• Všechny velikosti
  • Velké
  • Malé
  • Barevné
  • Černobílé
  • Jen barevné
Sherlock (PBS) TV Series Season 3. 2014. Shown from left: Benedict Cumberbatch (as Sherlock Holmes), Martin Freeman (as Dr. John Watson). Photo courtesy of PBS/Photofest.  Scholarship on Holmes has long rec- ognized the centrality of Watson’s trust to an appreciation of the stories. As early as 1925, Viktor Shklovsky saw Watson playing a dual role as the narra- tor who “tells us about Sherlock Holmes and conveys to us his expectation of the latter’s decision, while he himself is not privy to the detective’s mental process” (104) and as an “eternal fool” (104) to the often reticent Holmes. Both Christopher Metress and James Krasner complicate this reading: Metress ex- plores Watson’s complicity in guarding Holmes’s stories, telling them only with the sleuth’s consent, and thus “lead[ing] he double life of detective and dip- omat” (45). Metress is thinking here about “The Second Stain” (1904), but his argument is equally applicable to the rest of the canon (45). Krasner, on the other hand, hones in on Watson’s “frus- trated desire to behold and comprehend that detecting” (425), shifting the blame from Watson to Holmes—‘Holmes ei-   her does not speak, or will not explain” 425)—and this frustration from Watson to us (432-33). Recent work on Holmes has drawn links between the narrative strategies of Conan Doyle’s stories, how they figure in adaptations such as Sherlock (2010-—), and the social and political climates in which they were produced and on which they closely reflected. Ellen Burton Harrington, for instance, reveals how Sherlock employs Conan Doyle’s stories “about social or- der and invites a kind of Victorian nos-   For Harrington, Sherlock allays some of our contemporary fears by “allow- ing us to enjoy Sherlock’s rivalry with Moriarty and the satisfying way that this representative villain might be chal- lenged and potentially defeated” (73). Conversely, Darcie Rives-East has ar- gued that the perils represented in Sher- lock are politicized: the series, “like its nineteenth-century counterpart responds to the ongoing British middle class fear of the Other based on race, class, and gender” (44). Sherlock’s popularity owes much to the British public’s anxi- eties, following the 7/7 attacks, “regard- ing its government’s ability to contain and contend with threats, foreign and domestic, to the British nation” (Rives- East 44). The powers of “all-seeing and
Sherlock (PBS) TV Series Season 3. 2014. Shown from left: Benedict Cumberbatch (as Sherlock Holmes), Martin Freeman (as Dr. John Watson). Photo courtesy of PBS/Photofest. Scholarship on Holmes has long rec- ognized the centrality of Watson’s trust to an appreciation of the stories. As early as 1925, Viktor Shklovsky saw Watson playing a dual role as the narra- tor who “tells us about Sherlock Holmes and conveys to us his expectation of the latter’s decision, while he himself is not privy to the detective’s mental process” (104) and as an “eternal fool” (104) to the often reticent Holmes. Both Christopher Metress and James Krasner complicate this reading: Metress ex- plores Watson’s complicity in guarding Holmes’s stories, telling them only with the sleuth’s consent, and thus “lead[ing] he double life of detective and dip- omat” (45). Metress is thinking here about “The Second Stain” (1904), but his argument is equally applicable to the rest of the canon (45). Krasner, on the other hand, hones in on Watson’s “frus- trated desire to behold and comprehend that detecting” (425), shifting the blame from Watson to Holmes—‘Holmes ei- her does not speak, or will not explain” 425)—and this frustration from Watson to us (432-33). Recent work on Holmes has drawn links between the narrative strategies of Conan Doyle’s stories, how they figure in adaptations such as Sherlock (2010-—), and the social and political climates in which they were produced and on which they closely reflected. Ellen Burton Harrington, for instance, reveals how Sherlock employs Conan Doyle’s stories “about social or- der and invites a kind of Victorian nos- For Harrington, Sherlock allays some of our contemporary fears by “allow- ing us to enjoy Sherlock’s rivalry with Moriarty and the satisfying way that this representative villain might be chal- lenged and potentially defeated” (73). Conversely, Darcie Rives-East has ar- gued that the perils represented in Sher- lock are politicized: the series, “like its nineteenth-century counterpart responds to the ongoing British middle class fear of the Other based on race, class, and gender” (44). Sherlock’s popularity owes much to the British public’s anxi- eties, following the 7/7 attacks, “regard- ing its government’s ability to contain and contend with threats, foreign and domestic, to the British nation” (Rives- East 44). The powers of “all-seeing and
Při pokusu o sdílení polohy došlo k chybě
Více informací
odkazuje na služby nejen od Seznam.cz.

© 1996–2025 Seznam.cz, a.s.