The Curious Case of Mollyless Metas

 (Sherlock meta by cassbel5)

In honour of International Women’s Day, I would like to take a minute to observe the extent to which Molly Hooper is ignored in the zillion pages of Sherlock meta and comment in some corners of fandom, corners that normally take great pride in their feminism.. (And here I don’t mean metas on romantic pairings but rather general discussions of Sherlock).

I get that people don’t ship it, fine. And that they ship something else. OK. But like how can you just ignore her as a character and as an important part of Sherlock’s world? Why is this unique character with a unique relationship with Sherlock hardly ever mentioned in a lot of these metas and then mostly as poor lovelorn Molly? I mean, a lot of people were all over Mofftiss after The Final Problem because “how can they reduce her to this poor girl with a crush” when what I’m seeing in a lot of these metas is people doing exactly that. Mofftiss haven’t done it, you can’t pin it on them. Together with Louise Brealey they’ve given us an interesting and important character. But even if she doesn’t appeal to you in and of herself, I’m guessing you’re interested in Sherlock’s world, right?

Let’s say that you have decided that Sherlock definitely didn’t mean the 'I love you'. OK. Let’s leave that then. But just the fact that Molly and Sherlock share a scene with so much “emotional turmoil” (Gatiss), and this toward the end of Sherlock’s Sherrinford-Musgrave journey should catch your attention in terms of her significance. And the very least we can take from it is that Sherlock lost control and went through extreme emotional drama over this woman. Can we then at least consider the possibility that she is in some way important to Sherlock? Can we stop accusing Mofftiss of being the ones who are diminishing her? Because it’s not Mofftiss who have written pages and pages and pages of meta and comments on Sherlock, his relationships and his character without even mentioning this woman or if mentioning her then mostly condescendingly implying that she’s there merely to show Sherlock’s insensitivity or lack of interest in women or perhaps, in The Final Problem, compassion.

Because, you know what, let’s even forget about The Final Problem and THAT scene. Let’s just go back and look at their relationship, their previous scenes together. Everyone goes all weak at the knees over how amazing and touching it is when we get glimpses of Sherlock the man behind the mask, the heart beneath the armour etc. Well, take a look at what Mofftiss and Benedict have put in the show for you. Take a look at Sherlock’s scenes with Molly from A Scandal in Belgravia onwards. You want the man behind the machine? Look at the man who apologises sincerely and the man who is kind and compassionate with Molly in the morgue in A Scandal in Belgravia. You want a man who is surprised and unsettled that someone sees behind his armour? Well, lab scene with Molly in The Reichenbach Fall. A man who willingly reveals himself as vulnerable, perhaps even scared and unsure of himself? Well, night lab scene with Molly in The Reichenbach Fall, everyone. A man who is gentle, sincere and physically affectionate? Hallway scene with Molly in The Empty Hearse is right there for you. A man who is playful and flirty? Go see crime solving day with Molly. A man who is completely on the back foot – lab scene with Molly in The Sign of Three. Or is it scared and helpless but trusting you want? Mind palace with Molly in His Last Vow. Compliant Sherlock anyone? Shilcott’s flat and Rosie’s christening – or “how Molly gets Sherlock Holmes to obey with a look or a single word”. Yes, these and other similar scenes are actually there in the show for us to see and learn about Sherlock. And Molly. And their relationship.

Of course she’s not a main character. Of course Sherlock’s and John’s friendship is the central relationship in the show. That’s why there are literally thousands of pages written about it. And that’s great. But I just can’t understand how there can be so much discussion about Sherlock’s character development and humanisation, about how Mofftiss have given us this amazing Sherlock who is so much more than a thinking machine, who pretends, even tries, to be a high-functioning sociopath but actually really really isn’t one… and all this discussion just ignores Molly whose interaction with him, in like 99.9% of their scenes together since S2 consistently and clearly shows you precisely that more human, “hidden” Sherlock.

This stuff is actually there in the text. The actual spoken text. (Not to mention how it is played by Benedict). But I’ll end with a question with some wild conjecture.

So, how come, when love and its redemptive force is the huge and much discussed topic of S4 in so many of these metas, how come they never wonder what it means for Sherlock to have this woman in his life who loves him so steadfastly and unconditionally? Who has loved him through all the shit he has been through and all the shit he has piled on others. (I’m deliberately not mentioning what he might feel for her. I’m not going near that here.) But this man, who seems to have felt he is undeserving of love unless he is larger than life and whom even John, for a long time, had difficulty accepting in all his humanity and fallibility, this same man is loved - truly, deeply loved by a woman who has seen his most flawed and human self, has known him at his worst and weakest, has seen him for all the beauty and horror that he is and loved him. Always. And could it even mean something to him to be reminded of this so poignantly directly before facing his worst trial and the traumatic secret of his childhood? So, you write pages and pages and pages about the redemptive power of love but never actually even mention this woman. Really?