Gruszczynski 1 Bibliography Andr, Didierjean, and Gobet Fernand. herlock !ol"es # an e$pert%s &ie' o( e$pertise.

.) British *ournal o( +sychology ,,, no. 1 -.//012 1/,31.4. doi2 1/.15607///81.9/8:..669,. Atkins, ;i". <arrati&e identity, practical identity and ethical subjecti&ity.) =ontinental +hilosophy >e&ie' 58, no. 5 -.//612 5613599. http277tinyurl.co"7o..yu0,. Button, ?i". potty cope and @ur >elation to Fictions.) <oAs 69, no. . -./1.12 .653.40. doi2 1/.11117j.16903//90../1/.//804.$. Good"an, *e((rey. Bhere is herlock !ol"esC) ?he outhern *ournal o( +hilosophy 61, no. . -.//51. doi2 1/.11117j../6139,9...//5.tb//,60.$. Gruszczynski, Daniel. herlock @bser&ation <otes. February 15, ./16. !arrington. Dllen B. <ation, identity, and the (ascination 'ith (orensic science in herlock !ol"es and = E.) Enternational *ournal o( =ultural tudies 1/, no. 5 -.//812 594350.. doi2 1/.118871598088,/8/0/16,. ;roon, Fred, and Alberto Foltolini. Fiction.) ?he tan(ord Dncyclopedia o( +hilosophy -Fall ./111. http277plato.stan(ord.edu7archi&es7(all./117entries7(iction7. Giebes"an, Da&id. <ecessarily, herlock !ol"es Es <ot a +erson.) Analytic +hilosophy -./1612 1315. doi2 1/.11117phib.1./5,. <eary, Gynn. ?he Dnduring +opularity o( herlock !ol"es.) <ational +ublic >adio, Dece"ber 1,, ./11. http277'''.npr.org7./1171.71,7165,46.9.7the3enduring3popularity3o(3sherlock3hol"es. +olasek, Ashley D. ur&eying the +ost3Hillennial herlock !ol"es2 A =ase (or the Great Detecti&e as a Han o( @ur ?i"es.)@$(ord *ournals 9, no. 5 -./1512 50635,5. doi2 1/.1/,57adaptation7apt//9. +oore, Benja"in. herlock !ol"es and the Geap o( Faith2 ?he Forces o( Fando" and =on&ergence in Adaptations o( the !ol"es and Batson tories.) @$(ord *ournals 9, no. . -./1512 1403181. doi2 1/.1/,57adaptation7aps/.6. Ho((at, te&en and Hark Gatiss. Sherlock2 eason ?hree. ?F. First broadcast *anuary 1,, ./16 by BB= @ne. ?obin, Fera. Bays o( reading herlock !ol"es2 the entrench"ent o( discourse blends.) Ganguage and Giterature 14, no. 1 -.//912 853,/. doi2 1/.11887/,95,68//9/9/449.

Gruszczynski . Notes Endirectly cite Bartlett and !olland (or pro&iding the necessary ter"inology. <u"ber and group si"ilar sources and gi&e a rough outline o( ho' E shall present "y paper. Articulate "y stance. Blurbs2 E belie&e in herlock !ol"es) inspired "e to e$plore the Iuestion2 e$actly 'ho or 'hat is herlock !ol"esC Does herlock !ol"es constitute personhood, is he an abstract arti(act, is his e$istence dependent on "aterial and te"poral constraintsC Bhat i( you aren%t the one thinking, but 'hat i( thinking is so"ething that happens onto youC ?his (ollo's that organizing the thoughts o( (ictional characters to be internally consistent "atches the thought patterns o( a real person # a product o( their biology, e$periences, etc. honorary personhoodC Note: In my paper, I will replace the page numbers with the proper superscripts after the cited sentences and their corresponding footnote citations.

Source One Andr, Didierjean, and Gobet Fernand. herlock !ol"es # an e$pert%s &ie' o( e$pertise.) British *ournal o( +sychology ,,, no. 1 -.//012 1/,31.4. doi2 1/.15607///81.9/8:..669,. ?his paper uses e$cerpts (ro" Doyle%s short stories to e$a"ine ho' !ol"es% "ethodology can illustrate lessons on 'hat it "eans to be an e$pert). ?he authors e$plore ho' e$perts percei&e situations di((erently (ro" no&ices, the role o( deliberate practice, the organization o( kno'ledge o( &arying le&els o( abstraction, and the i"portance o( atypical cases and errors. ?hey co"pare !ol"es% insights 'ith current research and note areas o( particular interest (or (urther research. Bhat is o( particular interest to "e is ho' the authors utilize herlock !ol"es to re(lect on the progress o( cogniti&e science, and a re"ark the authors "ade on ho' Batson is indispensable to !ol"es because Batson helps !ol"es de&elop his &erbal e$pertise. En a sense, Batson is an arti(act to !ol"es, and !ol"es is an arti(act to these researchers. Bhat is also notable is that 'e can e$tract truth (ro" (ictional characters in the sa"e 'ay that 'e deri&e kno'ledge and 'isdo" (ro" other people through their 'orld &ie' -and then (iltered by the recipient%s 'orld &ie'1. ?hus, is herlock%s insights "erely a packaged &ariation on Doyle%s belie(s -or his conte"poraries1, or can 'e attribute these thoughts to herlock as i( he 'ere an independent agentC =an 'e "ake herlock an e$pert 'ith his o'n opinions instead o( si"ply illustrating his use(ulness as a the"ed e$a"pleC

Gruszczynski 5 Source Two Atkins, ;i". <arrati&e identity, practical identity and ethical subjecti&ity.) =ontinental +hilosophy >e&ie' 58, no. 5 -.//612 5613599. http277tinyurl.co"7o..yu0,. o"e Jse(ul Focabulary Normative ethics # the study o( ho' things ought to be and ho' people ought to act Phenomenology # the study o( structures o( consciousness as e$perienced (ro" the (irst3person +@F Narrative identity # the idea that indi&iduals (or" their identity by constructing an internalized, e&ol&ing story o( the sel( (ro" their li(e e$periencesK this is 'hat gi&es indi&iduals a sense o( unity and purpose ogito !cogito ergo sum" # E think there(ore E a") post#structuralism # a rejection against the objecti&ity assu"ed by structuralis"K e"phasizes ho' signs con&ey "ultiple "eanings and that one cannot separate "eaning (ro" the discourse and perspecti&e to 'hich it is &ie'ed. ?his "o&e"ent also rejects the notion o( a 'ork ha&ing true, authorial intent $ialectic # discussing7arguing opposing ideas to (ind truth ?his article argues that hu"an understanding is narrati&e and thus our identities take a narrati&e (or". ?he author belie&es that the narrati&e "odel is a co"ple$ interplay bet'een the (irst3person -subjecti&e1, the second3person -co""unicati&e1, and third3person -objecti&e)1 -5651. ?his arises because o( our bodily e$perience # the a"biguity o( ha&ing a sensing body and being able to sense our o'n consciousness "eans that 'e can &ie' oursel&es either as objects -third3person1 or as subjects per(or"ing actions -(irst3person1-5641. ?he second3person de&elops as a result o( hu"ans being social beings -5691K 'e (or" oursel&es as a result o( social interaction and the abstraction that our body "eans (i$ed) o&er ti"e, despite gro'th or physiological changes. ?he narrati&e "odel gi&es rise to the ordering o( e&ents in ti"e, leading us to construct a past, present, and (uture. ?his is intrinsically linked to the concept o( a beginning, "iddle, and end in 'hich e&ents are "olded to (it a kind o( cause3and3e((ect relationship -5601. Edentity also arises (ro" e"bodi"entK 'e "ust appropriate the accounts o( so"e character, and that character "ust be the subject in a narrati&e. En doing so, 'e beco"e both the 'riter) and reader) o( a li(e narrati&e and constancy is established -5411. En clai"ing actions, 'e gain liability (ro" the", 'hich i"plies agency. !o'e&er, actions the"sel&es are social concepts dependent on accept rules o( conduct. ?hese actions beco"e our o'n only 'hen they are sel(3ascribed and the act o( sel(3attestation is the basis o( ethical subjecti&ity -54.35451. Further"ore, this &ie' e$plains ho' i( it 'ere possible to split onesel( in t'o, there 'ould be no practical reason to assu"e that the t'o clones 'ere the sa"e person since the actions brought upon one is no longer linked the the e((ects brought upon the other -5401. ?his article is o( i"portance because it highlights the si"ilarities bet'een a personal narrati&e and a (ictional narrati&e. ?he article also pro&ides conditions that constitute personhood, gi&ing "e a set o( criteria to deter"ine 'hether herlock !ol"es) can be considered a person and the practical considerations in&ol&ed -e$2 !e has a body in the (ictional 'orld, but not one in the physical 'orld, but can does he still Iuali(y as a person)C !o' do 'e account (or the parallel adaptations o( !ol"esC1

Gruszczynski 6 Source Three Button, ?i". potty cope and @ur >elation to Fictions.) <oAs 69, no. . -./1.12 .653.40. doi2 1/.11117j.16903//90../1/.//804.$. ?his paper addresses an issue called the operator proble" that occurs 'hen irrealists try to talk about (ictional characters outside o( the scope o( their (igured 'orld. For these purposes, irrealists are si"ply indi&iduals 'ho Iuali(y their descriptions o( (ictional entities by the (igured 'orld to 'hich they are contained. For e$a"ple, According the BB=%s herlock, herlock li&es at ..1B Baker treet.) !o'e&er, the dile""a occurs 'hen an irrealist 'ants to say herlock is taller than "e.) ?his co"parison treats herlock as both a (ictional and a real person, hence the contradiction. ?he author pro&ides t'o options in this situation2 !%" austere#irrealism # you (ind a Iuanti(iable "etric that "akes the t'o subjects "utually co"parable -e$2 According BB=%s herlock, herlock is $ inches tall. E a" y inches tall. ince $ L y, herlock 'ould be taller than "e i( he 'ere real.)1 -.641 and !&" e'tending the scope of the figured world to include the subjects in Iuestion -.681. !o'e&er, this incurs other philosophical issues. ?he author atte"pts to create &ariations on logical operators to a&oid the spotty scope) but the author concludes that the proble" does not see" to truly go a'ay. ?his article is i"portant because it "ay lend credence to the idea that treating (ictional characters are si"ply (ictional leads to interesting logical issues that presu"ably 'ould not occur i( 'e assu"e that (ictional characters e$ist beyond their (igured 'orld. En particular, i( one holds an irrealist perspecti&e, then ho' does one account (or trans(erable kno'ledge or dra'ing direct co"parisons bet'een (ictional and real scenariosC ?his is 'hat E 'ant to address in "y paper.

Source (our Good"an, *e((rey. Bhere is herlock !ol"esC) ?he outhern *ournal o( +hilosophy 61, no. . -.//51. doi2 1/.11117j../6139,9...//5.tb//,60.$. ?he author begins 'ith a bold Iuestion2 Bhere and 'hen is herlock !ol"esC) En other 'ords, the paper addresses the ontological status o( (ictional characters, ontological "eaning a Iuestion o( existence. !e brie(ly lists the (i&e contesting theories that atte"pt to ans'er said Iuestion, and they are as (ollo's2 !%" (iction anti#realism !&" Platonism -(ictional objects are transcendent abstracta e$isting in e&ery 'orld1 !)" *odalism + Possibilism !," *einongianism !-" reationism + .rtifactual Theory -?ho"asson1 ?hen, the author pro&ides e$a"ple state"ents to illustrate the point that re(erring to true) state"ents about !ol"es "akes it episte"ologically sound to consider !ol"es to ha&e at least "ere being, thereby ruling out anti3realis". !e continues by stating his pre(erence (or Arti(actual theory because the re"aining three theories (ail to account (or the notion that (ictional characters are creations o( the author. Hore speci(ically, Good"an says that a (ictional character is rigidly, historically dependent on the intentional acts o( its creator or creators). Additionally, (ictional characters depend on others to re"ain in e$istence through "ore 'orks, adaptations, or allusions. Et is (ro" here that the

Gruszczynski 4 author de&iates (ro" ?ho"asson%s theory and clai"s that so"e (ictional characters do indeed ha&e spatial3te"poral locations. For instance, characters ha&e a te"poral location because they are brought into e$istence at so"e point in ti"e and 'ill ine&itably cease to e$ist 'hen others no longer perpetuate said character. ?here see" to also be spatial boundaries one can place around a character 'hich 'ould i"ply a spatial location, the e$a"ple being that herlock !ol"es is an Darthly entity). @&erall, this source pro&ides one philosopher%s take on the (ictional characters issue. ?here doesn%t see" to be "uch consensus on the issue, hence the author%s "oti&ation (or pro&iding a sensible argu"ent to the discussion. E intend to use his argu"ent a stepping stone to gauge "y o'n &ie's on the topic, being sure to discuss at 'hat aspects E agree and disagree on.

Source (ive Gruszczynski, Daniel. herlock @bser&ation <otes. February 15, ./16. ?hese are "y obser&ation notes on the three episodes o( eason ?hree o( herlock. ?hey record and detail the narrati&e that un(olds a(ter the t'o years o( herlock%s death hoa$. E intend to use these notes to build a case on ho' herlock !ol"es e"bodies a real person 'ith thoughts, (eelings, and "oti&ations that parallel the physical 'orld. E 'ill analyze the 'ay these characters display agency and discuss 'hether or not agency in their (igured 'orld constitutes agency in other 'orlds -the real 'orld) 1. E 'ill co"pare ho' herlock%s (ans treat hi" as an abstract arti(act the sa"e 'ay (ans o( the sho' treat herlock !ol"es) as an abstract arti(act and deter"ine 'hether it is necessary (or a physical herlock !ol"es to ha&e e$isted in order to dra' an accurate analogy. E 'ill also use "y notes to pro&ide e$a"ples on ho' the audience can gain insights (ro" this (igured 'orld and deter"ine i( the &ery act o( trans(erable kno'ledge (ro" a 'ork o( (iction establishes its e$istence.

Source Si' !arrington. Dllen B. <ation, identity, and the (ascination 'ith (orensic science in herlock !ol"es and = E.) Enternational *ournal o( =ultural tudies 1/, no. 5 -.//812 594350.. doi2 1/.118871598088,/8/0/16,. ?his paper atte"pts to dra' the parallels bet'een the popularity o( herlock !ol"es and current cri"e3scene in&estigation sho's -= E, Ga' and @rder1 as pro"oting larger cultural narrati&es about science, the indi&idual, and national identity. En both cases, 'e ha&e in&estigati&e parties 'ho use cutting3edge technology to assist the" in identi(ying and apprehending cri"inals. Both series rely on a (or"ulaic structure that rea((ir"s underlying ideals -the i"portance o( procedure, rational e$planations (or any e&ent # like cooby Doo, preser&ing order, the syste") 'orks1. Additionally, both cases e"phasize the scienti(ic "ethod abo&e the characterization o( its actors -5981. Bhen there is success, it goes the key indi&idual-s1 - herlock, the lead in&estigator1 rather than to the entire tea" in&ol&ed. ?he irony behind both tales is that they pro&ide escapis" through rationalization, and in "any cases, the "ysteries the"sel&es reIuire a certain suspension o( disbelie( -58/1. ?he author continues by saying that Doyle%s decision to "ake the stories discrete yet interrelated "ight ha&e in(luenced the rise o( episodic plots on tele&ision and (il" -59,1.

Gruszczynski 9 Bith regards to cultural and national identity, one can see the legacy e((ects o( Doyle%s ideology. Doyle hi"sel( 'as an i"perialist, and his tales subtlety e"phasize the need to ha&e a strong state to keep order -(or ci&ilised peoples1 (ro" dangerous cri"inals and terrorists-5811. ?his "akes the tales a product o( its ti"e since the 10,/s 'as a ti"e o( i"perialist e$pansion and also a ti"e o( uphea&al (or "any disen(ranchised 'orkers, "inorities, and i""igrants. @ne also sees the e((ects o( ho' scienti(ic thinking is not inherently objecti&e by re(lecting society%s biases -e$2 Go"broso%s study on cri"inal pro(iles1-58/1. = E%s take on scienti(ic inIuiry and their e"phasis on corpses and physical appearances do'nplay the i"portance o( socially constructed identities and reduces indi&iduals to the su" o( their parts, 'hich is proble"atic because it not only "isrepresents actual scienti(ic inIuiry but in&okes so"e o( the &ery prejudices -nor"ati&e identity, gender reduced to crude biology, etc1 that arises out o( a((ir"ing the do"inant ideology -58535891. ?hus, this paper pro&ides the historical and cultural conte$t needed to understand !ol"es% role as an abstract arti(act and 'hat his legacy "eans on a "acro le&el. i"ilarly, one can "ake the argu"ent that like any other indi&idual, !ol"es e"bodies zeitgeist, and that i( one can "ake a distinction bet'een !ol"es% id -personality1 and superego -internalized societal ideals1, then one has a co"pelling argu"ent (or !ol"es% personhood.

Source Seven ;roon, Fred, and Alberto Foltolini. Fiction.) ?he tan(ord Dncyclopedia o( +hilosophy -Fall ./111. http277plato.stan(ord.edu7archi&es7(all./117entries7(iction7. ?o begin, E 'ould like to "ake a distinction bet'een the t'o types o( Iuestions that E a" asking2 !%" *etaphysical /uestion: Bhat is the nature o( a (ictional entity such as herlock !ol"esC !&" Ontological /uestion: Do (ictional entities e$istC Bhy assu"e that there are (ictional characters to begin 'ithC Hetaphysics deals 'ith the nature o( reality by de(ining and describing essential concepts such as being, identity, ti"e, space, etc. ?hus, you "ay choose to read the (irst Iuestion as (ollo's2 Bhat does it "ean to be (ictionalC En contrast, ontology studies the nature o( e$istence. Bhen so"eone re"arks that herlock !ol"es isn%t real), that person is "aking an ontological state"ent about (ictional characters by concluding that on so"e le&el, (ictional characters do not e$ist in the sa"e 'ay that you or E do. ?here(ore, the second Iuestion is "uch "ore (unda"ental than the (irst in that one is Iuestioning 'hether or not (iction &s non3(iction is e&en a &alid dichoto"y to "ake. <o', there are t'o basic sides to this debate. @n one side, you ha&e the fiction antirealists. ?hese people deny the e$istence o( (ictional characters. +eriod. ?hey aren%t e&en concerned 'ith the "etaphysical Iuestions because their ans'er to the ontological Iuestion is a resounding no. @n the other side, you ha&e the fiction realists, people 'ho belie&e that in so"e sense (ictional entities e$ist. !o'e&er, one can (urther di&ide the realist ca"p into subcategories. ?his includes possibilism. Basically, this "eans that (ictional characters do not e$ist in our 'orld but could e$ist in other 'orlds in 'hich their ontological datu" -e&idence o( their e$istence1 holds true. Giebes"an addresses the

Gruszczynski 8 proble" 'ith this &ie'K na"ely, ho' do 'e deter"ine 'hich o( the possible herlock !ol"es is the herlock !ol"esC A sounder &ariation is to consider that Doyle%s conception o( !ol"es is an indi&idual that intends to realize the tales in so"e other 'orld in 'hich the stories are possible to actualize. !o'e&er, this "akes co"parisons di((icult to do because one 'ould ha&e to say herlock is possibly cle&erer than other detecti&es.) !olding this &ie' does not su((iciently e$plain 'hy 'e hold opinions (or (iction characters i( nothing about the" is concretely co"parable. ?hen, there is *einongianism, the idea that (ictional characters mere substance, lacking any sort o( spatial3te"poral being that 'ould considered existence. ?hey ha&e the properties gi&en to the" in their tales, both e$plicitly and in(erred. ?hen, there is creationism, the notion that the authors the"sel&es actively create the -abstract1 (ictional entities in Iuestion. !o'e&er, this calls to Iuestion the nature o( the creati&e process, the i"plicit creation o( characters lacking labels, or e&en 'orse, the creation o( characters 'ith identical properties originating (ro" di((erent sources. @ne subset o( creationis" is that (ictional characters are abstract arti(acts lacking de(inite properties -according to the 'ork)1 as a true object 'ould, but unlike Heinongianis", this idea does account (or the notion that (ictional entities are products o( the hu"an "ind. So basically, this source provides the terminology and bac0ground needed to understand the premise of my paper. This is the formal introduction to the topic, and this will lead into my other sources !sources written by authors with a viewpoint on this topic, and well as Sherloc0# specific information". 1hile this source is 2argon#heavy, I do thin0 it is an essential and even beneficial way to brea0 down such an abstract topic so that it is understandable to anyone who can follow abbreviated logical arguments. This source helped me truly understand what conversation was going on around my topic of in/uiry, and I was guide to have this as a reference when other sources made allusions I was unaware of. *y intentions are to avoid 2argon unless necessary without losing precision since I thin0 that I can write the bul0 of my paper in plain 3nglish. Nonetheless, some words are necessary and hence when I introduce these terms, I will do my best to provide a bare#bones definition for brevity.

Source 3ight Giebes"an, Da&id. <ecessarily, herlock !ol"es Es <ot a +erson.) Analytic +hilosophy -./1612 1315. doi2 1/.11117phib.1./5,. E"portantly, note that the sole conclusion o( the argu"ent is that necessarily, !ol"es is not a person. ?his is co"patible 'ith the popular &ie' that !ol"es is an abstract arti(act.) o"e Jse(ul Focabulary 4olmes/ue re(ers to the Iualities Doyle assigns to herlock !ol"es -such as being a detecti&e, li&ing on Baker treet, etc.1 Supervaluationism re(ers to the &agueness in re(erence. ?he purpose o( this paper is to clari(y a position "ade by philosopher aul ;ripke about the personhood) o( herlock !ol"es by pro&iding a "ore rigorous argu"ent to'ards the notion that necessarily, herlock !ol"es is not a person. Giebes"an%s argu"ent depends on three conditions2 5%6 na"es are rigid designators, 5&6 herlock !ol"es) is a na"e, and 5)6 herlock !ol"es) does not

Gruszczynski 0 re(er to a physical person 'ho Doyle "erely described -51. Gi&en this, the argu"ent (ollo's (our principles2 5%6 the necessity o( identity, 5&6 that t'o distinct things could%&e been !ol"esIue, 5)6 that i( !ol"es is a possible person, then being !ol"esIue is su((icient (or being !ol"es, and 5,6 identities are transiti&e -5341. ?he rest o( the paper (or"alizes an argu"ent by contradiction, pro&ides possible objections and rebuttals -'ith so"e Iuali(iers1, and concludes 'ith a su""ary. !o'e&er, the section o( interest co"es (ro" the 14th (ootnote re(erring to !ol"es as an actual abstract arti(act -91. E 'ould like to e$plore and Iuestion the de(inition o( person) in this conte$t as 'ell as e$plore the gray area in Giebes"an%s conditions. Source Nine <eary, Gynn. ?he Dnduring +opularity o( herlock !ol"es.) <ational +ublic >adio, Dece"ber 1,, ./11. http277'''.npr.org7./1171.71,7165,46.9.7the3enduring3popularity3o(3sherlock3hol"es. ?his <+> article describes ho' the ad&entures o( herlock !ol"es continue to endure and adapt to "odern audiences through re"akes and reani"ations -incorporationsC1 o( the Fictorian era sleuth. ?he article begins by noting that !ol"es is o&er a century old and then goes on to present three authors% take on !ol"es and 'hat he represents -based on their reinterpretations1 . ?he (irst author Anthony !oro'itz re"arks on the allure ca"e (ro" !ol"es% setting # the "ystiIue o( late 1,th century Gondon. ?his inspired his o'n "ystery no&el, adopting herlock and Batson as principal characters. ?he second author and technical ad&iser Ges ;linger highlights herlock%s physical skill set -as e"phasized in the >obert Do'ning *r. herlock "o&ies1. Author Gaurie ;ing re3i"agines herlock as a young (e"inist 'o"an and notes that herlock 'as the bridge into the "odern era, using technology and "ethods that 'ould beco"e the (oundation to "odern (orensics. ?he article ends 'ith ;linger re"arking that !ol"es% appeal co"es (ro" his uniIue sense o( justice and his outcast role. @&erall, this article pro&ides e$a"ples o( ho' indi&iduals ha&e co"e to continue herlock%s legacy as 'ell as sho' ho' this (ictitious character has a((ected real people, gaining an abstract (or" o( realistic legiti"acy. Source Ten +olasek, Ashley D. ur&eying the +ost3Hillennial herlock !ol"es2 A =ase (or the Great Detecti&e as a Han o( @ur ?i"es.)@$(ord *ournals 9, no. 5 -./1512 50635,5. doi2 10.1093/adaptation/apt006. In May o !01!" #uinness $orld %ecords announced that Sherlock &olmes has appeared on screen more than any other human literary character" surpassin' even &amlet by orty(ei'ht portrayals.) *p 3+,- . /his 0as since he irst appeared on screen in 1916 and on sta'e in 1+99 ?his article sur&eys the three "ost recent adaptations o( herlock !ol"es *occurrin' 0ithin the past six years-1 the $arner 2rothers ilms starrin' %obert 3o0ney 4r." 2256s Sherlock, and =B %s 7lementary, and attempts to ind the underlyin' similarities on ho0 each o these turned the traditional detective hero into a postmodern anti(hero. /he author remarks ho0 each re(ima'inin' o the sleuth leads to lar'er hurdlers on ho0 to make each reincarnation uni8ue yet relatable. 9olasek traces the inception o the postmodern Sherlock as a :acerbic social outcast) to &ouse M.3., a sho' that "ore closely rese"bles a "ystery 'ith allusions to !ol"es rather than the typical "edical dra"a -like D>1 -5041. ?he author links the de(ining Iuality o( the antihero &ersion-s1 o( !ol"es as his "anic dri&e to

Gruszczynski , sol&e "ysteries -taking precedence o( the original !ol"es% sense o( justice1. Do'ney%s !ol"es is obstinate, acidic yet ju&enile in outlook, and the (il" e"phasizes !ol"es% physical capabilities (or "ass appeal -5081. ?his !ol"es has the bra&ado o( a rock n% roll star e&en though the "o&ies stay true to the original stories% ti"e period and setting -5001. =u"berbatch%s herlock -BB=%s herlock1 is cold, arrogant, and occasionally crosses the social and ethical line 'hilst on a case. ?his herlock sees e"otions as distractions, and 'hile he displays so"e ju&enile beha&ior, this herlock see"s less helpless -but "ore dangerous1 -5,/35,11. ?he sho'%s selling point is it%s irre&erence and co"ple$ characterizations a"idst (ast3paced dialogue. En ter"s o( setting, the sho' uses conte"porary Gondon as the backdrop. Hiller%s herlock -Dle"entary1 is "ore e"otionally3(ocused and displays obsessi&e and addicti&e beha&ior. !e see"s the "ost realistic o( the three interpretations. Again, this herlock sho's a stunted and erratic personality that others -like Batson1 "ust help "anage. ?he sho' is set in conte"porary <M= -'ith Batson played by Gucy Giu1 and (ollo's the tradition o( cri"e dra"as like = E or =old =ase, albeit 'ith less e"phasis on the bureaucratic procedures. !is antihero Iuality is his brokenness # ho' he "anages to sol&e di((icult cases despite his setbacks sho's his intellect-5,135,.1. ;verall" I intend to use these comparisons to sho0 ho0 the postmodern Sherlock has adapted to it the ne0er 'eneration6s 0orldvie0 and ho0 audiences have come to seek meanin' throu'h these adaptations. Sherlock6s trans ormation over the years can be seen as :personal 'ro0th) in the sense that one chan'es over time to adapt to the social environment. /his is not dissimilar to a person6s mutations over time in that our essential 8ualities and appeal remain intrinsic. Source 3leven +oore, Benja"in. Sherlock &olmes and the <eap o =aith1 /he =orces o =andom and 5onver'ence in >daptations o the &olmes and $atson Stories.) ;x ord 4ournals 6" no. ! *!013-1 1,+(1?1. doi1 1/.1/,57adaptation7aps/.6. -!ere 'ould be a cool argu"ent2 Gi&en that *esus 'as presu"ably a historical person shrouded in a'e and "yth, and that people ha&e come to :believe) in him and his miracles/teachin's" i 0e 0ere to discover that he 0as actually not a livin' person" does 4esus cease to be a :person) in the minds o his ollo0ers@ Similarly" does this ervor to0ards 'randiose individuals seem to Austi y their existence" re'ardless o their lack o physical presence@En this paper, +oore suggests that the role o( de&out (ans are si"ilar to (aith3based practices, de&eloping so"e o( the characteristics re"iniscent to religion. En particular, +oore 'ants to address the herlockians and belie&ers), people 'ho pride the"sel&es on their rationality and adherence to logic, and deter"ine i( their underlying "oti&ations are ironically (aith3dri&en. +oore then describes three suggestions that result (ro" his thought3e$peri"ent2 5%6 di((erences in adaptations are si"ilar to di((erences in sects or doctrines, 5&6 si"ilarities bet'een adaptations and the Gospels, and 5)6 (ando" is at odds 'ith the gro'ing "arket and popularity o( !ol"es -14,1. Et begins as such2 the theologian >onald A. ;no$ had noted the religious ele"ents underlying the stories in 1,11 'ith the essay tudies in the Giterature o( herlock !ol"es.) @thers 'ho beca"e a'are o( ;no$%s essay 'ere the ones 'ho started herlock (an clubs, the (irst true herlockians # doused in ritual and engaging in care(ully researched play that ele&ated !ol"es and Batson to real3li(e status and treated Doyle as si"ply the literary agent) -19/1. +oore then "akes the case that the stories 'ere actually "elodra"as in that "uch o( !ol"es% "ethodology contains errors and al"ost appears to be a leap o( (aith -1911. For e$a"ple, !ol"es% reasoning 'as not deducti&e, but rather abducti&e -the

Gruszczynski 1/ pre"ises not guaranteeing the conclusion1. Et calls into Iuestion ho' !ol"es "anaged to be so success(ul gi&en his reliance on 'hat appears to be (aulty reasoning. +oore i"plies that Doyle had intended herlock to be a "odel o( the ne' "an (or the ne' age) and hence e"bodies the ideals that he does -1911. herlock%s death) in the >eichenbach Fall and subseIuent resurrection "irrors *esus, and herlock%s "ythos status is (acilitated by those closest to hi", his disciples), o( 'ho" herlock had inspired a ne' 'ay o( thinking about the 'orld -19.1. Bith regards to the second point, +oore 'rites that one can think o( the original series as the =anon), a su""ation o( the "any (eats !ol"es had acco"plished. Dach adaptation o( the =anon is like a Gospel told (ro" the point3o(3&ie' o( a (ello' herlockian. o"e ha&e "arked the inconsistencies presented in the te$t as errors on Batson%s part, hu"an errors. @thers 'ho ha&e criticized the stories ha&e done so as a cultural backlash against the idealized "odel surrounding that (ictional 'orld as 'ell as a rejection o( the literary hero -1951. /he rest o the paper does comparisons bet0een #uy %itchie6s Sherlock &olmes and BB=%s Sherlock and their cine"atic and narrati&e goals. ?hat part isn%t really i"portant. !o'e&er, this sentence is o( particular interest to "e2 But it is notable that e&en in "ore restrained (an (iction, there see"s to be a cra&ing by (ans to either 'rite the"sel&es into the stories, or to e$plore their o'n (eelings about (orbidden lo&e using !ol"es and Batson as ciphers -1901. ) ?his is an e$a"ple o( ho' (ans and the audience use herlock to e$plore their o'n identities and 'orld &ie'. ;verall" this source nicely complements my other sources on ho0 one reads these stories and interpretations. /his author con irms the idea o the modern Sherlocks abandonin' the hero role as 0ell as provides more insi'ht into the Sherlockian subculture. /his source provides valuable contributions to my overall analysis on the nature o Sherlock &olmes *and his similarities to not necessarily ictional but other lar'er(than(li e individuals-.

Source Twelve ?obin, Fera. Bays o( reading herlock !ol"es2 the entrench"ent o( discourse blends.) Ganguage and Giterature 14, no. 1 -.//912 853,/. doi2 1/.11887/,95,68//9/9/449. 3oyle bio'rapher Martin 2ooth *199?- reports that the 2ritish post o ice had received letters addressed to &olmes until at least 19,0.) Sherloc0ians # (ans o( the !ol"es storiesK they (or" a discourse co""unity na7ve believer # so"eone 'ho truly belie&ed that !ol"es 'as a real, breathing person ironic believer . someone 0ho acetiously treated &olmes and $atson as real people ?his paper e$a"ines ho' a single te$t can pro&ide nu"erous "eanings -readings1 depending on the indi&idual%s "ental spaces and 'orld&ie'. ?he author uses the e$a"ple o( herlock !ol"es to "ake a co"parison bet'een ho' being either a naN&e belie&er or ironic belie&er a((ects ho' you read the stories, and conseIuently, a((ects ho' your brain internalizes the in(or"ation -843891. ?he author starts by e$plaining ho' readers construct the te$ts that they read, na"ely that the discourse consists o( e$ternal (actors -the physical and cultural circu"stances1 blended and assi"ilated through the reader%s conceptualization o( these circu"stances to (or" situations and sche"atic (ra"es. ?hese (ra"es and situations allo' the reader to "ake sense o( 'hat is going on in ter"s o( (a"iliar re(erences -893881. <arrati&es e&oke nu"erous situations and (ra"es that the reader then has to use to understand not only

Gruszczynski 11 the plot, but rhetorical de&ices, the relationship bet'een the author and narrator -Doyle &s Batson1, etc. ?he identi(ication o( characters occurs as one identi(ies actors in a play, through their consistency bet'een label -na"e1 and their personality, gestures, &erbal patterns, and actions -801. ?o continue, the author describes the neurological basis behind readers getting lost in the book.) i"ply put, the reader is both i""ersed and non3i""ersed 'ithin the 'ork in that, on one le&el, our brains pro&ide a suspension o( disbelie( so that the 'ords that 'e read are si"ulated as i( 'e are 'ithin the do"ain o( discourse, 'hile at the sa"e ti"e, 'e hold the "eta3&ie' that the 'ork is still a (iction. ?he naN&e belie&er, 'hich historically "ade up the ne'ly literate British 'orking class, ha&ing been e$posed to (e' books other than the Bible, 'ere ill3eIuipped to handle the certain Iualities o( (iction that the ironic belie&er could. @ne such skill lacking 'as the necessity to Iuestion the &eracity o( the author and thus did not hold the "eta3&ie' that the stories they read 'ere in any 'ay (alse -011. En contrast, the ironic belie&er engaged in sel(3delusion to achie&e7"i"ic the reactions o( a naN&e belie&er 'hile still holding the "eta &ie' that the stories are (iction -0.1. ?he result is a co"ple$ interplay in 'hich, on a super(icial le&el, "akes their 'ritings and "usings indistinguishable (ro" a naN&e belie&er. ?he herlockians 'ho engaged in play(ul pretend did so using hyper(or"ality and intonational e$aggeration -061. ?hey had the e$tra (ra"e that included the scholarly kno'ledge about the 'orks needed to e"ulate and (ill in the gaps o( Doyle%s 'orks. /his paper is important to my topic in that it complements the ideas presented in a previous source about the philosophical ori'in o iction and constructin' narratives. /his takes that source one step urther" explainin' 0hat happens 0hen 0e read iction *kno0in'ly or unkno0in'ly-" and this seems to su''est a luid concept o iction. 3oes the nature o iction depend on the audience6s a0areness@