web analytics
Skip to content

Summary of “A Scandal in Belgravia”

I’m not going to waste my time and yours reiterating everything I’ve already written about this. Instead, here is a list of links regarding my initial feelings about this particular episode of Sherlock. It’s not a matter of being politically correct, and I don’t consider myself any kind of feminist, really. It has more to do with the character and story being wronged and playing false in a lot of ways. All very manipulated. Though, as you’ll see in the post titled “Redeeming Irene,” all may not be what it seems.

  1. Write-Up of the Premiere at the BFI
  2. More Thoughts About “Scandal” After a Week of Rumination
  3. After A Second (And Third) Viewing
  4. The “Sexist” Angle
  5. How to Like It (aka “Redeeming Irene”)
  6. But I Won’t Watch It Again


Comments (6) for post “Summary of “A Scandal in Belgravia””

  • I completely agree that Moffat is much better at writing men than women. Perhaps he should have written Irene as he would a man and then we might have gotten a truly impressive woman. He should do that with Doctor Who too. Amy annoys me most of the time. I do hope there is something more to Irene and that Moriarty isn’t pulling her strings.

    This is my least favorite of the episodes so far. I’m looking forward to this Sunday’s one. Not surprising that a paranormal bent to the story grabs my attention.

    • The other thing about “Scandal” that makes me unable to watch it again is: Worse. Faux violin playing. EVER. It seriously almost makes me nauseous how the music doesn’t even come close to matching the motions. Like, it affects my inner ear or something. So, so bad. No one loves Benny more than I do, but someone get him some lessons, even fake ones. Please.

  • I’m curious as to how quickly you figure out the cases and such on Sherlock. My mind tends not to go in the direction that Sherlock’s does (or rather, the writers). Yet Keith guessed the code to the safe was Irene’s measurements and his theory about the hiker’s death was very close to what it actually was. Keith uses deductive logic while mine is more whimsical.

  • I think in a strange way. I get that from my dad. I liken it to the old video game “Hunt the Wumpus.” Not the text version, but the one for the TI-99, where there was a grid of caves and each cave was a clue to where the Wumpus was: empty, bats, blood, bones. When I think about something, it’s scattered like a web of these caves: data point, data point, data point, WUMPUS! Might be because I was diagnosed with a mild form of Aspergers in college. No idea. But I look for the logic in everything and always notice when there’s a seeming lack. These things disturb me, so I zero in. So anyway, I figure out the Sherlock stuff pretty quick; I had the phone code solved the moment it appeared on screen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Comments (6)