Modern Interpretations

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson have never had much time out of the spotlight since their introduction in 1887. The pair have been reappearing in popular media time and time again, as the even the Wikipedia page covering their adaptations makes apparent. It is a full time job to keep track of all the comics, television shows, radio programs and films that are reviving the sleuth and his doctor. These many interpretations may include and exclude various aspects of the classic stories, as well as introduce any number of new elements.

Sometimes Watson is cast aside, occasionally Sherlock will be married off or will father a son, the pair may visit America, or even be re-imagined as mice. Looking into noncommercial, fandom ("fannish") interpretations, Holmes and Watson have been transported into the world of other narratives, from Harry Potter's Hogwarts to Dr. Who and beyond, without many hiccups along the way. However, in most of these renditions, Sherlock is recognizable based on the characteristics that coincide with his logocentric masculinity: rationality, intelligence, body denial and lack of (or difficulty with) emotional connection. So much of Sherlock's context and characterization can change without his appearing unrecognizable, but some aspects are more difficult to tamper with in an adaptation.

Although Sherlock Holmes has never truly fallen out of fashion, he has certainly regained prominence in the last five years. Although the well-loved Granada series finished only in 1994, Warner Bros. took it upon themselves to recreate another rendition in 2009 when they released Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, featuring Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes and Jude Law as Watson. A year later, BBC's Sherlock hit televisions in the UK to wide critical and popular acclaim. This year, Elementary is yet another television program that incorporates Sherlock Holmes into its narrative in a different way.

In explaining why Sherlock's masculinity might be especially popular at this moment, it might be useful to recall how masculinity functioned in the original canon to combat a Victorian crisis in masculinity. Women are continuing to enter previously masculine spaces like board rooms and parliament buildings and there is often talk about a "crisis of masculinity" that is said to be occurring (examples here, here and here). Men arguably feel like their masculinity is threatened. In addition, similar to the Victorian economic changes, the economy is growing increasingly unfamiliar to many people, either due to the change from an industrial to an information economy, outsourcing manufacturing to developing nations, or the economic vulnerability after so much prosperity.

Finally, a postmodern anti-hero who still has all the answers is an incredible gift when there is no longer strict black and white morality. Sherlock Holmes is at home among the likes of James Bond, Robin Hood and Batman, all characters whose portrayals have become darker and more openly ambiguous. Sherlock can be made more complex, more flawed, and yet still be a force for justice and order. He is at his most reassuring in our current era, even as he is the least god-like that we have seen him.

Sherlock Holmes and Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

In this incarnation, Sherlock Holmes is essentially an action hero, making the casting of Robert Downey Jr. particularly important. He had just featured in Iron Man and this superhero factor did arguably translate over to this portayal. Otherwise, he is not an obvious classic Sherlock Holmes, as he is too short and hardly wiry enough to qualify as the canonical Holmes. However, he is very convincingly masculine and the audience is often reminded of his physicality.

Although Sherlock is much more physical and erratic and romantic in this version, his genius, scientific endeavours and difficulty with emotional connections remain in tact despite the departures. Again, the phallologocentric heart of the character is allowed to remain. That is no threat to the desire to create a masculinity compatible with being an action hero for the mainstream movie-going audience (particularly in America).

Critically, the relationship between Holmes and Watson is featured, although there are established heterosexual romantic interests for each of the characters. This bond is highlighted not only in the film, but also in the press promoting the movie. 

In the second film, the main dilemma is arguably tensions between Holmes and Watson, making Moriarty's plots merely an interesting setting for the test of their friendship. The women occupying the romantic space for Holmes and Watson have been conveniently killed or misplaced, leaving much more room to establish the potential for their intimate, rocky relationship to be defined more romantically than platonically. Masculinity is unlinked from heterosexual performance here, and even allows for Sherlock's campy disguise as a woman. It is flexible enough that our action hero can wear lipstick and eyeshadow through a battle scene and appear to be  in control. 

Regardless of their focus on the relationship between Holmes and Watson, the masculinity overtly presented in the Warner Bros. films is generally compatible with the action hero. In the next section, I will talk about how promotional interviews may complicate readings of these movies. 

BBC's Sherlock

In this rendition of Sherlock Holmes, we meet the detective in modern day. However, despite the different setting, the series is arguably very loyal to Conan Doyle's original material. Benedict Cumberbatch makes an appropriate Sherlock Holmes and Martin Freeman's Dr. John Watson is merely missing a mustache. In addition, the show draws on stories from the canon. The translation of Sherlock's masculinity is an interesting issue.

The BBC's Sherlock Holmes is an easily bored genius, not a paternalistic protector. He cannot be confused with a moral pillar. He does retain the capacity to solve practically any problem (with only minor hiccups) and the work remains his sport of choice. In Sherlock, we also see an extreme rationality in play, a refusal to care because it is "not an advantage." John's role is to provide the heart that Sherlock appears to lack (*SPOILER*) but is eventually shown to have. Sherlock presents a very cold, scientific masculinity. Sherlock is still depicted as emotionally distant from everyone (except for perhaps John) and in this version, he finds connections not only challenging but pointless. His disregard for emotions - and clear discomfort when he is faced with them - is often articulated, as seen here. John is then meant as a crutch to help deal with his lack of emotions and the issues with interacting with others, and occasionally he has had about enough. The portrayal could hardly be accused of challenging hegemonic masculinity in these aspects.

Like the Warner Bros. movies, Sherlock and Watson have a fraught relationship at times, but also a significant degree of intimacy. In order to protect against accusations of homosexuality, which come at the pair from all sides and in all episodes, John Watson must engage in a very active campaign to maintain his status as a straight man. However, as Sherlock Holmes refuses to 'defend himself' from the charge of homosexuality, Watson's role as help-meet to maintain the heterosexuality arguably integral to hegemonic masculinity is more limited. In fact, this version's Irene Adler, who in other renditions is the factor that substantiates Sherlock's heterosexuality and bolsters his hegemonic masculinity, openly suggests that Sherlock and Watson are a couple. What she does boost is Sherlock's value as a desirable commodity.

The action hero figure is an attractive object of fantasy and Benedict Cumberbatch has received an overwhelming response from straight women fans of the show. Sherlock has been incredible successful in proving that "brainy is the new sexy," as Irene Adler puts it in the first episode of the second series. I argue that part of the appeal is engaging with a dominant masculinity that is appealing to viewers. Part of the romance of falling for Sherlock/Cumberbatch-as-Sherlock is engaging with his masculinity. Despite his cold demeanour, arrogance, questionable morality and insensitivity, Sherlock is seemingly still making it into many fans' fantasies. Today's hegemonic masculinity arguably incorporates and idealizes rationality, science, logic and genius enough to overlook these personality flaws. In the 21st century, "scientific smarts" are a key part of the masculine ideal that is celebrated and lusted after (Essays on New Adaptations 33).

CBS' Elementary

 Elementary is a new CBS show for their 2012 fall line up that takes Holmes and Watson on their furthest journey yet. Sherlock Holmes has left London in favour of New York after finishing rehab and he meets Watson as his sober companion.

Elementary has kept very little of the original canon approach. They have integrated Joan Watson, no longer an army doctor, and imagined Sherlock as "volatile," rather than an aloof Englishman. They are not borrowing from canon mysteries so far and their changes have inspired ire among many Sherlock Holmes fans.

However, the detective remains recognizable for all their changes. Sherlock is still portrayed as brilliant, scientifically oriented, logical and emotionally disconnected, although they have added insensitive, heterosexuality, tattoos and drug addiction to the list of traits.* In addition, the incarnation of Watson as a woman arguably offers a defense against accusations of homosexual tensions between the detective and his companion, making it the most obvious example of Watson providing a sort of heterosexual alibi for Holmes. Although this show departs largely from established facts about Sherlock Holmes and arguably has more in common with CSI: New York than Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories, it is another way that Holmes continues to pervade popular culture and maintain ties to hegemonic masculinity.


Sherlock Holmes Forever

In any of these above adaptations, Sherlock Holmes is easily identifiable because he is a pervasive figure in Western culture. I know the signs of Holmes and believe the evidence of my eyes, even if a few aspects appear out of line.

“A popular hero breaks free form the original textual conditions. Such figures transcending their original source materials, with character acting as a central narrative point with more import than events or setting. Whilst some Holmes adaptations followed Conan Doyle’s actual stories, most notably the Granada series (1984-1994) and various adaptations of the Hound of the Baskervilles on film, radio and television, it has tended to be the character rather than individual story lines that is adapted. It is, then, perhaps natural that different Holmses emerge.” (BBC Sherlock and Transmedia Fandom 108)

However, what joins these different Holmses is their collective fidelity to the phallologocentric elements of Sherlock's masculinity. Whatever their differences and however they separately conceptualize the man of Sherlock Holmes, they all reify his intelligence, logic and emotional distance as an actor for justice.


*Holmes' drug issues in the original works by Arthur Conan Doyle are minimized and while Watson disliked his habit, the conventional wisdom was not that his cocaine or heroine use was absolutely awful. It was a bad habit, but not depicted as a drug addiction for which Sherlock might have to undergo treatment.