Discover Top Posts Tagged with #scan acd

Popular Recent

the problem with most sherlock holmes adaptations involving irene adler is that they’re made by men who can’t imagine that a man could possibly be impressed by a woman and not want to sleep with her

#scandal in bohemia #acd canon #astudyincanon #scan acd

Old crusty men throughout history: Holmes is in love with Irene Adler!

Canon:

Also Canon:

#SCAN ACD #shernanigans

Handwritten draft of A Scandal in Bohemia [x]

#SCAN ACD #acd holmes #acd canon #a scandal in bohemia #i love seeing any of his original handwritten notes

Irene Norton

Upon further consideration, I'll use Irene Adler's married name, Norton. Because in the text she was married. To Norton. And she referred to herself by Norton. And I'm cranky enough about adaptations of Adler -- it's always "Adler" -- into Holmes’s love interest that I’ll use "Norton” just on the same silly principle by which I would order a “large” at Starbucks because “venti” is ridiculous.

#irene norton #scan acd #astudyincanonbookclub #a scandal in bohemia

So this line from A Scandal in Bohemia:

As I passed the well-remembered door, which must always be associated in my mind with my wooing, and with the dark incidents of the Study in Scarlet, I was seized with a keen desire to see Holmes again, and to know how he was employing his extraordinary powers.

His “wooing”? What does that mean? It’s not him wooing his wife, because that doesn’t make much sense in the scope of his memory of 221B. So is he the one that had been wooed here? If so, it’s obviously by Holmes. And that’s such an odd word to use. I know to woo can mean to curry general favor, but it’s almost always connotated romantically, or at the very least meant to sound like an enticement.

So, put another way, “When I passed the door and thought about Holmes wooing me and our first case together, I was seized with a keen desire to see him again.”

That’s adorable. And gay. So very gay. Honestly, how do people interpret lines like this WITHOUT a queer lens? Where do the words go? Even if there is another way to interpret that line, how does someone adequately argue AGAINST this interpretation?