Monday, April 1, 2013

April 2 . . . almost.

The day of the fool is done.  Well, not quite.

Writing yesterday's blog came at some small cost. A few thoughts had to be suppressed. Comments had to be edited out. And while I consider myself a man of some willpower when the task demands it, I have to admit that no amount of resolve could have quelled all the things that came up as I worked on praising Elementary yesterday. And so, for those of you who would know what didn't get said, here are the random jottings expelled from creating my first April Fool's Day blog.

WARNING: The following is intended for mature adults who are not fans of CBS's Elementary. Anyone who does not match that description should do themselves a favor and go somewhere else, like that Deductionist site. Here's a link to help you  get there ASAP. Seriously. Go now. You're not? Well, don't say I didn't warn you.

And now, on with the show.

  • Was Elementary created to be like Sherlock Holmes? No, it was created to NOT be like Sherlock. Sherlock was created to be like Sherlock Holmes. Think about it.
  • He's just such a cute little Jonnylock, like you could stick him in your pocket and take him down to the stream to scrub him up like a filthy little leprechaun or one of those Cottingsley fairies after they got into the garbage as they were wont to do.
  • Seriously, does it bug anyone else that they named one detective from the Canon (Gregson) and one from Doyle's biography (Bell)? That is just kick-you-out-of-the-reality messed up. They were already using the names Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson, which were both in Sherlock, would it have killed them to use Gregson and Lestrade?
  • Has any pastiche used as much defecatory material outside of O Xango de Baker Street? (Which I still enjoy better than Elementary, and it featured Sherlock Holmes with diarrhea.)
  • The waste of Lucy Liu still appalls me. She has been given so much better work to do, almost everywhere else she's been. Watching her in Elementary is like watching any actor you'd care to name in that second Star Wars trilogy. George Lucas took some of the liveliest folks on the silver screen and made them ho-hum, even with light sabers. But at least they had light sabers. Poor Lucy got a stick.
  • He's a deductionist. Seriously. Like there's deductionism.
  • I worry about people who say how much they love the relationship between Mr. Elementary and Joan Watson.  Either they were raised without human contact, or someone is abusing them horribly, because that is not any kind of relationship as I know humans. 
  • Conan Doyle once said to William Gillette of Holmes: "You may marry him, murder him, or do anything you like to him." That was a.) specifically to William Gillette and no one else, and b.) in the 1800s, before anyone, even a science fiction writer like Doyle, could have foreseen what horrors the future and a thing called television could hold for Holmes. And Conan Doyle definitely didn't mean this . . . no, definitely not this . . . anything but this . . .
  • If they changed all the characters names in Elementary, I think I could safely quit watching it and forget all about it. Until then, it's like they're holding the good name of Sherlock Holmes hostage, and hostage crises are riveting television.
There. That's better. Karma is balanced.

Oh, wait, it's a whole twenty minutes until April 2 . . .

April Fool! Hee hee, I was just kidding all along.


  1. As good as your anti-Elementary posts usually are, this one is extra special thanks to the warning.

    That bright red warning brought a smile to my face.


  2. I am so glad you felt compelled to explain how you were kidding on an April 1 post so that your loyal, and apparently humorless, "Sherlock"-ite fans would not think you had a road-to-Damascus conversion. All the "Johnlocks" can relax--here's Brad back to heaping his invectives upon "Elementary". Once he dispels those Mary Morstan rumors all will be right with the world. Except mine. I learned a sad truth yesterday: "I pre-judged Elementary last summer before ever seeing an episode, and when it came out, well, I didn't even watch the first six episodes and just blogged based on what I read on the web." Of course I knew that Brad had pre-judged "Elementary", but I had not expected that second part. To realize that your idol has feet of John Clay...let's just say that I had shattered feelings that no amount of Easter candy could compensate. It was a long, dark night with that mournful voice singing on endless repeat in my headphones,
    "Love on the rocks
    ain't no big surprise
    Just pour me a drink and I'll tell you some lies
    Yesterday's gone
    And now all I want is a smile"

  3. You know, sometimes I need to review a book, and I'm in a bad mood. When this happens, I always worry that I'm being too harsh. I am now going to hunt down O Xango de Baker Street (it's that Tango book, right?) and hold it in reserve, just for such an occasion. Thanks!

    Also, I will state for the record that I kind of misread yesterday's post. I got the gist, but, yeah, April-fooled.

    1. Brad is more talented than I thought. Most Sherlockians north of Miami had to settle for A Samba for Sherlock, since the Portuguese original, O Xango de Baker Street was beyond the linguistic reach of most of us.

    2. Actually, Brad just knows how to work the subtitles on a DVD player . . .

    3. My bad -- I assumed you meant the book, not the film.

  4. I was wondering where you were putting all the acerbic comments that had to have been building up in your very soul as you wrote the first of yesterday's posts. I figured that either you were doing a little Zen meditation in order to free yourself of them OR that they would eventually explode out of you onto your keyboard... So glad you chose the latter recourse. It gave me more than a few laughs this morning.

  5. Is it okay to be bugged by the fact that Jonnylock has yet to wear a dressing gown?