I have found that the current season on Sherlock is better on a second viewing. The episodes are so densely packed with many Holmsian stories interwoven with the plot of the episode and the story-arc of the season that it is easy to miss something. If I have one criticism, it is with Irene Adler, I must be one of the very few people who prefer Ritchie’s movie Adler.
As I’ve been watching the latest episodes of season 2 of Sherlock on TV and eagerly awaiting Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows DVD, it occurs to me that what I like most about the great detective is that he is not really a genius/savant at all. He has just trained his brain in the one science. The science of detection. He has done this to the exclusion of all other extraneous distractions. He has absolutely no intuition and works solely on the application of pure logic. This is shown time and time again, such as his analysis of Watson’s mobile phone in episode 1 of season 1. (This is, of course, an adaptation of his analysis of a drunkard’s watch in the Conan-Doyle story The Mystery of the Red-Headed League.) Also his arrogance isn’t based on a superiority complex, rather an impatience to cut through the chaff and get straight to the heart of any puzzle.
I was a teenager when first read A Study In Scarlet and, as my mother is also a fan, it has given us something to talk about for years. Something different from the mundane. For that I will always be grateful to Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle. I still occasionally peruse the honorable tomes of the Holmes canon whenever I need a little pick-me-up. They always give me a sense of what an ordinary person is capable of with a little application. They are also funny and thrilling. Try them yourselves-
Start with A Study In Scarlet at Gutenberg.