not only is it interesting, but it makes me sit at the edge of my seat because I want to know what is going to happen next. In The Dancing Men I wanted to know what the words spelled out. It was cool to see the techniques/knowledge he used to unscramble the words and what it meant.

            The board game Clue reminds of Sherlock Holmes a lot. I’ve also never seen any of the movies or shows either. I was pretty excited when I saw that we get to watch an episode of Sherlock. I think the show will be even more interesting than the readings because you actually get to see how he is solving the crimes rather than reading about them. Watching something is so much more amusing than reading about it because then you can see facial expressions and identify the characters easily. At times I would catch myself not knowing the clues they were giving out, but that’s why I would think it would be easier to interpret the clues if you’re watching it because of the tone in their voices and their body language. I have always imagined Sherlock like this when I was reading the stories. He seems like the type of detective to smoke out of a pipe. 

            Overall, I enjoy Sherlock Holmes and hope to keep liking the stories and eventually like the shows and movies. I’m also hoping to be so interested in the show that I can just watch it on my own without having to be assigned to do so. Many people say they enjoy the Sherlock episodes.

Is that a gun in your bathrobe or are you just happy to see me? jk, I know it’s a gun. That’s dangerous.

I'm going to be blunt. I wasn't expecting a dick joke in this reading. And I used to read Holmes stories all the time when I was in middle school. Maybe “it is a dangerous habit to finger loaded firearms in the pocket of one’s dressing-gown’” (218) wasn't a dick joke at the time, but it definitely is now. I’m disappointed in my younger self for not remembering this. I wasn’t a very careful reader at the time, so maybe the whole thing escaped my notice (although I don't know how a middle schooler can fail to recognize a dick joke).

Seriously though, I think the fact that Moriarty’s comment comes before Sherlock even told John, and therefore the reader, that he “had slipped the revolver from the drawer into [his] pocket and was covering [Moriarty] through the cloth” (218) is an important aspect of the story’s narrative and character development. Moriarty knows what Sherlock has done before the reader does, and because he is the one to tell us instead of Sherlock, we are unsettled by Moriarty and more acutely aware of his powers of perception. Dick jokes are just an unexpected bonus.

Holmes’ size had also escaped my memory, so it was a shock to read that “he was rather over six feet, and so excessively lean that he seemed to be considerably taller” (24). Plus, I had forgotten Holmes’ brute strength! I remembered he was a skilled pugilist (thank you RDJ movies for jogging that memory), but I hadn’t realized he was strong enough to bend a steel poker back into place (162)! I guess we tend to associate very intelligent characters with physical weakness. Nerds are wimps, jocks are dumb, etc. Clearly, Conan Doyle would’ve disapproved of these beliefs.

Actual irl footage of Holmes, apparently.

Another unexpected finding in the Holmes stories was Holmes’ moments of compassion. From the first time he’s introduced in A Study in Scarlet, and throughout the other stories, the reader is told that one would “not care for him as a constant companion” (19) because he is so “very desultory and eccentric” (19). Even if he is  “a decent fellow enough” (19), Holmes’ “cold-bloodedness” (20) can be off-putting and offensive. Since we are so often told things like “all emotions… were abhorrent to his cold, precise, but admirably balanced mind” (32) and are tolerated about as well as “grit in a sensitive instrument, or a crack in one of his own high-powered lenses” (32), I did not expect him to be so kind towards Helen Stoner. I’m not shocked that Sherlock perceived that she was “cruelly used” (159); however, I was surprised that he soothed her and “[bent] forward and [patted] her forearm” (153), promising he and Watson will “soon set matters right” (153) and even offered to help her escape from the abuse by taking her “away to [her] aunt’s at Harrow” (164). As an abuse survivor, it means a lot to me that this character recognizes signs of abuse and is compassionate towards the victim, especially considering the Victorian society’s general views of and treatment towards women.