Sherlockian Masculinity

The Premise

Sherlock Holmes has been a hero on page, stage and screen for over 125 years. As a character, he has been put in almost every setting imaginable and faced every possible problem. He can survive and solve anything, even (*SPOILER*) death. Although the Arthur Conan Doyle stories continue to be popular, Sherlock Holmes is also an incredibly dynamic character and new stories of his adventures have proliferated. He has changed as we have needed him to change, reinterpreted over time so that he remains relevant as our hero.

I argue that his compliance with dominant masculinity has been a tool to maintain his position as an iconic hero over time and that, presently, interpretations of Sherlockian masculinity must grapple with Sherlock's potential for a queer masculinity. However, the ties to hegemonic masculinity arguably short circuit a radical interpretation of Sherlock, as this white Englishman is convincingly homonormative and potentially feeds into homonationalism. A queer reading of Sherlockian masculinity is not transformative.

Before We Continue, A Note About the Doctor

Although Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson are arguably an inseparable pair, most of this blog will focus on Sherlock, as he has been most consistently portrayed as the admirable figure. Watson, along with the audience, looks up to Holmes and his performance of masculinity. The unfortunate army doctor has been too often used merely to prop up the traits of the detective - bumbling to emphasize Sherlock's competence, unintelligent to highlight Sherlock's genius, romantic and sentimental to contrast with Sherlock's cold aloofness. Although more properly depicted as Sherlock's partner in crime (solving), John Watson has not held the fascination and intrigue that Sherlock Holmes has garnered. I would argue that this is because of their differing portrayals of masculinity. As in anything else, Watson is Holmes' help-meet, but is not recognized as vital to the detective. His role in supporting Holmes will be explored through this lens, as opposed to their relationship as a duo.

Hegemonic Masculinity

Although there is no one masculinity, no single fool-proof way to legibly enact manhood, there is arguably a hegemonic masculinity for a particular place and time. This will shift, because all kinds and flavours of masculinity will shift as they are constantly constructed/reconstructed. A hegemonic masculinity is the performance of masculinity that is held in greater esteem than any other, making other masculinities subordinate to its social power. There is a coercive aspect to a hegemonic masculinity. It is not enough that a particular expression of masculinity be dominant - it will also put pressure to conform on those who want to be read as masculine (Sherlock's Men 4-5).

Masculinity is must be constantly "achieved, asserted and renegotiated," through the embodied actions and imaginations of both individuals and society (Sherlock's Men 15). In order for a hegemonic masculinity to have power, it must be prominently displayed as a model for repetition by others and represented as powerful within mainstream culture. This is where Sherlock Holmes comes in. He portrays a dominant masculinity throughout Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's work, the ideal of the phallologocentric man. Phallologocentricism centres society around men and reason, validating and valorizing Western masculinity, science and rationality. Sherlock Holmes is clearly a hero within this world view. Joseph A. Kestner argues in Sherlock's Men that, "Doyle indisputably aligns Holmes with manliness by linking his character to science, practical application, exact knowledge, logic and system, all elements gendered masculine in the nineteenth century" (29). He alligns perfectly with the phallogocentric model, the hegemonic masculinity then and now.

Under these assumptions, what does it mean for Sherlock Holmes to be so incredibly popular for so long? Holmes fit well within the framework of Victorian values, but he continues to thrive. I argue that he has been able to fit with hegemonic masculinity and remain a relevant hero. A brilliant, logical hero has not fallen out of style, and Sherlock Holmes also influences what kind of heroic masculinity will be celebrated.

"If the Sherlock Holmes tales recognize the conflicts involved in constructing and reinforcing manliness in the culture, it is also their function to advance concepts of masculinity, to police male behaviour and to propose and endorse paradigms of maleness for the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century" (Sherlock's Men 25).

Sherlock continues to be influential today. We live in a world where many of the same masculinities are valued as in the Victorian era, although with new possibilities that can potentially challenge hegemonic masculinity, like queer or butch masculinity. Sherlock Holmes is arguably still useful because it is flexible enough to allow for a shifting meaning of masculinity, to a point, because it is not beholden to heterosexuality to prop it up. While hegemonic masculinity, dominant masculinity, usually integrates heterosexuality as an important qualifier, Sherlock Holmes does not specifically rely on a straight reading. His romantic interests are potentially non-existent, putting him closer to asexual than the "red blooded man" that hegemonic masculinity often insists upon. By disentangling a performance of heterosexuality and a performance of dominant masculinity, Sherlock Holmes arguably makes space for a queer reading.

However, as I will explore in other sections, Sherlock Holmes is hardly revolutionary or radical. His "queer-ness" does not challenge hegemonic masculinity any further than pulling it apart from compulsory heterosexuality, which arguably makes it a homonormative performance of masculinity. With all his work for Queen and country, Holmes is a perfect candidate for engaging with homonationalism. As a white, middle-class Englishman who protects women and the motherland from foreigners, criminals and misdeeds, Sherlock Holmes is essentially a conservative figure, even when read as potentially queer.