Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Worthy of Canonical villain status? Nope.

A word of warning, I'm going political today. If you are weary or sensitive to such things, it might be in your best interest to head elsewhere for distraction. (Such warnings, of course, are rarely heeded.)

We seem to be in a news cycle where conspiracy theorists are having their day as we approach America's next presidential election. And some of the more excited of those theorists would have us believe that we have a Moriarty running as a major party candidate . . . not a mild-mannered mathematics professor, but a former first lady, who, if the theorists are to be believed, is a criminal mastermind of the first order. Capable of Mycroftian power plays and getting away with actual murders, the level of competency if those Moriarty theorists were correct is almost enough to make you want to support such a candidate, just because, hey, in a world without a Sherlock, a Moriarty might look awfully good.

But those are just crazed conspiracy theories. Looking at the other presidential candidate, however, for a Canonical doppelganger, one finds . . .  well, my mind first heads for James Ryder, the sad little villain who stumbled into providing Holmes a mystery and then was chased out of Baker Street with a simple "Get out!"

Sherlock Holmes didn't have time for overly-pompous blowhards who had no close relationship with the facts. His disdain for a Scotland Yard man or two who fit that bill was very apparent, and he had even less time for those of higher status. Had Sherlock Holmes run into a two-bit charlatan from a wealthy family who rose to media prominence in the lowest sort of entertainments . . . well, it might have been very amusing to watch, but it would have hardly provided the mystery for a decent case.

And that is what we find ourselves presented with this fall. Someone that Watson wouldn't even find worth writing about dominating our national stage. Sherlockians are a very inclusive group as a fandom, so I don't doubt we have a Trump fan or two out there. But I don't think I will ever quite understand how any mind could hold Sherlock Holmes up as an ideal and consider that man a viable candidate for even a Baker Street client, much less anything higher.

Unless, of course, you're really, really, really into wanting there to be Moriartys out there. And even in that case, one would think you could find a better champion to go against said mastermind . . . which we all know took a Sherlock Holmes.

And we know Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes is a friend of ours. And that huckster on the national stage is no Sherlock Holmes.

1 comment:

  1. Could he be a Neil Gibson - an American Gold King, filthy rich, loves the ladies, and doesn't care WHO he hurts? Oh, wait, HE was once a Senator and knows something about how the government works.