One of the more interesting readings, by the way, that I've seen of the final scene and Mycroft's conversation with John in the cafe, is that part of the reason he's so certain she's actually dead is that he had a hand in putting her into that situation.

That was my impression, too. I can't believe that Mycroft would just shrug and let her run off.

I also can't believe that if Mycroft meant to have her killed, he wouldn't have wanted some proof of death; if she'd escaped from Mycroft's death sentence, he'd have known about it. The only way I can believe that (a) she lived and he told John she didn't, and (b) Sherlock had any realistic chance of getting in a position to save her, is if Mycroft was behind it all.

There had to have been easier ways to convince the world she was dead, but it wouldn't have been as much fun.

Oh, and to the terrorism point, we're watching a show where the title character was willing to give up state secrets for his flatmate, where the flatmate killed for the title character when they'd barely met, and where the brother of the title character does all sorts of cheerfully dubious things for king and country, and where no one has hands that are especially clean.

Right, but mostly not offered as some sort of modern equivalent of canon. This Holmes is not Doyle's nor our the other characters, and we love that fact. Irene is no exception. She is not Doyle's Irene and does not impact us the same way Doyle's Irene impacted Victorian readers. Her being linked to terrorists is not even a rough equivalent to the original being a adventuress. The Victorian attitude towards adventuresses was much more ambivalent than the modern attitude towards terrorists. Do we even disagree on this?

I think at this point we are talking past each other and you are focusing on something that has nothing to do with my primary point, which had little to nothing to do with terrorists and very much to do with pro dommes in relation to adventuresses.

Actually, it does make me wonder. Now that the UK is fairly post-Emperial, does that make a difference with the Sherlock stories?

I vote "yes", although I think it's inextricably linked with a lot of other cultural stuff, and that's part of why the Orientalism felt like such a throw-back. It doesn't fit anymore.

I'm also not sure that it's so much "post-imperial" now as "post-9-11" (I don't know what else to call it, but, I mean, look how the series starts.) Bombings are at the least (mostly) a post-Imperial concern, but I would say even more so since the London Subway Bombings.

You know, having just watched it, wow, The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes appears to have influenced this take on Adler greatly during the second half of the episode.

I think I saw it at one point, but, now that I Better Know A Canon (This week on Better Know a Canon: Sherlock Holmes), I want to see it again, especially given its influence on Sherlock.

I think I saw it at one point, but, now that I Better Know A Canon (This week on Better Know a Canon: Sherlock Holmes), I want to see it again, especially given its influence on Sherlock.

Well worth it.

Good Lord, people, why is no one posting?!

I think I like the Gatiss episodes better than the Moffatt ones. I shall need a third series to be certain.

Cluedo! Cluedo reference is made of win.

I am shocked that no one made a werewolf joke. I guess it's the web content people who make those sorts of meta-actor jokes.

Having just finished the Doyle, the references to canon were extra-amusing (light signals! Glowing critter! Sherlock staying behind in London--only not.)

I need to re-watch to figure out wtf was going on in that last scene, apart from Nothing Good.

I haven't seen it yet! Probably won't til tomorrow.

I fell asleep in the middle and didn't feel lost at the end, so I don't have much to say.

Is it possible that the "aren't they a couple??" constant references came to some sort of a head in my somnolence? Or is this just going to be a running joke for the slash fangirls, and not even do anything with it like draw sparkly hearts around a devotion so strong that the world can't believe it's not gay?

They did not come to any sort of head (apart from a heartfelt conversation in front of a fireplace with an honest-to-god heart-shaped wreath). Well, Sherlock basically said that John is his only friend. And then drugged him.

So, yeah, fanservice, mostly. This show is so comprehensive in the fanservice that I feel like I should be leaving a tip.

eta: What the Fucking Fuck, Mycroft? Is this going to tie into "Scandal" and Moriarty's leverage? The dude at the end, is that someone we know? He looks like the guy from the palace, but IMDB will not confirm that.

I'm saying this as a Supernatural fan, but I really like when the fanservice is dual purpose. Seeing that scene would have helped me.