Sherlock analysed...

So, I'd been hoping I would be able to show you the cover of my new book A Winter's Day in 1939 today but there has been a slight change of plans. Do not be alarmed faithful friends as the changed plans are not problems.

Instead today I am forced to change topic and talk about one of my current obsessions, shoes, chocolate, Sherlock. As we head in to the summer television season the quality of programming is already dropping. I am forced (and okay I am not really having my arm held up my back here) to watch my Sherlock DVDs to ensure the continuing quality of televisual entertainment. And not only am I entertained but I can feel my writing improving from watching things like this with smart plotting and characterisation, creating an effective villain, sowing clues, satisfying conclusions and awesome dialogue. Of course the experience is elevated by great production values, effective direction and superb acting but, really, these are essential in a book as well so its all good training. We writers have the best boot camps. I feel fitter already.

As any good fan will know the final episode in the second series of Sherlock was quite a cliff hanger and it is difficult to imagine how they are going to explain the main character surviving a very busted head and large blood loss on the pavement after his fall from the top of the hospital. One of the writers Steven Moffat has said there is a clue in that final episode to how its done and it is specifically something that Sherlock does that is out of character. I have watched and re-watched and have seen what I think are a few clues but haven't been able to formulate a solid explanation. I think I understand the Higgs Particle better. Damn you Mr Moffat et al - I would have watched the next series anyway but now I am forced to suffer in between times and have much racking of the brain trying to figure it all out - consider my brain severely racked. My suspected clues so far include the front page headline of the newspaper Sherlock reads in A Scandal in Belgravia (with The woman) that says Refit for Historical Hospital. I can't imagine this is just a casual production effort and I can't see any other reason for its inclusion. In the Fall episode Sherlock makes tea (for Moriarty) which he never does otherwise but this doesn't seem to be terribly meaningful. There are several plot developments that have potential such as the little girl screaming at the sight of Sherlock and the blood?/mark? at the spot where Holmes steps up on the ledge, the van parked below, the cyclist knocking Watson over but none of these is an out of character thing for Holmes. That Sherlock is indifferent to Mrs Hudson's being shot is out of character but this is clearly part of his effort to get Watson out of the way. I guess I'm a little surprised Watson didn't question this. Holmes includes Molly in his plans because he recognizes that his previous behaviour towards her has led Moriarty to ignore her, thereby excluding her as a potential target for Moriarty's final plans. She can fly under the radar so to speak. So Sherlock has guessed some of what Moriarty is planning (wheels within wheels) but fails to see that the binary code tapped out is a red herring??? He knew he was going to have to appear to die, how did he not see the code?? That's unlike Holmes. His statement to Molly that he needs her, is unlike Holmes. So Molly and the Hospital are crucial to Sherlock's great escape. I'm hoping there's not some look-a-like/great switcheroo involved (the screaming girl, the convincing dead body). They did whisk the body away with unseemly haste - not enough time to draw a chalk outline round the body folks - don't they usually wait for the police in these circumstances?? Mr Moffat am I warm with any of this? I hope I believe the denouement when I finally get to see it. Either way I'll be learning from it.