a completely strange "scandal in belgravia" reaction

[laurajv]

I have no idea why this is bothering me so much, but it is: the line about how Irene was obviously born in the 1980s.

It just keeps jarring me, badly, every time I think about the episode. I think it might be because I have 5 siblings born from 1981-1989, so I know perfectly well what they and their age cohort look like, and Irene was made up to look older. (The actor was born in 1980; in non-Adler shots of her, she looks younger than Adler does.)

I keep feeling like I must have missed something -- like that Sherlock must have been commenting on her making herself look older with makeup somehow, or something -- because to me the character is made up to look like she's in her late 30s (or early 40s and successfully trying to look younger).

Or like I misheard the line somehow? But seriously, it threw me completely out of the episode, and it is STILL BOTHERING ME and I am not even sure WHY and I'm really not comfortable with being this bothered by something like this. Like there's only one right way/age to look if you're born in the 80s or something. (But if you were born in the 80s, you cannot be older than 32, so if you look older than I do -- I was born in 77 -- I'm going to be a bit struck by that, is all I am saying, because very few people born in the 80s look older than I do unless they have spent a lot of time in the sun or have been seriously ill.)

Comments

[sasha_feather]

By gosh you are right! (here via network)

Maybe Sherlock is just trying to mess with her; to gauge her reaction to his statement.

[laurajv]

I wish I had the time to rewatch and see if I just missed something!

[tazlet]

I was struck very by it (and he looks so much younger to me)... Yes, she looked younger without the make up and clothing but the whole affect just made me nuts - it's a certain kind of classic look - but a classic dominatrix look? Maybe it works for Brits? Maybe it was intended to set her apart from the common sort of dominatrix? But who, under 60, relates to it? Or is does it mean there has been no strong image of 'A Mature Woman' since the 40's? - I'm leaning toward the last, btw - other than that...

[laurajv]

I thought it was being -- I don't know, that particular look worked for me, because of the sort of New Look + burlesque + dominatrix crossover as performed by e.g. Dita Von Teese. There are several stereotypical dominatrix looks I can think of in pop culture, and I think this one is the most elegant and refined of the set (there's also the bikerish one, and the Madonna(the singer)ish one, and the Goth one, for example).

But at the same time, that particular look doesn't have to end up with the performer looking older than her age. Von Teese, for example, looks younger than her age -- often looks, to my eye, younger than the Adler character was made to look. (Von Teese was born in '72.)

[saraht]

I don't know, that particular look worked for me, because of the sort of New Look + burlesque + dominatrix crossover as performed by e.g. Dita Von Teese. There are several stereotypical dominatrix looks I can think of in pop culture, and I think this one is the most elegant and refined of the set

Co-sign.

[tazlet]

Thank you - not something I'm up on, but would explain 'the look.'

[laurajv]

(but also, yes! Sherlock looks a good bit younger than Adler through the whole thing, and yet Cumberbatch has several years on Adler's actor - whose name I forget, bad me. I feel like that HAD to be intentional, but on the other hand based on John's resume from the first season they're trying to make HIM born in the early 80s, which don't make no damn sense at all for an actor who looks like Martin Freeman does -- he's just, he's got one of those faces that only gets more interesting as he gets older but as a side effect that makes it hard to disguise his actual age -- so maybe they just don't think very clearly about age on the show?)

[tazlet]

They're thinking about something: I pitched a fissy hit in a post yesterday about, not Sherlock's age, but his boyness (I'm deliberately using that word instead of immaturity). In canon Mycroft is 7 years older than Sherlock, in BBC the apparent difference looks like 15, but could be as much as 20 years. In canon Mycoft appears twice. Unovis commented on my LJ that, in effect, by expanding Mycroft's role they've split the character - with Gatiss embodying the insider/conservative aspect of the character and Cumberbatch the outsider/queer (for a certain value of queer) aspect - it's not a perfect parallel, since we see Sherlock celebrating Christmas with friends and Mycroft alone but... Unovis commented further that exploring the split would be delicious; I'm pondering that.

[brownbetty]

Except that, to me, Mycroft reads far more queer than Sherlock. Or am I missing something?

[brownbetty]

No, I caught that. I'd honestly just assumed he was married to a dude.

(Although very much agreed about the difficulties of relying on one's gaydar interculturally. Prince Phillip reads as somewhat gay, to me, which I am happy to assume he is not, actually)

[tazlet]

Sorry 'bout that delete - re-post below.

[tazlet]

His wedding ring? (Not that it necessarily means anything) - and British men of his class frequently read gay when they're straight? And being gay also doesn't necessarily mean you can't be committed to the status quo?

Addonthot: Given the puerile sniggering about Mycroft's sexuality throughout, I kinda want him to the straight-arrow ex of a bi-sexual woman with whom he'll forever be in love.

[blktauna]

I thought he was insinuating that she was probably trying to look older than she was and he'd caught her at it.

[laurajv]

That is kind of what I am hoping? Because otherwise it's either too jarring, or I missed something.

[unovis]

I don't think they're that bright--sloppy, yes, when abit of cleverness is in sight.
I took Irene for early 40s or possibly late 30s and yet another adult in the mix as a contrast to the decidedly immature behavior of Sherlock.