Category: Uncategorized

The original claim I’m revising is example E:

“In the TV series Veronica Mars, Veronica has a series of flashbacks suggesting that she lives too much in the past. (A Generalization)

 

Revised,

 

With Veronica Mars’ flashbacks, the viewer is able to see a troubled past through the lens of a young woman who has used such events to build herself up into a confident and straightforward detective, not burdened with such thoughts but rather embracing them to make her a stronger person within a dangerous world.

In class today we joined forces to try and combat what Rosenwasser and Stephen call “Counterproductive Habits of Mind” (See pages 42-71 in Writing Analytically).  These habits do not bolster analytical thinking, but instead they “shut down perception and arrest potential ideas at the cliché stage.”

Rosenwasser and Stephen categorize these problems into four types: a Premature Leap (43), The Judgment Reflex (44), Generalizing (46), or Naturalizing our Assumptions (47).  Since, as a class, we are still struggling with some of these counterproductive habits of mind, I asked you to work on revising some examples of these common mistakes.

I am going to post the statements for revision below.  Instead of writing a full reaction paper for Wed, I simply want you to comment on this post with your revised claim.  Your claim might be a sentence or a few sentences, but please note which statement you worked on in your group.  We’ll take a look at the revised statements together in class on Wednesday.

Statement A:

The character Veronica Mars uses a camera and watches people, so therefore the series must be an adaptation of Rear Window.  (Premature Leap)

Statement B:

The Veronica Mars pilot episode does not get its point across because it is over-dramatic and outdated making it uninteresting to viewers today.   (The Judgment Reflex)

Statement C:

What Veronica Mars all boils down to is bullying and how it is always bad for schools. (Generalizing)

Statement D:

The character Veronica Mars comes from a broken home and just suffered a break up so her interactions with other people are guarded and sometimes mean because she has a broken heart due to these things. (Naturalizing Our Assumptions)

Statement E:

In the TV series Veronica Mars, Veronica has a series of flashbacks suggesting that she lives too much in the past (Generalizing)

Statement F:

Veronica Mars is a TV series a feminist show because it deals with rape and Veronica is a strong woman. (Generalizing/ Naturalizing Our Assumptions)

One revision from the Sherlock Holmes original that caught my eye was the fact that Irene Adler knew who Sherlock Holmes was at the same point that he knew who she was. In the book version, Irene Adler didn’t discover who Sherlock was until he was playing sick on her couch. In the movie she had been previously following him for a couple of days. She was ready for his arrival and wanted to make it known that she knew him before hand. While the book puts her ahead of Sherlock later on the movie shows that women have more power in society then expected during this time period. It shows she is a wealthy woman who can fend for herself and does not need a man to support her. It also shows how Sherlock and Irene Adler have the same understanding of each other and are at the same level as equals. The movie switches as to who has the upper hand, having it change between Irene Adler and Sherlock. They both outsmart one another throughout this movie over their desire to be in control of this phone that holds all secrets. The book differs from the movie perspective because by Irene taking the pictures herself puts her at an advantage. Where as Sherlock was handed pictures of her that had been previously consciously been taken. Sherlock was filled in about Irene Adler, while she gathered all the information about him by herself allowing her to get to know him without actually knowing him, keeping him in the dark. I think that they left the scene out where he fakes sick and had her know before hand because it makes her look more powerful and in control. Another thing that puts them as equals is the description of colors used, her make-up as well as his bruise. This scene shows how comfortable she is with her feminine body and how comfortable he is in her house.

Within the Sherlock Holmes short story “A Scandal in Belgravia” we have seen two different interpretations: the BBC series edition and The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Although these two interpretations are derived from the same story, the way they depict the relationship between Irene Adler and Sherlock Holmes is extremely different.

Throughout the Sherlock Holmes book we see Holmes making deductions, carrying out his plans, and everything going in his favor. We, as readers, believe Sherlock is in control throughout the entire story. Despite this preconceived notion of who holds the power, we realized that Ms. Irene Adler has outsmarted Sherlock. This shift in power is not yet known until the closing of the story when Sherlock receives a letter clearly stating Irene’s deductions and reasoning’s.

Contrary to the book Irene Adler, in the BBC series, is in control for most of the story. She figured out Sherlock’s case before he was able to which, proved her dominance over him. She later tricked him into giving away the information about a government plan regarding a terrorist bomb on a British airplane. These situations allow the audience to see, and think, that Adler has bested Sherlock, similarly to in the written interpretation. Despite these situations regarding Irene’s control, Holmes does ultimately outsmart her. He steals her cell phone and figures out her pass code by reading her pulse. When he notices her heart rate increase when they are in close contact, he gained the evidence that she has feelings for him and figures out her password is “SHER”. This strand of events plays into the Sherlock stereotype of him being an infallible genius.

The BBC edition holds more firmly to the ‘typical’ Sherlock Holmes stereotype. Despite being bested in a situation or two, he will always come out the smartest, the winner. The written story gives Holmes more human characteristics; we see that he is capable of failure. By letting Irene Adler be the smarter of the two in the book, shows that Homes is human. He becomes more relatable when he does not always win or come out on top. The BBC edition plays on the stereotype of always being correct which feeds into the perception of Holmes being incredibly reliable. The idea of Holmes having human attributes is only touched on in the BBC edition of Sherlock. These different portrayals further the debate of Sherlock Holmes as a human or infallible character.  file://localhost/Users/sarahsackman/Desktop/images-1.jpegfile://localhost/Users/sarahsackman/Desktop/images-3.jpeg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtskKP5TTio

Gillian Horn

Seminar

Friday, October 4, 2013

A particular character in the Sherlock Holmes BBC series that interests me the most is Irene. From the intro of the 2nd season series, she comes across as the rich, pulled together and luxurious female villain. When she initially finds out about Sherlock coming  to her house, she starts to get in her “war” zone. Irene is sitting at her vanity putting on red lipstick and make up and talking about her  “ war” outfit she is planning to wear. Next she is shown in her bedroom closet in her green lace cover up, staring in her closet. She picks out a sparkly black one shoulder dress and looks at her self in the mirror. At this point Irene is ready to face Sherlock and is prepared for “war”. Soon after this scene, Sherlock shows up to her house and is told to wait in the living room for Irene. She comes out not wearing the dress anymore and is now naked instead. To me this seems like she is trying to lure Sherlock in by her nudity to be distracted and not question what she wants from him. Sherlock tells Irene to put something on but Irene questions it but in the end puts on a coat to cover up. About 5 minutes later of discussion between Irene and Sherlock, men come into her house and hold both of them hostage. Irene is sat down on the couch with a gun against her and Sherlock is brought over to the mural in the living room. Underneath that is a safe which the men see and tell Sherlock to open. Sherlock or Irene do not know the code, but Sherlock manages to open it after the countdown the man holding him was giving before he was going to shoot them. The safe opens and before any of the men can see, a gun being powered by a string starts to shoot at the men. This indicates that Irene must have known that this was going to happen so had decided to put the gun in the safe. This interested me because one moment the two of them arguing and being enemies, but they become partners trying to fight off these men. The characteristic that I would give to Irene after watching these scenes, is a powerful woman. She is powerful because she is clever. The gun in the safe is an example of this power and in a sense you can get from her initial imagery that she is a confident woman who isn’t afraid to fight. She not only is just a woman, but she is also a luxurious and sophisticated woman. The opening scenes help piggy back this statement because it shows her doing things that woman with class and money would do. She is provocative but she is also classy at the same time which makes her unique. A video from youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtskKP5TTio, highlights the moments of Irene Alder from the series and helps show every aspect of her “ powerful woman” personality. The song playing in the background, “  The Ballad of Mona Lisa” by Panic! At The Disco,  also helps support the statement of her powerful figure as well. Important lines in the song like, “She paints her fingers with a close precision” and “ Whoa, Mona Lisa, You’re guaranteed to run this town” are important to take note of because Irene puts lipstick on slowly in the begging and although Mona Lisa was married to a King and Irene is not, Irene has the motivation to be powerful like Mona Lisa. From analyzing these scenes, I can fully support the statement that Irene is a powerful woman and displays it throughout the story.

There is obvious tension between Irene Adler and Sherlock Holmes as both individuals are more perceptive, intelligent, but above all mysterious than the average citizen. As a Chinese proverb goes: “a mountain cannot house two tigers,” Holmes and Adler are both bold and occasionally reckless when executing their plans.

 

However, there are similarities between the two when both are on screen in succession. For example, the first instance where this happens is when “both” of them are naked. We see Holmes covered in a long white sheet while Adler is completely naked shortly after. The sheets play an interesting role here. One, the fact that it is white is ironic as white usually resembles purity and thus nothing to hide. But this is Holmes as he is far from being pure. Instead he is a black hole. He takes in anything but little is known about him other than his gifted ability to perceive everyday objects and routines in detail. The fact that Watson, his partner, cannot read Holmes indicates just how complex he is as a person. Second, along with the deep and mysterious personality Holmes embodies, the white sheet acts as a stark contrast to how is he as a person; the white sheet wrapping around him serves as a visual oxymoron.

We are then introduced to Irene Adler as the visual evidence continues. When she walks into the room completely naked in front of Holmes, she is doing two things. She is trying to seduce him and to “protect” herself by exposing her entire body. From an earlier scene we can gather that Holmes is about to “read” people as he made observations about people’s behavior and outward appearance. By showcasing herself in front of Holmes scantily clad she is able to shield herself from being read like a “normal” person and disguise her enigmatic personality.

Reaction Paper #2: Making a claim about The Maltese Falcon

Brigid O’Shaughessy is a mysterious actress on the stage of Sam Spade. As such, she is apt at disguising herself and her intentions. When the reader is first introduced to her as Ms. Wonderly, she was a woman desperately in search of  her sister in fear of her safety being compromised. As we later find out, this was all a fluke in an attempt to get Spade to help her in another situation. However, upon closer examination in the way that O’Shaughessy has requested this deed, it foreshadows the mysterious and manipulative nature of her character.

 

Ms. Wonderly walks into Spade’s office asking for someone to be tailed for the sake of her sister. However, she does not get straight to the point. Instead, she says that because their mother and father are about to return home, she hopes that her sister will be there, all the while referring to her sister simply as “her.” This does not accurately describe the situation a sister would be in if her dear sibling was in danger. We then turn to the fact that she showed no signs of close bond with this said “sister” that she had. However, from her dialogue, we can gather that Ms. Wonderly simply wants the sister to be within her sight.

Fast forward to the two murders that take place and again we see this shadowy and manipulative side of her as she plays the pity card against Spade but ultimately fails. On page 35 when Spade asks for more information on the situation, O’Shaughessy breaks down and tries to get Spade to help her once more. She starts off with “ I haven’t live a good life” and immediately bombards Spade with emotional rhetorical questions: “You know that I’m not all bad, don’t you? You can see that, can’t you? Then can’t you trust me a little? Oh, I’m so alone and afraid, and I’ve got nobody to help me if you won’t help me.” This then leads into forceful request laced with pity: “Help me because I need help so badly, and because if  you don’t where will I find anyone who can, no matter how willing? Help me… Be generous, Mr. Spade. You can help me. Help me.” The constant reinforcement of her plead only loses its effect and gains in pressure as a way to corner Spade into helping O’Shaughnessy despite her unwillingness to spill the beans.

Sherlock’s Mirror Image

As Sherlock, Irene, and Mycroft sit in the elegant dining room to negotiate, Sherlock sits quietly and patiently while Irene states her demands. Once Sherlock figures out what he wants to say and how to say it, he is quickly shot down and equally refuted by Irene. This battle goes on as each of them strike observational blows at each other until finally, Sherlock proves his point and silences Irene. These battles between Holmes and Adler occur frequently and fiercely throughout the novel and the film, with each character holding their own victories from time to time.
The concept of battling between Sherlock and Irene was relevant from the outset of their relationship. As Sherlock searches for something to wear for their first meeting, Irene picks out her “battle dress” to combat that. The back and forth action between each of the two individuals continue on throughout their interactions with each other, despite what was happening around them, perhaps suggesting that they may not be as individual as they seem.
Irene, in faking death, leads Sherlock to believe that he has won the battle since he now possesses the phone with all of the information on it. However, Irene outsmarts him by faking her own death and coming back to take back the phone. In another instance, Sherlock feels that he has outsmarted Irene yet again when he analyzes the email and figures out the plot to destroy the plane, however, he is simply playing into yet another trap set by the cunning Irene Adler.
While it may seem like the tension between Sherlock and Irene is far too strong for any connection to be made, the frequency and intensity of these back and forth battles of with and the relative evenness of the competitors show how each of them, in essence, are mirror images or equals to themselves.

Irene’s new identity as a dominatrix in the BBC’s “Sherlock” is an unneeded aspect of her character, causing her to seem weaker than her counterpart in Doyle’s original rendition.  In the book, Irene is portrayed as a kind hearted, beautiful actress with an affinity for creating scandals;this image of Irene is juxtaposed against the overly masculine, overly power-wielding Irene we get from the show.  Although it can be inferred that Irene is more masculine than most women in the book, Doyle offers it as subtext when calling her “the woman”(1), having her dress like a man, and having her wit match that of a man.  This masculine trait is supposed to be in the subtext because Irene needs to be a formidable opponent to Holmes while still remaining feminine, proving that women can outsmart men.  In the show, however, the inflation of Irene’s masculine identity only causes her to seem more transparent and superficial, causing her to seem like less of a challenge.

In the book, it is Irene’s deceiving kindness and appearance which make her seem to be an unlikely match for Holmes, yet she proves that the previous assessment of her is a fallacy through wit and trickery.  In the show, when we see Irene, she is a dominatrix, an obvious antagonist for Holmes due to her relationship with power and and obviously masculine female; this leaves no need for her to prove her abilities because she is presented as Holmes’ nemesis from the get go.  We can already tell that  she is a match for him wit-wise and we know she leans towards the side of evil, so there is nothing else to discover about her character.  In the novel, her true nature lies under the surface, causing her to appear to be an unpredictable character and, thus, an even more formidable match for Holmes.

 

The tales of Sherlock Holmes are captured within the past, the shining age of detectives in silly hats. However, the television show Sherlock follows that trend by no means and gives the timeless detective a cellphone and a computer, thrusting him into the modern age. With such a challenge as adapting the old to the new, Doyle’s stories not only get a new coat of paint, but also another layer of story.

First off, translating a story from the 30’s and placing it in the 21st century is an impressive feat. The producer’s of the show must be well versed in the original tales and then be able to have it make sense within it’s new world. Simply having the text applied to modern day would be plain and boring, so the next great step is to twist it into a thrilling modern mystery.

Technology, technology is key within the new Sherlock which gives the show that new spin to make things fresh. More so, it allows for the story to be enriched with information not clearly seen in the original novel. It could be as simple as the addition of a modern fire alarm to reveal Irene Adler’s photos rather than the traditional exclamation of “Fire!”. More importantly the introduction of the cellphone (the device Ms. Adler’s stores her photos and other information), with Sherlock’s cellphone, he and Ms. Adler communicate throughout the episode showing that deeper relation of the two that is known yet not explicitly obvious. It is a great addition that makes things interesting yet true to the classic lore.

From phones to cars and smoke to fire alarms, the modernization of Sherlock’s cases is an enjoyable re-imagining of the beloved mysteries. Staying true to its roots, but making it different in a very fascinating and fun way is an accomplishment any producer should be proud of.