non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Sherlock Holmes became an adaptation of an adaptation.

By watching several adaptations, it is possible to see how Holmes' personality begins to change over time, and how some adaptations are very similar to each other, not because they are based on the same book, but because they are based on each other instead of being based on the canon.

For example, the stereotype that Holmes is cold and emotionless, even though in the book Watson indeed says that Holmes is "a machine", Watson still describes him as sensitive, gentle, Holmes compassionate towards the clients who need it most. In addition to the explicit affection he has for Watson and how he respects Watson's feelings.

In older adaptations, Holmes has a personality and attitudes that are more faithful to the books, until the 2000s, Holmes' personality was consistent with the canon.

From the 2000s onwards, the adaptations became increasingly distant from the canon and began to be based on existing versions of the character instead of the canon, and thus a whole new perception of the character was created that did NOT match AT ALL with his original counterpart.

(very long post)

And it's not just Holmes' personality that is affected, but his dynamic with Watson and the history and personality of the other characters ends up being affected. For example, Irene Adler.

Although the interpretation of Irene as Holmes' romantic partner has existed for decades, since the 19th century, and even though she appeared in ONE short story, and was the only woman to beat the great detective, her relevance in having been a woman at that time and having been smarter than Holmes was transformed and reduced to her being Holmes' love interest, BUT even then, there isn't THAT many adaptations where Irene is portrayed this way how people think

First, there is Alice Faulkner, Holmes' romantic partner created by William Gillette, an original character inspired by Irene Adler, but very different from Irene. Holmes helps her and falls in love with her, kinda cute. (almost everyone knows) William Gillette is also responsible for the image of Holmes with the big pipe and the famous phrase never said by the canon Holmes "Elementary, my dear Watson". This is where the first influence on the other adaptations begins.

William Gillette's Holmes inspired the adaptations by Clive Brook and John Barrymore. Brook's version Holmes has a wife like Alice, and Barrymore's version is an adaptation of Gillette's film.

‼️This is all referring specifically to visual media such as movies and tv shows.

From decades before until the 1950s (not included), there is no Irene Adler. Of the more than 30 adaptations, four of them have an original female character as a romantic partner to Holmes. From the 50s to the 80s (not included), there are 30 other film and television adaptations. Where Irene only appears in 1976 in “Sherlock Holmes In New York” with Roger Moore as Holmes, and I believe that this is perhaps the FIRST version where Irene and Holmes really have a romance.

In this movie, half of the time, it is shown how Holmes loves Irene Adler and misses her, until a case ends up taking him to New York, to meet the woman he loves so much, BUT in the end, after he discovers that he has a son with Irene, he simply decides that he cannot stay with her and their son, because he has a whole life in London and cannot leave everything like that. Father of the year.

Before that, of course, there is “The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes” in 1970 by Billy Wilder, where he has the character of Gabrielle, which may have been the starting point for Irene Adler's transformation.

There were two adaptations in the 1970s where a man ends up in a type of psychosis that makes him believe he is Sherlock Holmes and a doctor named, by coincidence of course, Watson, and she is the one who helps him. In the first film, “They Might Be Giants,” Holmes and Dr. Watson fall in love.

At this time, it has the movie “The Seven Per-Cent Solution,” where Freud helps Holmes overcome his “aversion to women” and at the end of the movie, Holmes meets a potential female love interest.

Of all the 33 films from this period [50s-80s], there is ONE movie where Holmes is implicitly homosexual, ONE movie where H&W fall in love, ONE movie where Holmes has an original female romantic partner and ONE movie where Holmes and Irene Adler were a couple.

Irene only appears then in the “Soviet Holmes” series from (1979), where although it seems that Holmes may have feelings for her, she is not a love interest.

From the 80s to the 2000s (not included), of the almost 40 film and television adaptations, Irene Adler only appears THREE TIMES.

In 1984 in the film with Peter Cushing “The Mask of Death”, where Holmes seems grumpy with the mere presence of Irene and complains about how he lost to a woman. In the same year also Irene appears in “Granada Holmes” which is probably the most faithful adaptation of the tale of the Scandal in Bohemia.

Irene only appears AGAIN in 1991 in “The Leading Lady” with Christopher Lee, where Irene has no self-respect whatsoever and has only one mission in this movie, which is to marry Holmes. She literally says that she DOESN’T CARE IF HOLMES DOESN’T LOVE HER, she wants to marry him and ends baby trapping him.

In 1994, there was the pilot episode of the series that would be called “Baker Street: Sherlock Holmes Returns”, which is a remake of the 1987 pilot episode “The Return of Sherlock Holmes”. In the first version, Holmes wakes up from cryogenics and meets Watson’s granddaughter, Jane, and from her, he learns that it is okay to be gay in the 80s. In the second version, Holmes is found by a doctor named Winslow who falls in love with him, but Holmes shows no interest in her.

In the late 90s, there is “Shirley Holmes”, who is Holmes' great-great-granddaughter-niece (?), her father is a Holmes and her mother is a doctor named Joanne. There is also “My Dearly Beloved Detective” where H&W kiss, the movie is mainly about love.

From this period, of the three times that Irene appears, only once she is a love interest and other THREE adaptations that put H&W in a romantic position.

So until the 2000s, of the more than one hundred adaptations, Irene is Holmes' love interest ONLY TWICE.

Of about 61 film and series adaptations produced since the 2000s till this day, EIGHT adaptations have Irene Adler as Holmes' romantic partner and another EIGHT adaptations where Holmes has other originals female characters as romantic partners.

And hust because I'm a math teacher:

It's worth noting that the number of adaptations (movies and tv shows) in 25 years is almost equivalent to the number of adaptations (movies and tv shows) in ONE CENTURY.

From the first sample of adaptations (movies and tv shows) from the period 1900-1999, there were 104 adaptations.

Irene as a romantic partner: 2 (± 2%)

Original Female Character: 4 (± 3.8%)

H&W in a romantic situation (corresponding or not, explicit or not): 4 (± 3.8%)

From the second sample of adaptations (movies and tv shows) from the period 2000-2025, there were 61 adaptations.

Irene as a romantic partner: 8 (± 13%)

Original Female Character: 8 (± 13%)

H&W in a romantic situation (corresponding or not, explicit or not): 7 (± 11.5%)

Irene Adler as love interest from the 2000s onwards:

“The Royal Scandal” with Matt Frewer, their relationship is implicit, this movie sucks, but other Frewer movies are good, as is Clive Merrison, Frewer is one of the only actors who has a voice that most closely matches the description of Holmes' voice in the canon. Also in the television film “Sherlock Holmes and the Baker Street Irregulars”, where Irene spends most of the movie disguised as a man, because of course that the ONLY WOMAN Holmes could fall in love with, dresses as a man. And then we have the Robert Downey Jr. films where despite explicitly showing the romantic relationship between Holmes and Irene at the same time it implicitly shows the romantic feelings between Holmes and Watson. And then we have “Elementary” (2012-2019), “Шерлок Холмс” (2013), “Sherlock Gnomes” (2018) and the most recent “CBS Watson” (Holmes is dead but they still made sure to let us know that Irene and Holmes had an affair.)

So, it was here, in the 2000s that the adaptations really began to change and became adaptations of each other. Holmes lost his personality and became another character. The canon stories were replaced by “fanfics” of other adaptations. (Irene Adler case)

I consider that three adaptations are mainly responsible for the CURRENT image of Sherlock Holmes, and that it is from these three adaptations that the image that we have (in the contemporary era) of Sherlock Holmes was perpetuated and is the basis for the adaptations produced more recently.

The first is House M.D. (2004-2012). Although the general public does not know that it is based on Sherlock Holmes, House influenced other adaptations, especially the personality that Holmes has today. The cliché of the super-intelligent, cold, calculating, emotionless male character begins here. Even though House is not exactly that trope. The image of Holmes being insensitive to clients/patients, his arrogance and being an ASSHOLE starts in House. Including the way he treats or mistreats Watson/Wilson.

The second adaptation is the Robert Downey Jr. films as Holmes (2009-2011). He turns Holmes into an action hero, which Holmes is not, his personality does not match the canon at all (in these movies, this is not a problem). But the main influence of RDJ Holmes is Holmes as an action hero, and being SLOPPY. He dresses badly and does not keep a clean appearance. It looks like he has not showered in months. I know he STINKS.

And then we have the third adaptation, which is where the adaptations of other adaptations begin: BBC Sherlock (2010-2017). BBC Sherlock could almost be an adaptation of “The Private of Sherlock Holmes” considering the amount of similarities and references to Billy Wilder's film and the number of times Moffat and Gatiss said that this was their favorite film and INSPIRATION. BBC Sherlock is set in the modern era as Basil Rathbone's film series was then, it also makes references to the 1965 BBC series with a background appearance by Douglas Wilmer, they made reference to “Granada Holmes” in “The Abominable Bride”. And considering that RDJ Holmes is (I believe) the FIRST adaptation that decided to have Irene Adler working for Moriarty, it can be considered that Irene Adler from BBCSH, besides being an adaptation of Gabrielle from ��Private Life of Sherlock Holmes”, is also inspired by Irene from the movie.

Still, controversy, but BBC Sherlock also suffers from the influence of House, mainly in Sherlock’s PERSONALITY. He has a personality quite similar to House’s.

So we have BBC Sherlock that is inspired by other adaptations and other adaptations that are inspired by BBC Sherlock. They are adaptations based on others adaptations, where the original Holmes gets lost and it is no longer possible to recognize him.

House influenced BBC Sherlock, Elementary and CBS Watson. Although Elementary suffered from the obvious comparisons to BBC Sherlock, it clearly follows a House approach style, including the opening of the show is inspired by the 1965 BBC series. And even with the influences of other adaptations, Elementary managed to maintain a personality more in keeping with Holmes, despite the sexual appeal that Elementary Holmes has (I believe it's House's fault). This Holmes has character development and takes a more serious approach to being neurodivergent and queer, and to his addiction. Unlike both House and BBCSH, which do not fully address Holmes' autistic, or his sexuality, and in the case of BBCSH at no point does it seriously address Sherlock's addiction problem.

And again, possibly influenced by Irene from the Warner Bros. films, we have an Irene Adler who works with Moriarty, and spoiler alert, not only does she work with Moriarty but is actually Moriarty herself. In addition to having a romantic involvement with Holmes, and Moriarty (her own counterpart) being an obstacle in their relationship (as in the film).

CBS Watson series has a big problem, being from the same producers as Elementary, even though Elementary managed to maintain consistency and a certain fidelity to Holmes' personality, CBS Watson ends up having almost no personality, being similar to House, and with a Watson that seems trying to be Holmes at all times. In a way, CBS Watson is an adaptation of another adaptation: House, which is inspired by Sherlock Holmes.

RDJ Holmes has influenced two Russian adaptations, “Sherlock Holmes” from 2013, where despite expectations that it was inspired by the Soviet series from 1979, the new Russian Holmes is very similar to the ways of RDJ Holmes, sloppy and careless. The series plot is that Watson narrates the adventures of Sherlock Holmes, but the Holmes he writes about is not the same as the real Holmes he lives with. Even though in this context, fidelity to the canon somehow does not need to exist. It still shows the influence of RDJ's films. And again, Irene Adler here is Holmes' romantic partner.

As for the NEW Russian series “Sherlock in Russia” (2020), despite its originality and very well produced, we have an almost sloppy Holmes, long hair and a goatee, that yes, is RDJ's fault.

Being the most influential of the post-2000s adaptations, BBC Sherlock influenced several other adaptations, such as: “Miss Sherlock” (2018) which is not only inspired by BBC Sherlock, but clearly an adaptation of BBC Sherlock in a modern Tokyo setting where Sherlock and John are women. (An adaptation of another adaptation that was inspired by other adaptations). “Sherlock Untold Stories” (2019-2022) which is also heavily inspired by BBC Sherlock visually, but unlike Miss Sherlock it manages to be more original.

Moriarty the Patriot's Sherlock. Both the manga and the anime are, in my opinion, the best adaptation of Sherlock Holmes, both in the original plot and in how they adapted Moriarty and the canon to the context of the manga universe. However, Sherlock is clearly inspired by BBCSH's Sherlock. Some parts of the manga are also very similar to the events of BBC Sherlock.

And the most controversial one: Sherlock and Co. And I say this not as if they deliberately decided this. It's undeniable the impact that BBC Sherlock had on the general public's perception of WHO SHERLOCK HOLMES IS. Considering that the producer himself said that they had three audiences that they had to balance when making this adaptation, one of them being the "Johnlocker Community". Evidencing the HUGE impact that BBC Sherlock has even on the general Sherlock Holmes fandom, and yet, the producer said that he didn't know about queerbaiting when the allegations started that SH&Co. could be queerbaiting, remembering that no adaptation is obligated to make H&W a couple. This fact happened precisely because of the public's perception of how SH&Co. is similar to BBCSH and not just because it is set in the modern era. Observing the fandom, especially in the beginning, it was perceptive that SH&Co. was being treated as an extension of BBC Sherlock. So by EXTERNAL CONSEQUENCES, I will consider that SH&Co. Whether willingly or not, he suffers from the direct influence of BBCSH (and its fandom).

And then there's the Netflix problem. I haven't read the Enola books (yet), and I have no idea how Holmes is adapted in her books. But Henry Cavill Holmes is a consequence of BBCSH and RDJ. It's as if they had a son, but he clearly pulled Sherlock's hair more (BBCSH).

And Irregulars, only Netflix know where they got their inspiration from to do that. And Holmes is sloppy again, it's RDJ's fault. And taking inspiration from Sherlock in New York, Netflix's Holmes also abandons his daughter even though he says he loves the child's mother more than anything. Eleven worse, Irregulars Holmes neglects his daughter for FIFTEEN YEARS, but her mother is the love of his life and could let the world end if they could be together. And for some reason Watson loves that jerk.

(also is like benedict and jonny lee miller had a child)

And the light at the end of the tunnel came, unexpectedly, from the CW. Finally an adaptation that is not based on another adaptation, that despite the original approach, it is still noticeable that it is in fact based on the canon and does not suffer from the influence of other adaptations.

This is based on a twitter discussion, but mostly on a comment from an oomf.

English is not my first language, I am smarter in Brazilian Portuguese

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

The Dying Detective is the short story in which Holmes is... shall we say, at his peak irritability (the man hadn't eaten or drank for three days, so he has a good explanation for why his character had shifted), which is a trait that has been seen in different stories (for example, Watson describing his investigations in The Retired Colourman, only for Holmes to order him to 'cut out the poetry') but isn't as pronounced. It is however the most emphasised element of his character in adaptations, but we don't need to get into that.

Holmes is strangely callous (if that's not too far to say) in the opening dialogue between him and Watson, telling Watson that he was 'enough to drive a patient into an asylum' and he 'fidget[s him] beyond endurance'. Again, malnourished/hangry, but it is odd. And, an important point to mention, Holmes is largely acting here, he's telling the truth when he says he hasn't been eating, but Holmes says it himself, his 'habits are irregular'- working during a period of starvation is his natural state. There would be no need for him to be this cruel to Watson... unless he's not acting.

Holmes orders Watson to sit still and allow him some rest, giving Watson a while to inspect his room (like he's not been there before...) which mainly erves the purpose to allow ACD to introduce the ivory box that Culverton Smith sent to Holmes, and for Holmes to tell Watson to stay away. So, this is how Watson describes the state of Holmes' room: 'pictures of celebrated criminals with which ever wall was adorned... the mantelpiece. A litter of pipes, tobacco pouches, syringes, penknives, revolver-cartridges, and other debris was scattered over it'.

Messy guy.

But look at that list- 'syringes'. When has Watson brought up a syringe before?

'Sherlock Holmes took his bottle from the corner of the mantelpiece and his hypodermic syringe from its neat morocco case... He adjusted the delicate needle and rolled back his left shirt-cuff... Finally, he thrust the sharp point home.'- The opening paragraph of The Sign of the Four.

Syringes have many uses (the sun rose this morning, if you want to hear any more obvious statements) and Holmes doesn't just use them for drug use, surely. He has his science experiments, which he'll use syringes for, but why are these syringes in his room?

Look at the rest of the list, amongst the syringes, there's pipes and tobacco pouches, so, Holmes smokes, we know this. Penknives... to stab something? Opening letters, more likely. Revolver-cartridges, we know Holmes uses his revolver inside, so that makes sense.

There isn't anymore mention of any other science equipment.

Looking at this from the perspective of ACD, or any other writer, it's important to know that anything you write is there for a reason. ACD didn't look at his own mantelpiece and write what he saw there (at least, I doubt he did)- he's creating a picture of Holmes and his space, and everything he's listed there should suggest something about him and form connotations in the reader's mind. So, yes, you read how he has pipes on his mantelpiece, and how often is Holmes depicted without a pipe? ACD included a throwaway term in this list 'other debris'- in other words, more shit that isn't important to highlight. So why tell us about the syringe? Is Holmes using drugs here? It's not unreasonable to think this.

In The Missing Three-Quarter, Watson briefly refers to how he 'weaned [Holmes] from that drug mania', probably due to the fact that the Victorian public had recently learned that drugs aren't great, so ACD was quick to take his protagonist off cocaine/morphine without further discussion. TMTQ was published in 1904; TDD in 1913, and we know how ACD was like with chronology so I'm not even going to bother trying to place the stories in order, but those publication dates are still important. ACD has rid Holmes of his addiction in a few words, and so has his narrator, Watson... but did Holmes?

Circling right back to the introduction (all the way back, I do have a reason for writing all that) and Holmes' out-of-character shortness (okay, not wholly out-of-character, but more pronounced) I think it's possible to suggest that drugs are an explanation. But, this opens the door to more than one explanation:

Holmes is high, so he's snappier than usual

Holmes is high and Watson is pissed at him, so he's using his authorial privilege to depict Holmes in a negative light.

There's no need for me to divulge into how the first theory would manifest in Watson's narrations, since you only have to read TDD with this in mind to understand, but the second is quite interesting.

To explain it, it's important to establish how different TDD is to most of the other stories: it's layout is entirely different, there's no clear-cut client in need of saving, with the largest chunks of conversation in the opening being their explanations (and ACD's wonderful use of speech within speech within speech, i.e ' " '), the victim is not the focus at all, and Watson talks a lot. Yes, he's the narrator, he's talking the entire time, but he has a lot of actual speach, and he not just 'ejaculating in surprise' (get your head out of the gutter) or asking questions so that Holmes can give an explanation which the reader might search for as well, he's arguing with Holmes. (In my edition, TDD is 16 pages long- Holmes and Watson argue/talk for 7 pages, so nearly half). In 56 short stories, 4 novels and 40 years, you could count on one hand how many times Watson (told us he) had an argument with Holmes. He wasn't a lapdog, always agreeing with Holmes' plans/ideas, he did have his own opinions and he told us, the readers how he was one of the long-suffering mortals to deal with Holmes' antics, but saying this:

'Holmes... you are not yourself. A sick man is but a child, and so I will treat you. Whether you like it or not, I will examine your symptoms and treat you for them.'

And-

'I was bitterly hurt.

'"Such a remark is unworthy of you, Holmes."'

Is very different to a complaint about Holmes leaving his papers on the floor. Watson is annoyed. I also think it's worth mentioning that Watson describes Holmes looking upon him with 'venomous eyes', which is a far cry from Watson initial description in A Study in Scarlet: 'His eyes were sharp and piercing', again connoting to snake eyes, but in a more positive and engaging light. Maybe this is a step further, Watson's not just annoyed, he's angry- angry that Holmes relapsed? Or something else- but, is that why he mentioned the syringes? Watson must have looked in that room, and his eyes were immediately drawn to what would worry him most, signs that Holmes might have been smoking too much (pipes, tobacco pouches), if he's in danger (penknives for protection, revolver-cartridges) and- yes, syringes. Not being used for science experiments.

But this is Watson. He's not going to hate Holmes for his drug usage- if Watson was so against it, he would have left the moment he saw Holmes injecting himself in the living room. No, Watson could not be too angry- how could he? As Watson narrates himself:

' "You are not angry?" he asked, gasping for breath.

'Poor devil, how could I be angry when I saw him lying in such a plight before me'

Watson is an unreliable narrator (I'm full of obvious statements today) so everything he tells us, every name, date, plot point, conversation, anything- it must be taken with a pinch of salt. Is he telling us what happened, or what he wants the audience to know? And- who is his audience? Who is he writing for? And what's his state of mind? Maybe, in the heat of frustration after confronting Holmes over his drug use, he sits down to write up a case and his emotions take over, glimpses of early arguments come through, and yes, he's thinking about syringes and smoking and the dangers that Holmes puts himself through. But then he actually thinks of Holmes. High? In withdrawal? And he won't pity him, no, Watson was in the army, he won't pity a man- but he'll worry. And he'll want to help- even if Holmes won't let him, because 'Let him be my master elsewhere, I at least was his in a sick-room'. We know- and Watson knows- that Holmes reads the cases when they're published, since he complains that Watson 'attempted to tinge it with romanticism' (TSotF), so he wants Holmes to read exactly how he feels and feel that anger- but know that it comes from a place of love and concern.

So,the case has been solved, Holmes is close to his usual self after eating a few biscuits and drinking some wine (enough to restore anyone, I should think). He babbles on, explaining why he needed to do this and that and suggests a date a meal at Simpson's. And Watson's quiet. Apart from simple, narrative progressing questions. All is back to the normal structure of a Holmes story and (this might just be me) you can feel it in the text, the shift, the easy tying up of a story with little emotion, all logic, and everything is lovely. Because, how can Watson be angry for long?

This ended up being a lot longer than I expected, because as much as I joke about ACD's mistakes, I really have to give credit to the guy on how much subtext can be derived from these stories and his actual skill as an author, because, I haven't mentioned this already, but Culverton Smith? ACD formulated such an interesting character with Smith. Writing a quote like 'I don't see you in the witness box. Quite another shaped box' is deserving of praise. But anyway, ramble for another time.

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Listen I know John Watson was originally ACD's self insert or whatever, but let's be real, Watson and Doyle would fucking deck it out. Like "WDYM YOU KILLED MY BOYFRIEND?!"

"HE'S AN ANNOYING PRAT!!"

"AND??? I LOVE HIM???"

"YOU SHOULDN'T! I HATE WRITING ABOUT HIM!!!"

"WRITING ABOUT SHERLOCK HOLMES IS MY GREATEST PRIVILEGE YOU UNGRATEFUL FUCK!"

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

"John Watson is Sherlock Holmes’s best platonic friend and narrator" factoid actually just statistical error. John Watson is publicly declaring his love to the entire city of London multiple times a year. Sherlock Holmes, who only thinks he can receive love for the service he provides and tricks he can do and therefore makes fun of the stories as unbelievable and sensationalized, is an outlier and should not have been counted.

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Making bracelets with boyfriend 💕🫶

If you want to see this little animatic with music you can watch it on IG: @Herius.is.drawing or on TikTok @herius.drawing

Thank you for your support and love 💖⭐️

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

It is tempting to think that Sherlock Holmes was so emotionally repressed and secretive and obviously not great at handling the feelings of others (making Watson believe him dead or dying several times) because his own author did not love him enough. Childhood trauma. Deep in his heart he knew that all the time ACD spent with him he'd rather write about dinosaurs, and that turns a man bitter. And looking at some adaptions I think this is still ongoing - some creators still do not love Sherlock Holmes. They want his name, but they don't want him. Pleeeaaase let Sherlock Holmes be with creators who love himmmmm pleeeeaaaaaase my poor silly little guyyyyyyy

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

It’s crazy to me that people read Sherlock Holmes’ obsession with Irene Adler as romantic when it is so clearly the same kind of obsession that gay men have for Lady Gaga

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

I’ll never get people who think Sherlock is a straight man. Gay? Sure. Aro and/or ace? Sure. But straight?????? There’s no universe where he’s straight. There’s barely any where he’s interested in women at ALL. He’s been queer since ACD created him, we may never know in what way, but he’s queer. Always has been. That’s not even a theory, that’s just canon from the literature itself lmao

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

(x)

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

A Study in Scarlet is just Watson going "I love detective novels," and Sherlock Holmes desperately shoving Dupin out of the cultural consciousness and going "I could be a detective novel!"

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

I find it hard to call Holmes and Watson by their first names because. Like. They aren’t my friends. They’re my strange little creatures that I observe in their little environment with a magnifying glass.

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Holmes: okay Watson I see you’re back from your reconnaissance mission. Anything to report?

Watson: I missed you :(

Holmes: I meant about the case...

Holmes: .....also I missed you too :(

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

watson: what a tragedy.

*looks at the victims face*

watson: damn, he's so ugly, he must've had it coming

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

I am certainly developing the wisdom of the serpent, for when Mortimer pressed his questions to an inconvenient extent I asked him casually to what type Frankland's skull belonged, and so heard nothing but craniology for the rest of our drive. I have not lived for years with Sherlock Holmes for nothing.

This is the funniest fucking thing in the entire Sherlock Holmes stories beginning to end. Watson purposefully setting this guy off on his special interest to distract him from inconvenient questions. “I have not lived for years with Sherlock Holmes for nothing” and its double meaning of being clever + picking up how to deal with autistic people. Wisdom of the serpent indeed.

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Felt the need to point out that kurzgesagt made Holmes and Watson gay

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

Modern Sherlock Holmes adaptations I beg you please let Mycroft Holmes be weird and gay.

Stop making him the "normal" brother he's so strange, you guys.

[non-cat-holmes-stuff-i-like]

It doesn't matter if that fic has been in your drafts for years and is now self-indulgent to the point of parody. If Steven Moffatt is allowed to do it professionally, you are allowed to do it for fun.