Sherlock: Season 2 recap: A Scandal in Belgravia (SPOILERS)

Lara Pulver as Irene Adler. Credit: BBC

I have written and written on this episode, and Ive hated everything Ive written, leading me to start over again. It just wasnt good enough. I couldnt get my thoughts together. So, I think the best way (and, sadly, the most tedious way) to write my review and analysis of A Scandal in Belgravia is to take the show apart one piece at a time. So this review will have three parts, each part will be long enough for its own post. Before I go into how Ill break this down, heres a really important disclaimer:







Okay, now that Ive given  you ample room, heres how this will break down:

Post 1: The show itself

Post 2: Canon

Post 3: Fanon (how the show addresses the rabid fanbase)

Here we go with Post 1.

All right, so Im one of the many in the U.S. who watched the season premiere of Sherlock online, and I have to say that it was AMAZING. It was so amazing, that Im declaring it as the best television Im bound to see for the entire year.

Where to start with this? Well, first, Ill quickly get the synopsis out of the waySherlock (Benedict Cumberbatch) and John (Martin Freeman) are charged with getting some incriminating pictures back from Irene Adler (Lara Pulver), a dominatrix who goes by the name of The Woman.

Now that thats out of the way, heres what I loved about it:


The cinematography, Paul McGuigans hyper-visualized directing (AMAZING), the script by Steven Moffat (who I thought was completely against the Sherlock/John thing, so the fact that he wrote this S/J-laden episode is pretty astounding to me), and, of course, the acting (which also included Louise Brealey as Molly, co-creator/writer Mark Gatiss as Mycroft, Una Stubbs as Mrs. Hudson and Rupert Graves as Lestrade) was top tier. Also, this is the only time Ive ever loved Irene Adler. Generally, I hate her in screen adaptations, so big ups to the writing for making me like her as much as I like Sherlock Holmes. Everything about this episode was, as Victor from Project Runway would say, GLAMAZING.

Some of the best parts, though, come from when Sherlock realizes that he is a human and debilitating being a human can be. For instance, when Sherlock insults Molly at the Christmas party and, after realizing his carelessness, gives a heartfelt apology and kisses her on the cheek.  Also, when John tells Mycroft that he doesnt think Sherlock is capable of feeling love, Mycroft intimates that this is not really the case. Later on, John can see that its not the case when Sherlock insists on keeping Irenes camera phone. This whole case  has opened up Johns eyes to the fact that Sherlock, can, in fact, feel a lot more than he lets on. I think Sherlock is also reminded of how much he can feel; I think he must have forgotten he had the capacity to feel after so many years. Due to how much Irene has taught all of themnot just Sherlockabout the depth feelings can have is why she truly is The Woman. Even if there was the scene at the end (which will be discussed later), she still came out on top of Sherlock.

Of course, though, there are a couple of ticks people have with the episode. The three points of contention that seem to be tearing some people up inside:

1) Irene Adler is a lesbian who loves/lusts for Sherlock, a man

2) Irene Adler uses Sherlocked as her password.

3) Irene Adler is saved by Sherlock (or is she?)

I wrote a large Twitlonger post about no. 1 due to a quick temper after reading some tweets about Irene liking Sherlock being an impossiblity/pushing the lesbian-must-be-straight-secretly agenda. Even though I think what I wrote gets my point across, it was quickly written, and I like to have a while to think about what I just saw, especially if Im not completely sure how I feel about something. Now, Im taking my time to explain exactly why I didnt have such a huge problem with the scene where Irene explains/confronts John about sexuality.

Thanks to livejournal user bizarremain, we have the transcript of what exactly was said during this scene:

Irene: You jealous?
John: Were not a couple.
Irene: Yes, you are.
John: Who the hell knows about Sherlock Holmes? But, for the record, if anyone out there still cares, Im not actually gay.
Irene:Well, I am. Look at the both of us.

Some women have taken this to think that the scene was enforcing a tired stereotype of lesbians needing to have the right man come along and change them. Sure, an argument can be made for that, I really do think so. If you look at it on the surface, you might not want to have Irene say that shes attracted to Sherlock after showing her be happily  intimate with women. But I think the argument would be much stronger if the scene was written in an entirely different way. For that argument to work in my eyes, Irene would have had to say something like, I always thought I liked females until Sherlock. Now Im turned onto men forever! She didnt say that at all. She is merely pointing out something that, I thought, was made in a crystal clear fashion.

What shes saying is that she and John are both two people who arent attracted to men. Yet, here they are, attracted to one man, not because hes a man, because hes this amazing being. What Irene was getting at is that it doesnt matter what Sherlock is, its that he is who he is whats so attractive and magnetic. Its not so much that hes the magical male that can change Irene into a heterosexualthe episode never says shes changed to a heterosexual woman; its that shes attracted to him, no matter what he is, and thats what makes the whole thing interesting. If Sherlock was a woman, shed be just as attracted, I think. And lets not forget that there are a lot of lesbian women who do report having feelings for the opposite sex, even though they predominately prefer the same sex.  This is in real life, so it would only be fair to portray it in fiction. To me, the whole scene is a lesson in sexual fluidity. Sometimes, labels dont really account into who you like.

By alluding to this, Irene is also saying that John is in the same boat as she is. John being put into the mix is another area where the lesbian stereotype argument falls apart for me. If John was nowhere in this story, then the argument could be made with force. But, here he is. Irene is saying to John that he needs to analyze what is going on with him and Sherlock and realize that even though hes attracted to women (just like she is), hes just as attracted to Sherlock. In fact, Irene is also intimating that Sherlock might be the one for John. Never once does she say that shed actually like to have a relationship with Sherlock. Shes mostly just got a mixture of intrigue and lust when it comes to him. To me, Irene summed up Johns relationship with Sherlock in just a few words.

Irene during the Look at the both of us scene. Screencap credit: fprintmoon/gallicka

To piggy-back off that, John is getting a lot of hints from the universe that he is meant to be with Sherlock, whether as friends or as more-than-friends. Sherlock is naked in a sheetJohn takes a look before even asking Sherlock if hes naked under it. Johns new girlfriend breaks up with himthe umpteenth girlfriend to do so. She says to his face that hes a better boyfriend to Sherlock than he is to her. The whole Irene scene I just blabbed on about. And, frankly, I think Irene herself is a big clue to John that theres more to his relationship with Sherlock than he even realizes yet. By Irene constantly asking him if hes jealous of her and telling him that hes in a relationship with Sherlock, coupled with his string of bad relationships due to his dependence on Sherlock, John slowly seems to be mulling over how his relationship with his friend is perceived, which is interesting. Livejournal user writer_klmeri hit the idea of Johns dependence right on the head when they wrote that once John realizes he is dependent on Sherlock is when he can finally have a stable relationship with someone. To quote writer_klmeri:

It’s more than best friends solving mysteries together—which is essentially what every girl John dates points out to him. Until John can actually see himself living a life separate of Sherlock and the inherent madness therein, he hasn’t even taken the first step toward independence. But I have my own theory about this… mainly that Sherlock is what John needs after he comes back from Afghanistan, and John is—obviously—the reminder that the rest of humanity matters, a fact which Sherlock likes to so easily forget.

And, hopefully I wasnt reading too much into this due to swimming in the fandom waters for too long, but it seems like not only did Moffat play with the idea of Irene/Sherock, but they played with the idea of John being jealous just a little. I say this because in some scenes, he seems to act a little strange when it comes to mentioning Irene, like when he says, annoyed, that they should use his middle name if theyre picking out baby names. Hes not saying this in a joking blokey tone. Shouldnt he be happy to see Sherlock with someone? Why is he so annoyed about it?  (however, some of his strange tone throughout the whole episode might be because shes a threatening type of dangerous woman). Ill get more into a lot of this John/Sherlock relationship stuff in the fanon post. But I will say that after all of the posturing Moffat did in interviews about John and Sherlocks relationship in Series 1, Im surprised how much he pushed the J/S angle.

John looking shellshocked after Look at the both of us scene. Screencap credit: fprintmoon/gallicka

I need to go back and address nos. 1 and 2. Irene setting her password to Sherlocked is probably too much for some people to bear. When you think about it, its probably the second-to-worst part of the episode. The idea that Irene is so smitten with Sherlock that shed use his name as her password is a bit ridonkulous. However, I do think that perhaps Moffat was trying to do a subtle call-forward to when Sherlock keeps Irenes phone. I think the password is Irenes way of keeping something of Sherlocks. In her case, shes keeping his name; in his, hes keeping her phone. Irene thought she was going to get away with her scheme, and even though shed have a lot of outward prizes in the form of protection, money, etc., her private prize would be keeping Sherlock close to her in the form of having his name as her password. She also probably thought no one would get to it since she had so many encryptions on it. One could still get a false sense of security and give themselves a joke password only they know.

But I think the main point isnt so much the fact that she used his namethe point people get mad about is that love is what did her in. Its almost like in the Star Wars prequels in which love is the true villain. I get why people are irked by this. Part of the reason some folks are irked is because Moffat has gotten a reputation of being sexist, as pointed out by i09, which talks about something he said in an interview with The Scotsman, saying something about women being needy and wanting husbands:

There’s this issue you’re not allowed to discuss: that women are needy. Men can go for longer, more happily, without women. That’s the truth. We don’t, as little boys, play at being married we try to avoid it for as long as possible. Meanwhile women are out there hunting for husbands.

Its a crazy quote, but supposedly, Moffat said that the quote was actually supposed to be referencing a character from Coupling said, according to TVTropes user Anathema:

As others have mentioned an article in The Scotsman as evidence of Moffats misogyny, I thought I ought to note that someone brought that article up to Moffat on twitter fairly recently. A fan asked Moffat if he had really said what The Scotsman claimed, Moffat responded: No. Ages ago but I think I was talking about Patrick in Coupling and was selectively quoted to make it about me. Was furious. Of course, you could argue that Moffat is simply backtracking when called out on saying something stupid. But it only seemed fair that someone point out that Moffat has essentially claimed that he was quote-mined in that article, especially since the statements that The Scotsman attributes to Moffat seem pretty damning.

Bad press sticks around, I suppose, because if its true that he didnt really say this from his own thoughts, then he still hasnt lived it down yet.

To put Moffat-gate aside, however, I think the show is still playing fair since the script does get at that its not only Irene that got struck by thinking with the heart. Almost everyone in this episode gets struck by thinking with their heart. John is always thinking of Sherlocks safety and well-being to the point of not having a life or a steady relationship; Mrs. Hudson helped Sherlock out because she cares for him; Molly gave Sherlock a gift only to get verbally slapped in the face and  kissed for it; Irene got stuck on trying to figure out and one-up Sherlock while being simultaneously turned on by him. Sherlock, of course, gets struck by the power of the heart when he fails to realize one of the biggest security events was right under his nose until he louses it up. So, in short, everyone fails to think clearly. No one is safe.

The only reason Sherlock outright states that love is a horrible weakness isnt because shes a woman; its because he fell for the same feelings too and he knows how it can make you lose your head. Did he not just lose his head and not realize that his brother was trying to create a corpse plane plot? Mycroft is right in saying its something Sherlock shouldve seen coming, but he didnt because he was too focused on whatever mojo Irene was pulling on him. Id actually posit that Sherlock is always struggling with love in every episode because hes trying to deal with his love (friendship or however you want to read it) for John and deal with his love for his work. He cant balance the two, and throwing Irene into the mix just throws the little balance he had left completely off. So in short, when he states that love is terrible, hes berating himself as well as her, because he always feels he should have known better than to be a human being.

Sherlocked. Screencap credit: fprintmoon/gallicka

Lastly, the bit at the end when Irene is saved by Sherlock. At first, I was confused; I actually didnt think this really happened. To me, it seemed like a bit of narrative that was going on in his head. But I guess it did  happen, since hes not supposed to know that she was killed in Pakistan. And even if it did happen, Id imagine that he would try to save her; she is THE WOMAN, after all. In terms of similar thinking patterns, she is the first true equal hes faced aside from Moriarty (John is an equal, too, but in a much different way). I dont even think hed kill Moriarty if he didnt have to simply because he gives him the same thing Irene doesthe thrill of the chase and the chance to prove that he is the smartest person alive. So, following this reasoning, of course hed save her; hed want her to come back and challenge him again because he lives for the challenge. (Will she be back? I dont know. Moriarty has been woven through this series, so she might be, too. I seriously doubt it, though.)

I do want to stress again that I do think that even though Irene didnt best Sherlock in the obvious sense of beating Sherlock in the very last battle of wits, she does best him in the overall game, just as she does in the written story. In this version, she didnt get the last word despite besting him in all other challenges, but she still got the last word in a figurative sense, and how she wins has much more of an impact than if she had actually beaten him at a puzzle. She reminded Sherlock in a very powerful way how he is still susceptible to allure, lust, love, hurt, and all of the messy feelings that come with being alive. I dont think the show is saying that Sherlock is straightI think the allure with Irene was just as confusing for Sherlock just like Sherlocks allure was confusing for Irene. But I do think this version shows just how powerful of a force Irene was for Sherlock in terms of teaching him about himself. I think her presence is setting us up for something major in the final episode of Series 2. For teaching Sherlock about the messy side of life, she truly is The Woman.

Sherlock grinning when thinking about The Woman. Screencap credit: fprintmoon/gallicka

So, with all of that said, I think this episode is the best episode Ive ever seen. In fact, Id go so far as to say its the best single piece of television Ive seen in ages. I get that there are some things that, on the surface, can get under the skin, but I also think the surface things are way more complex than some might give them credit for. Or maybe Im thinking too much. But, for me, whats beneath the surface problems is the lesson that everyoneincluding demi-gods like Sherlock and Irenehave hearts and sometimes they let their feelings get the best of them.

Part two coming up!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

14 comments for “Sherlock: Season 2 recap: A Scandal in Belgravia (SPOILERS)

  1. Beth
    January 3, 2012 at 2:00 pm

    A wonderful review, I agree with almost everything youve said here.

    I also thought the final scene was a hallucination on Irenes part still cant work out if thats the case or not, although Mycroft did say he had been very thorough when John asked him if he was sure. I expect it was Moffat trying to appease everyone. Im not a big Adler fan myself sometimes I feel like she has been thrown in for the sake of giving Sherlock a love interest, or for the Guy Ritchie films, so there is an attractive/strong female lead to appeal to a wider audience.

    I would absolutely love it if Moffat and Gatiss did choose to take the Sherlock/John route though in fact, I think they would have missed a great opportunity if it doesnt go down that road later on in the series. I wouldnt go as far to say that theyre promoting homophobia by denying it all so forcefully (people jumped on the Moffat is sexist bandwagon soon enough), but it does lead me to ask why not?

    Wonderful blog, by the way. Ive been lurking for a while, haha.

  2. moniquej
    January 3, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    Thanks, Beth! Im glad you liked the review (more of it is coming later today in which Ill address some canon and fanon stuff). Im glad to hear Im on common ground with other Sherlock fansgenerally, I feel like an outcast in the world of the Sherlock fandom. Im not really sure why I do, though.

    You brought up a good point about the hallucination being Irenes hallucination because I envisioned it as Sherlocks daydream even though he might not have known exactly where Irene was. But youre absolutely rightit would be like a callback to Sherlocks hallucination with Irene solving the case in the field. The more and more I think about it, the more it makes sense that its a hallucination of Irenes, because how could Sherlock have gotten to the Middle East and back without anyone noticing? She was having one final fling with Sherlock in her head, almost like a Near Death Experience.

    If this is true, Moffat needs to say so so he can get people off his back about being sexist! :)

  3. Nicola
    January 5, 2012 at 11:46 am

    First of all, I liked your review a lot! I thought the final scene was Irenes hallucination or something, but most people think that really happened so I have to admit that Sherlock saved her. Now I wonder if shell be back.
    Sorry for the random comment, I just wanted to say your post is really great :)

  4. moniquej
    January 5, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    Thanks for the comment! Glad you liked it!

  5. natalie
    January 10, 2012 at 3:08 pm


    This is a week late, but I found my way into your blog entry. I was mainly unclear about that scene where she tells Watson she is gay, and a search run for transcript led me here lol. I agree with your points about Irene and the argument about her lesbianism vs her attraction towards Sherlock. He is asexual for the most part, but she stirs in him the same lustful attraction which he stirs in her, because they are intellectually equal to each other. I didnt think it was a case of lesbians like men underneath it all. As for the last part, I am inclined to think it really happened. If it was Irenes hallucination, I think it was oddly juxtaposed. O.o

    There was something I wanted to mention. Karachi is in Pakistan, which is in South Asia, not the Middle East.

  6. moniquej
    January 10, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    Thanks, Natalie, for pointing out the Middle East mistake. Ill go correct that.
    Also, Im glad you liked the recap!

  7. February 7, 2012 at 9:30 am

    Hi, Im almost afraid to post this BUT am I really the only person in the world who did not care for this episode at all? Ive loved all the others and even on his worst day Moffat can out-write almost any of his contemporaries but for me, this ep was definitely a brave experiment which fell short of its goal. It just didnt flow properly and, to be honest, merely reinforced the fact that Holmes & Watson work best as a team; separate them & you have two misfits, put them together and you have dynamite! I couldnt honestly say why this one ep didnt work but for me it just didnt.
    Just an opinion,

  8. moniquej
    February 7, 2012 at 11:49 am

    Dont be afraid! :) I can see why the episode wouldnt work for some people.

  9. JKM
    April 16, 2012 at 8:43 am

    I was imppressed by your opinion. I wonder one thing.
    Why did Sherlock chase after John when John was abducted by Irene?
    I really wonder it.

  10. mejon
    May 7, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    how could people like this show! the ending is so stupid! some say its irenes
    hallucination, others say sherlock saved her by going to pakistan.

  11. ami
    July 15, 2012 at 8:10 am

    Right. Lesson of sexual fluidity. Guess what, it happens to different people, not only lesbians (and studies on that matter show that actually those women who were always only into women, are not prone to this fluidity). Coincidentally, it is practically ONLY showed on lesbians, so you cant really pull that argument when 95% of lesbian portrayal in mainstream TV and movies include their feelings/sex with men, because it is merely an excuse for including that storyline.

    At least before people were honest when they were constantly making lesbian characters falling for guys. Now they pretend thats because it would be closed minded to think that lesbian would never fall in love with a guy

  12. moniquej
    July 15, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Thanks for your opinion. As for my personal experience, I actually havent seen the storyline of the lesbian falling in love with a man that muchthe only prominent portrayal Ive seen of that is Gigli and perhaps some old Womens Prison movies, which have skewed perspectives, anyway. In any case, Im not saying that all lesbian storylines are about sexual fluidity; Im just providing an argument as to why this particular character might fall for Sherlock. Personally, I didnt see the episode as we must change Irenes lesbianism! I felt it was more about showing how enigmatic Sherlock is. I felt it was more about Irene acting as a foil to Johnboth of them were people who shouldnt like Sherlock based on their sexual preferences, but do. Thats all. To me, shes still all about being a lesbian; she herself said she didnt know exactly why she was in love with Sherlock. I could have made the argument about Moffats supposed misogyny, but I really dont know that much about him to write that. In fact, to me, it seemed like Moffat made more of a John as sexual fluidity argument in this episode rather than a Irene is lesbian whos been changed straight argument. He practically made John/Sherlock canon in this episode. I can see your side of the argument, though, so I understand.

    Im not attacking you when I ask this, Im just very curiouswhat are the 95% of lesbian portrayals you speak of? Because in the mainstream, Ive found that there arent as many as gay men portrayals. And like I said, most of the ones Ive seen didnt involve lesbians getting changed.

    In any case, I want to state that this site isnt about promoting bad ideas about lesbianism, or saying that its close-minded to think that lesbians could never fall in love with men (if I felt a show had that as its prominent theme, Id certainly write about it). If anything, Im just attempting to add something new to the conversation.

  13. ami
    July 15, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    Problem with this portrayal is a fact that most of the time it could look like it perfectly makes sense when it comes to each particular plotline. Only when you look at bigger picture, how such portrayal of lesbians is omnipresent, you would see the issue. I would make a comparison to the way black people were portrayed not so long time ago. Mainly as thugs or not too bright servants. There are people like that IRL too, so it could be argued that it makes perfect sense for each individual storyline. But not when its almost the only representation.
    And BTW, when it comes to Adler, it was indicated that shes sexually attracted to Sherlock. And again, when you would read into sexual fluidity theory, which is defined scientific concept created by Lisa Diamond, actually only women who are or ever were to any degree sexually attracted to both are prone to this fluidity, so in fact they simply de-gayed her by this. Huge part of this theory is also evidence that romantic attraction is run by different brain circuit than sexual attraction, and the former is apparently potentially gender blind, unlike sexual attraction (so even if youre slightly into both, it potentially may work), but thats subject for different discussion.

    And speaking of examples in TV shows and movies of the cliche of lesbian falling for a guy or having sex with him, here it is:

    Skins UK, Skins US (those were completely different lesbian characters and it happened to all of them BTW), The Kids Are All Right, Chasing Amy, Nip/Tuck, She Hate Me, Queer As Folk, Flash Forward, Gigli (Ben Affleck apparently has a talent for turning lesbians), Los hombres de Paco, My Idiot Brother, Your Sisters Sister, All My Children, Las Aparicio, The Monkeys Mask, Hospital Central, Satisfaction, Goldfish Memory. And Sherlock.

    Those are just titles I recall at the moment. And of course quite recent movies and shows, not mentioning such portrayals as Pussy Galore from Bond, who was turned straight by his magic penis.
    Basically the only kind of shows or movies that have lesbians who dont fall for men or want to have sex with them are lesbian ghetto shows and movies by lesbians and for lesbians.

    Lately one of the only positive portrayals of lesbians in mainstream TV, Emily in Pretty Little Liars, whos out and proud lesbian, is rumored to fall for a guy as executive producer said, the guy is so sweet and sexy that Emily cant help herself but develop feelings for him. A fact that shes consistently portrayed as lesbian who doesnt feel anything to men apparently means nothing here, this producer didnt even move that, its apparently normal that lesbians are into men. As overwhelming majority of media representation shows.

    Media create visibility. It especially affects minority groups. And we live in a world where corrective rapes to turn lesbians straight are still real and huge problem.

  14. moniquej
    July 15, 2012 at 7:23 pm

    Well, youve got a point there. Now that you mention it, I do remember seeing the US Skins episode where that girl (I forget her name)fell in love with a guy, and I did have a problem with that episode since it seemed like it was supposed to be more about her accepting herself; that part where she kisses the guy didnt even need to be in the show.

    Ill have to write a blog post on this in the future. Thanks for the information and your opinion on this episode of Sherlock.

Leave a Reply