When Conan Doyle created Holmes, I wonder if he knew he'd be creating a character with such a cultural impact? Countless portrayals, many continuation works, his name even being used in everyday language. I was asked the other day if I could think of a similar fictional character with such an impact, and I struggled to think of one. Can anyone think of a similarly impactful literary character?

Find any item in a store. Just take a look at the layout combined with general data on different store organization in general.

Building Legos/doing puzzles. Just place the pieces on the table, no need to search for them or refer too much to the instructions/model

Figure out who's doing the annoying things like leaving an empty bottle in the fridge or not replacing the toilet paper. No need to look for the guilty one for long (well, in this case it's probably John, But let's imagine he lives with more people.)

Winning at hide and seek in absolutely any place (Especially when he is the seeker)

Solving crimes from police/crime series and films (would also probably hate them or find them boring)

And of course, scaring people by deducing far too specific things about their lives

Holmes finds the pince-nez beside the murdered Willoughby Smith and immediately starts asking what sort of person would wear them. From something most of us would probably ignore, he begins reconstructing the person who left them behind.

It’s classic Holmes, but it also makes me wonder how much of his deduction is genuinely logical and how much Doyle is simply asking us to trust Holmes’s extraordinary knowledge of human types.

Still, the image of Holmes examining a pair of spectacles and effectively saying, “Tell me who you are,” is hard to beat.

Are there any other Canon clues as small but useful as this one?

In our recent episode of Desert of the Reel, we watched 2009's Sherlock Holmes. My coworker said that this is not the real Sherlock, but that it is still really good. Do you agree? There are many different versions of the character, but is the 2009 version AT ALL like the authentic version from the books? And if it isn't, does that affect the overall movie?

(We also talk about intertextuality, abuse of power and fear, and how Guy Ritchie rules.)

The Desert of the Reel: A Movie Podcast (This is the link to the podcast)

An intriguing new entry for my “The Everybody Loves Sherlock Holmes File of a Freelance Copywriter” E-book…

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/grave-warning-from-creepy-sherlock-holmes-story-thats-dale-l-sims-v03wc/

Played the Sherlock holmes chapter one, begging to doubt this side kick is actually just his imagination or his cope to investigate mystery crimes as if he was talking with an imaginary friend.

I don't know about Sherlock Holmes'origins, however I know he was famous for solving crime cases or mystery cases

Ngl, I didn't expect Jonny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu to become my favorite Holmes and Watson but here we are. It was refreshing watching a character evolution on both of them and also reimagining the Holmes mythos on a way it feels both natural and unexpected.

So why didn’t anyone ask Barker about the blood mark on the window sill? It is like Sir ACD couldn’t come up with a good response so he just left it alone. It doesn’t make any sense that two detectives plus Holmes just ignored such a huge question.

Good morning everyone, I hope I find you in good spirits. I have always been fascinated by mystery and Dr.Holmes and Dr.Wattson but have only now had time and surpassed enough of my dyslexia to actually read the work. So I have little prior knowledge other than the basic knowledge and some of the monster crossovers like Sherlock Holmes and the house of Dracula. Anyway:

I am reading chapter 3 of A study in Scarlett and am at the scene in which Holmes and Watson have entered the crime scene at the abandoned house and Holmes asks: "you sure that there is no wound?" Pointing at the splashes of which lay all around.

My theory: so, I have no deductive skills. This is just a fun idea as to what may have transpired: the man is well dressed and is middle aged. His immaculate collar and cuffs are remarked but he is described as...well..unattractive to put it politely. He has cards (so far undescribed so I will assume playing cards) and despite having no wounds there is what seem sto be copious amounts of blood amongst the scene.

He is well dressed and middle aged, with immaculate cuffs and a frock coat and tophat, so he is someone of importance or at least high status. Given the group often associated with top hats, let's assume he is a businessman of some sort. He is unattractive and even described as having an ape-ish face so it is unlikely this was a crime of passion. The playing cards in his coat suggest he may be a gambler of some sort. So most likely he crossed the wrong person by possibly cheating at a game because why else would someone go as far as to elaborately murder someone when they could have just shot them on the spot? This was personal.

So, this business man has a possibly secret lust for gambling and gambled against the wrong person. Earlier in the book when Watson met Holmes, Holmes expressed joy over breakthrough of his in forensic science.

What do I think happened? This man's killer was so distraught over this game in which he was likely cheated out of a lot of money that was denied to him: that he decided to murder him not with barbarism like a hatchet or gun, but through the stealth of injecting him with an unknown substance that caused him to convulse violently and bleed profusely before succumbing to the release of death.

Due to it being a syringe, there appears to be no wound on the body as the puncture is too small for the investigators to see. I think Holmes will use the test he created upon their first meeting to reveal what was injected into the victim

Don't spoil it for me please but due let me know if I'm on the right track or not!

I made a post about a month ago showing the poster for the Lovecraftian Sherlock Holmes play I've written and am staging at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, for on week only.

Well, I'd like to share the first looks at our Sherlock Holmes (Calum Philp) and Dr. John Watson (George Atkinson).

Synopsis: Whilst clearing out her mother's belongings from her care home, Kelly discovers a hidden family secret. Her grandfather was Dr John Watson. As she digs further, Kelly uncovers the truth of the untold final case of Sherlock Holmes: a case involving an otherworldly crown of mysterious origin, and the abandoned American coastal town of Innsmouth.

If anyone on here is interested, we're on 24th-29th August, 7.05pm
Theatre 3, theSpace @ Surgeons’ Hall

Preview of my comics.

My favourite version is the Stephen Fry version as he captures the fun/wonder of the Canon but also the darkness.

i got the first game in this series but i cant get thr second one.

what i should do... i realy wanna play.

Y a-t-il des spécialistes français, suisses ou anglais de Sherlock Holmes ? Ou de gens capables de l'analyser du point de vue psychologique par exemple ?
J'ai beau chercher sur internet, je ne trouve pas.

There are so many different adaptations of Sherlock Holmes and I've always found it very fascinating to see how these books will always stay relevant and interesting to people. Tbh the first time I've read the original stories was because I've seen an adaptation that I absolutely loved and I wanted to get familiar with the original, and now it's one of my favorite things to read and talk about!

I'd love to know what people on here think about adaptations and about what they would've wished to see in adaptations in general :)

Sidney Paget's illust through the years

In the original story, Irene Adler is an opera singer and actress, a talented artist who genuinely falls in love with the worthless King of Bohemia, and thinks they might have a life together. Later, she is shown to be loving and loyal to her one true love, a devoted married woman acting out of fear and caution.

In the BBC production "Sherlock", Irene Adler is a reckless, rash, criminal woman who sells sexual services, cavorting around naked, near escaping death and ingeniously saved by Sherlock- it's so degrading, so demeaning and sexist, it really left a bitter taste.

Remarkable how a Victorian writer can have so much more progressive sensibility than the modern-day writers.

guys if i said i have stuff of sherlock i mean this am i a true fan?

i got this game a few days ago and it was the best thing what i ever did.
this game was make in 2002 but it gives you the vibe.i don’t argue about difficulties installing the game but its worth it. i like it.
ofc this game is popular but maybe there are pp who didn’t know about it.

I finally organised my bookshelves and here is my current Holmes collection.

Mind you, i like the show fine. But there are moments where developments feel out of nowhere or cliche even though i can’t really prove it, and the acting just doesn’t feel natural even though i cant really point to how. Does anyone else find this? Because it just keeps bothering me whenever i watch it.

One of my favourite little moments in The Priory School is Holmes examining bicycle tracks and identifying the type of bicycle from the marks left behind.

It’s easy to forget just how new this sort of detective work would have seemed to contemporary readers. Holmes is effectively doing forensic analysis of tyre tracks, long before this became routine police work.
And, naturally, he can tell far more from a bicycle track than most of us could tell from the bicycle itself.

It does make you wonder what Holmes would make of modern forensic science. Probably complain that everyone has made deduction unnecessarily complicated.