A Question for ELEMENTARY fans

It’s obvious that Sherlock’s dad, doesn’t exist, right? Sherlock himself hired Watson?

I keep looking on Television Without Pity to see if everyone else also thinks this. But no one does! And yet, it seems obvious. Almost intentionally obvious.

Am I wrong? I mean, just for starters, she NEVER receives communications from Sherlock’s father when Sherlock is around.

6 thoughts on “A Question for ELEMENTARY fans

  1. That is a fascinating thought. The aspect of ‘Elementary’ that has hooked me is the idea that this Holmes exists entirely independently. There is no sense of a previous Holmes in fact or fiction. It is like staging ‘Henry V’ in Manhattan.

    In that context, your point makes even more sense. Much of the literature about Holmes is filled with speculation on his father. For Holmes to create a ‘responsible and caring’ father would allow him to protect himself without seeming to impose limits on himself.

    Thanks for the great insight.

    Now when will we meet Mycroft and what will his role be?

  2. Mark, that’s what convinced me. His father is loving and caring enough to arrange for him to have a sober companion, but is such a douche that he doesn’t show up for an arranged meeting with said sober companion?

    Nope. Dude does not exist. Sherlock is impersonating his father because he, himself, though he knows he needs help, does not want to be vulnerable enough with a stranger to get it.

  3. Either that or Mycroft is pretending to be his father because Mycroft is the key figure in some secret British Intelligence unit and wants to protect Sherlock from being a target of his enemies.

    I have not seen every episode but so far I have not caught a reference to Mycroft. Since the original Holmes stories portray Mycroft as the smarter brother and he is the brains of the Foreign Office, there is plenty of room to give him a place in the show.

    The detailing of the show is something else worth mentioning. Instead of Lestrade, who was not respected by Holmes, we get Gregson whom Holmes liked. We get a more unpleasant Holmes than ever depicted. I think the irony here is that Conan-Doyle came to dislike Holmes so much that he would have loved the current incarnation.

    Watson has been badly wounded albeit not in Afghanistan. Given that she could have been in Afghanistan and been wounded by natives, that is a nice touch.

    The more I think about it, the better I like the show because of its understanding of and respect for the original.

  4. I finally saw the latest episode. The killer, Sebastian Moran, was another nod to the Conan-Doyle stories. In the first story in the second series, when Holmes makes his return, Moran is an agent of the late Moriarity. He is a hunter of note from India {something about an unequaled count of tigers} who knew Holmes was alive and was stalking him.

    The more the series tracks the events in the original stories, the more likely it is that we will discover that there is no father since there is no father in the stories.

    If the show does continue to pull in themes from the original stories, then I will be interested in seeing if there is an episode critical of Mormons or other religious group {‘A Study in Scarlet’} or a terrorist group or criminal organization {‘The Valley of Fear’} or a cheap shot at pit bulls.

    It will also be interesting to see if, as with Conan-Doyle, the show chooses to let the complex back stories for some of the Holmes works take more time in preference to focusing on Holmes and Watson.

Comments are closed.