The Mystery, Crime, and Thriller Group discussion

While doing background research for my Victorian crime novels, I came across several articles discussing Sherlock Holmes potentially being asexual. As per definition, an asexual is a person who does not experience sexual attraction.
Today I had a long discussion with David Jay, founder of the Asexuality Network (www.asexuality.org) on asexuality, Sherlock Holmes and his relationship with Watson, his view of Victorian women, as well as the great difference in perception of sexuality between the Victorian era and today. To say that my horizon got broadened, would be an understatement.
But I would like to know what avid readers and Sherlock Holmes fans think about that.
Could Sherlock Holmes be described as asexual or not?

That's an interesting question and I'm wondering exactly what David Jay's opinion is. Aside from that, how would anyone find out?

Joan

To quote Holmes in The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone, "I am a brain, Watson. The rest of me is a mere appendix."
And from A Scandal in Bohemia, "All emotions, and that one particularly [love], were abhorrent to his cold, precise but admirably balanced mind," And, "... as a lover, he would have placed himself in a false position... to admit such intrusions into his own delicate and finely adjusted temperament was to introduce a distracting factor...."
I think Holmes CHOOSES to remain rational and to not allow the clutter of what he would see as unnecessary feelings. I think an asexual person isn't making a choice. They are who they are. Being asexual is different from choosing abstinence.

Hum... But the quotes don't show that he chose celibacy. He could have been not interested (as in asexual). But he thought about marriage repeatedly (Watson, if I should ever marry) and once mentioned he was attracted to a woman (who was convicted).
While the term asexuality didn't exist back then, one of Doyle's friend was later suspected to be an asexual.
Complicated to place a historical fictional character...

Of course, Laurie R. King and Mary Russell have a different opinion...

And the TV show says he likes the physical exercise.

Hi Jackie,
I think everyone wants someone to share intimacy with, be it emotional, physical, or purely intellectual. Whether Holmes was supposed to be asexual - no one will ever know. But what new story construct would be most true to his character is the intriguing question. And how would an intimate relationship with Holmes feel/look like? Intimacy on whatever level a man like him would accept or strive for. There is some of it with Watson. But anything further than that???

I guess Laurie King wrote her novels before the term asexuality was carried into the public. Hence "her" Holmes is not described as asexual.

If you watch the film 'The private life of Sherlock Holmes,' (which is an all time favourite of mine), Holmes explains that he likes women, but doesn't trust them. The arsenic in the tea, the knife in the back, is how he puts it.

Yeah... The mistrust in women is mentioned in the Conan Doyle books, too. When reading about Victorian upper class women and how they were "trained" (aka raised), my toenails are about to fall off.
Funny that Holmes mistrusts women despit the fact that "his" criminals were almost exclusively male.

Tiffany wrote: "To quote Holmes in The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone, "I am a brain, Watson. The rest of me is a mere appendix."
And from A Scandal in Bohemia, "All emotions, and that one particularly [love], wer..."
Excellent, Tiffany!

Hi,

First of all I would like to say that this is really an interesting topic as it makes you think before you start typing the comment (something you don't see where often today).

As for Holmes' sexuality I would agree that he chooses to be asexual, if it can be said so. I think that he has dedicated himself to his profession and he consciously removes all distractions. And emotions are a huge distraction. I do not believe that he is actually asexual as the confrontation with Irene Adler clearly shows that he can be moved by women. I just think that he does not allow himself to be moved, if he can help it. Saying that, I would like if there have been other cases where Holmes would deal with strong women. Of course, having in mind when the canon was written I'm happy there is even the case of Miss Adler, or the Woman as he refers to her...

What an interesting question! I swore I would never read continuation novels by authors other than the creator of a character but finally broke down and read one of Laurie King's books. If Holmes were ever attracted to a woman, it would probably be the anti-Victorian model of womanhood represented by Mary Russell. She was feisty and took no guff from Holmes. But I don't think that Conan Doyle gave much thought to introducing a "love interest" in the original Holmes tales as he was concentrating on the puzzle, the mystery, the situation that tested Holmes' mental powers. Why clutter up those stories with romance....that was not what the reader was looking for. I think there were some clues that have been mentioned in earlier posts which point to his asexuality or at least his unwillingness to be emotionally touched by a woman. But we will never know.

Hm... I discuss asexuality in the Asexual Network Forum quite intensely since a few days (not much, I know). They don't choose to be asexual, rather want to be like everyone else (some, not all).
Holmes encounter with Irene was too short to say anything about his emotional involvement, except that she outsmarted him. Moriarty did this too and kept Holmes quite busy (and pissed off AND admiring). The Irene hype I don't quite understand, because all its based upon is a 10minutes encounter and loads of imagination. In my opinion...

Thanks Tara! I find it very interesting, too! Keeps my mind rolling since weeks now.

As for the Irene I believe that Watson's remark that she remains The Woman for Holmes, at the end of the case, speaks a lot in psychological terms. Therefore, I am certain that by the end of the case there is emotional involvement on Holmes' part. I, personally, always thought that there is significant admiration towards her. Note, that I'm talking about the original story and not TV interpretations.

Anyway, I believe that in this discussion the period with its norms and values should be taken greatly into account when interpreting the sexuality of characters. And from that point, I would say that all Holmes' remarks as "if I should ever marry" would only show someone who was brought up well and who was assimilated in the society.

I don't think so, at least not in the original intent of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. He was trying to portray Holmes as someone who was conditioned to be immune from such day to day "weaknesses" as love, anger, or other human emotions that might distract from his analytical abilities. It's not that he didn't feel them he simply chose to ignore them.

In the chauvinistic times in which he was created it wouldn't have been uncommon for intellectual men to prefer the company of other men as opposed to "silly" or "frivolous" women. To classify him as asexual based on the information available from the original works is no more convincing, IMO, than those who want to interpret him as gay or having homosexual tendencies. By the standards of today, he might just as easily be classified as having something akin to a high functioning form of Asperger's Syndrome.

Hi Mike,

I do agree with the "typical male behaviour" of the Victorian times. But the Asberger's Syndrome is far fetched. Holmes had a very good intuition and observational skills when it came to his fellow humans. He also expressed compassion towards Watson (and stressed out female clients) repeatedly.

I also agree that Conan Doyle will not have intended Holmes to appear asexual - as anything NOT heterosexual was certainly more than frowned upon in the Victorian society.

Just to clarify - I don't want to post mortem diagnose Holmes with anything. Its a question of staying true to his character and not turning him into a common sleuth.

Thanks everyone for your thought! Its been very interesting so far and I hope it keeps rolling :-)

It may not be part of the literature canon, but In young Sherlock Holmes, the love of his life is killed. It's funny how the Films seem to have more depth than the stories. But, If you look at Conan Doyle's background, the stories were meant to be throwaway weekly serials.

Ha! I wonder whether Conan Doyle would flip around in his grave if he knew about Elementary, Sherlock BBC, The Beekeeper's Apprentice, etc.
Not to speak of Fifty Shades of Sherlock Holmes (yes, I saw that somewhere)

Annelie wrote: "Ha! I wonder whether Conan Doyle would flip around in his grave if he knew about Elementary, Sherlock BBC, The Beekeeper's Apprentice, etc.
Not to speak of Fifty Shades of Sherlock Holmes (yes, I s..."

I may be wrong, but I'm sure he was cremated!

But If you haven't seen the films I've mentioned, check them out. The Private life of Sherlock Holmes,' is probably the best Holmes story ever. Christopher Lee is in it. I rest my case.

Well, then there might be quite a dust (or ash) cloud.
:-)

Will check out the film you mentioned. Thanks!

Annilee> Check out this blog regarding Holmes and Asperger's Syndrome: http://moniqueblog.net/2012/03/sherlo...

Jackie Renee wrote: "As an aromantic asexual, (and a huge Sherlock Holmes fan) I say he definitely was."

You read my mind!!! I hate the constant talk about his homosexuality. He just wasn't interested.

@Tiffany: the Asperger's Syndrome post is about Sherlock (BBC) as far as I can see. Him I can imagine having Asperger's. But the original Holmes surely didn't.

@Veronika: No idea about Holmes being gay. My gay radar doesn't go off, but that doesn't mean anything...
When talking about the classical Homes - I doubt Doyle would have dared to write a homosexual character, when people went to jail for expressing anything in that direction. The stiff Victorians didn't even write about pregnancy. Babies simply appeared. Sex and sexual orientation in literature happened only "undercover" and was seen as something utterly dirty.
That Holmes might have been intended to be asexual or demisexual is possible, although these concepts/terms did not exist back then. But it has been theorized that one of Doyle's friends was an asexual.
As far as I know, Moffat (Sherlock BBC creator) has said that an asexual Holmes would not work (=would not sell). I can imagine that to be true. As long as readers/viewers can imagine sexual tension between Holmes and whatever character, they'll keep reading/viewing. If that is simply wiped away (by Holmes being identified as asexual), this tension would be gone, too. At least in the eyes of a sexual person, whoch 99% of people are (I hope the numbers are correct?).
Don't know what it is with readers these days. Only looking at the Amazon bestseller lists makes me thing that all people want to read about is sex. And lots of it.
:-(
Annelie

I like the idea that he was an android from the future!

p.s. Victorian perception is maybe not so different (under-the-surface) from ours as we assume. They were as lusty; they just couldn't acknowledge it as openly. Check out John Fowles' The French Lieutenant's Woman or The Pearl: A Journal Of Voluptuous Reading, The Underground Magazine Of Victorian England

Well, they were the same people as we are now, althoughj influenced by a different culture.

ps. I like the steam punk Holmes version, too :-)

To me Holmes asexuality is one of his best attributes; I like that stories about him don't get clogged up with romance :)

Barbara wrote: "To me Holmes asexuality is one of his best attributes; I like that stories about him don't get clogged up with romance :)"

I don't think he's asexual - he's just really really really fussy!

Great discussion! I'd say he's not asexual or homosexual, nor does he have Asperger's. Maybe he's just obsessed with catching the criminal, as Ahab was with killing the white whale.

Scout wrote: "Great discussion! I'd say he's not asexual or homosexual, nor does he have Asperger's. Maybe he's just obsessed with catching the criminal, as Ahab was with killing the white whale."

Can you imagine reading a Holmes story in which Holmes was not obsessed with catching the criminal? Watson can be (and is) distracted by falling in love with the victim, something almost mandatory for the detective in a modern story (also mandatory: unsuccessfully). Benito Cereno was gay. For Holmes, it's irrelevant.

I think the most interesting thing about this discussion (which I had in other forums, too) is that:

(A) Heterosexuals think he's imply not interested, because he has other things to do (catch criminals). No need to mention that Holmes is heterosexual in their minds.

(B) Asexuals think he's asexual

(C) Homosexual think he's homosexual (but can't express it because he lives in the Victorian era)

That basically leaves me with all kinds of options. Well... I guess a 50Shades of Holmes is totally out of the question.

:-)

Annelie wrote: "I think the most interesting thing about this discussion (which I had in other forums, too) is that:

(A) Heterosexuals think he's imply not interested, because he has other things to do (catch cri..."

Good point Annelle :)

Annelie wrote: "I think the most interesting thing about this discussion (which I had in other forums, too) is that:

(A) Heterosexuals think he's imply not interested, because he has other things to do (catch cri..."

In the private life of Sherlock Holmes, Holmes and Watson are mistakenly believed to be a couple. Naturally, Watson is worried that his former regiment will ban him from future reunions!

I think the Sherlock Holmes tales are asexual in that they don't involve the protagonist's sexual preference at all, to my knowledge. To that end, if Holmes's sexuality is not important to the story, why is it necessary to label him one way or another?

Ha! Excellent point you are making John. I'm just curious.

Sorry, pressed "reply" too early. I don't plan to label him any which way. All I want is to be in my protagonists' heads. It does help to throw thoughts at people and see their reactions. Since my main character is a woman, I was curious to know how her presence would effect a man like Holmes (other than annoyance).

I still believe that the Holmes tales are the pulp fiction of their day. If you look at Conan Doyle's background when writing them, he wasn't really expecting great things from them, hence their focus on solving crime rather than any great characterisation.

Strictly, Strand Magazine wasn't pulp. If your definition of "pulp" is an emphasis on action and little in the way of psychology then an embarrassing amount of modern story-telling fits it, including most thrillers. Doyle is certainly not Henry James, but neither is he Reynolds. He was a master story-teller, and told only what he needed to. I think the less demeaning "popular fiction" would do nicely without being entrapped in "great things". That said, I think the distinction you are making is one to keep in mind.

as much as I've loved reading about Sherlock Holmes I've loved all the movies -- especially Basil Rathbone's (asexual) portrayal pitted against Lionel Atwill's Moriarity. Tell me in the movie "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" you don't sense some "sexual" tension between Holmes and Moriarity. There's nothing like a good love/hate relationship between two worthy adversaries!

Laurie wrote "Tell me in the movie "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon" you don't sense some "sexual" tension between Holmes and Moriarity. There's nothing like a good love/hate relationship between two worthy adversaries!"

Maybe, but this wasn't a Holmes. It's a spy movie which uses the dancing men code, the only Holmes element in it. It's the same with the current BBC knockoffs and other additions to the canon -- they may be fun. but you can't make any arguments about Holmes from them.

Charles wrote: "Strictly, Strand Magazine wasn't pulp. If your definition of "pulp" is an emphasis on action and little in the way of psychology then an embarrassing amount of modern story-telling fits it, includi..."

Fair points. I never meant pulp as a form of insult, as I'm a great fan of it myself. I do believe that Conan Doyle wasn't expecting great things from Holmes, as he famously got bored with them and tried to kill off Holmes after the Final Problem.
Mind you, I'm no Conan Doyle expert.

R.M.F wrote: "I do believe that Conan Doyle wasn't expecting great things from Holmes, as he famously got bored with them and tried to kill off Holmes after the Final Problem. "

Indeed. Doyle thought his best, most committed writing lay elsewhere, and for the creator of the Great Rationalist this meant what looks to us like a lot of claptrap and hoodoo. But hey, you've got to make a living, so back to the Holmes grindstone. As for "the pulps" I suspect that they were below critical radar when there were pulps. I went looking and found that Walter Benjamin had been at work on the idea in the 30s. Benjamin was always at the head of the pack. I remember when Susan Sontag's article on camp and kitsch was published in 1964 it was quite a novel thing for her to be writing about the stuff at all. I also learned that the word was in use at the turn of the 20th century, along with the antonym "the slicks". Strand was definitely a slick, but as usual I find I know less than I thought I did.

One: I don't believe he was asexual. It was the Victorian era after all. Uptight, somber, repressed sexually.

Two: Why does it matter anyway? Does his sexual preference (or lack thereof) make him less of a compelling character? I don't think so. The focus was on the crimes and solving them, not on who Holmes was sleeping with (or not).

@Carmen: It does matter in a (my) writer's head to get to know my characters better, even if that particular trait will never be discussed in a book. For me its like a good foundation to describe facettes of a person. But yes, uptight, somber, repressed sexually surely was true for a lot of Victorians. But I do wonder, how much of that uptightness as we see it today, comes from fictional literature written by the rich for the rich?
An example: One thing Victorian writers avoided at all cost was to mention pregnancy. Babies suddenly appreared, yet no one today would assume Victorians were never pregnant and reproduced by budding.
:-)

@Annelie:
Ok. I understand your point about having that information for backstory, but to me at least, sexual orientation doesn't really matter. I mean, it's not a personality trait, or a personal enhancement/shortcoming. It's just sex. Maybe because I'm not a writer, I don't get it, but that's ok. I'd rather know his hat size and shoe size, why he was so crabby and why he became a junkie. But hey, that's just me. :D

I did get a good giggle out of the "pregnancy" reference. I suppose it wasn't something "pure" to talk about it. Good God, I can't even imagine what it had to be like for the nine months they were pregnant. They probably had to hide indoors the whole time so no one would see that they'd "sinned". Women were only to be thought of as chaste and squeaky clean in their "moral being". (You know, I wonder what they wore when they were pregnant. I'd never thought of that before!) Now you've made me curious! HAHA!!

I doubted very much that he was asexual as the author, Dr. Arthur Conan Doyle “ became quite a Ladies man, boasting about being in love with five women at once”

I thought Sherlock was in love with a woman (can't remember her name.) The modern version of Sherlock implies that he's gay but I don't think he was.

Carmen wrote: "@Annelie:
Ok. I understand your point about having that information for backstory, but to me at least, sexual orientation doesn't really matter. I mean, it's not a personality trait, or a persona..."

Annelie wrote: "@Carmen: It does matter in a (my) writer's head to get to know my characters better, even if that particular trait will never be discussed in a book. For me its like a good foundation to describe f..."

I think people of the Victorian era had just as much wildness in their lives as people do today. They just hid it. People are people in any era. I don't know any facts about it but I have a feeling the orphanages were filled with "secret" babies. They hid pregnant women away until the babies were born and then quietly set them on orphanage doorsteps at night. I am only guessing though.

In the film, Young Sherlock Holmes, Holmes was in love with a girl, and that's good enough for me. Debate over! :)

Maybe the drugs made him impotent. Who knows?

The TV series plays up his sexual side. Basil Rathbone, no.

Annelie wrote: "@Tiffany: the Asperger's Syndrome post is about Sherlock (BBC) as far as I can see. Him I can imagine having Asperger's. But the original Holmes surely didn't.

@Veronika: No idea about Holmes bei..."

Yes, you're absolutely right. Almost all the books, films and advertisements have sexual overtones. I just do not understand it.(Well, I propably never will:):))