The Final Problem: Making Sherlock Holmes a good man 

(Sherlock meta by fffinnagain, with reply by vulgarweed)

fffinnagain:

After The Lying Detective, I didn’t know what to expect for the last episode of series 4. John and Sherlock had reconciled on screen after hurting themselves and each other so deeply over the course of years. Mary had made her mark and worked herself out of the series. In two episodes, the main problems left by Series 3 had basically been resolved. What was left for the big finale?

With that trepidation in mind, I was honestly surprised by how much I enjoyed The Final Problem. It wasn’t easy to watch, but I found it powerful and convincing in ways that many others apparently did not. It tied up a lot of standing issues: the Moriarty business, from his initial interest in Sherlock to the last Miss Mes, the Why of Sherlock from series 1 onward, the Why of Mycroft and the broken Holmes Brothers’ relationship. It gave an emotional grounding to the fundamental contradiction of this Sherlock Holmes: a strongly empathic person trying to override sensitivity and compassion with extraordinary analytic ability that is (strangely) a source of great insecurity. As a closing chapter on the story of Sherlock’s progress from being a Great Man to a good one, I found it incredibly satisfying. The bizarre premise of a series of rooms on an island fortress was romantic and dramatic, but not out of style for a show that has featured delayed-action stabbings (TSOT), an un-convict-able super-villain (TRF), and a serial killer engaging in a battle of wits with every victim (ASIP).

Maybe I read too many fantasy stories about quests as a child, but I wasn’t bothered by the improbability of the plot, nor by the use of all non-protagonist characters to further this hero’s journey. This episode wasn’t about John, or Mycroft, or Molly, or even Eurus. However, their respective relationships with Sherlock have made him grow in different ways, and the sequence of crises forced on him by Eurus serve to prove how much he has changed, both to her and to himself. That the depiction of these tests put the audience (well, at least me) through the emotional wringer heightened (my) satisfaction and confidence in Sherlock’s transformation. In the moment, I didn’t care if the action did not make much sense; the why has always been more important than the how in BBC Sherlock.

Over the course of four series, Sherlock has gone from being a self-destructive solitary man-child to shouldering the responsibility of healing his own broken family, and that change in perspectives and priorities is huge. He is willing to learn from Eurus (rather than feel threatened by her abilities), to work for the sake of his parents and siblings (rather than push them away like a whiny teenager), and to care openly about his chosen family. Finally, Sherlock has the stability to treat strangers’ needs with respect and sympathy, as mature Holmes does the stories of ACD.

Besides capping the great progress of Sherlock Holmes, The Final Problem also moved me with the story of Eurus. There are plenty of stories about weirdly precocious children, but this was the first I’ve really appreciated about a younger sister, and it really hit home. Around the comic violence, Eurus is treated with sympathy, her struggle recognised and respected. This is helping me think very useful thoughts about my own familial relationships and that kind of impact is a hallmark of good art.

There was plenty more to enjoy in this episode (just as there was plenty to criticise) but a last point that mattered a lot to me was a big deviation from the usually crime-solving content of detective stories (or stories about detectives). Through the Holmes family’s history and present, we finally have a look at the consequences of violent crime and the criminal justice process on the families of the incarcerated. The temptation to forget, the importance of remembering, the intra- and inter-individual conflicts about engaging with loved ones who are or are deemed dangerous. The specifics were fanciful and not without their problems, but it’s an important change from having so many antagonists dismissed as unconditionally evil. T

he Holmes and Watson of ACD repeatedly weight the cost of arresting the guilty with consideration for their families, but on BBC Sherlock, the wrong doers tend to wind up dead or arrested without questions of fall out. We haven’t seen a real moral quandary on screen, and I hope that kind of story will pop up in some future independent story about our Baker Street Boys.

vulgarweed:

Beautiful. And yes, the description as “Love conquers all” was completely accurate. It did. It was about familial love. (Which, as Sherlock was quick and emphatic to state clearly, definitely includes John, and we can assume his daughter as well).

It’s not an easy love even for a more “normal” family, and Holmeses have rifts that can never fully heal smoothly. But I was moved to tears by Sherlock’s devotion to their violin duets - if it’s the only way to get through to her, the only connection they can safely have, it’s clearly important to him.

Could he so easily forgive her for killing his best friend so cruelly? Hard to say. What IS forgiveness exactly? Is it accepting what the other person did as OK? No, that’s not what it is.

This is, after all, a man who forgave his best friend’s wife for killing HIM (he didn’t stay dead long, of course, that does make a difference). Is that all just self-loathing, or does it indicate someone who’s learning to see sympathetic motives woven into the most unsympathetic acts?

I found a lot of things about Eurus stretched my suspension of disbelief even more than I’m used to on this show - but less so than on some other shows and movies I enjoy, so it wasn’t a dealbreaker.

I think it’s an episode that’s going to reward a lot of rewatches for me. I liked it better the second time than the first, and the third time more than the second.