The Case Study of Sherlock Holmes (2009) - Scholarly Commons ...
The Case Study of Sherlock Holmes (2009) - Scholarly Commons ...
The Case Study of Sherlock Holmes (2009) - Scholarly Commons ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
To inspire such a reaction from a modern audience may be more difficult to achieve due<br />
to <strong>Holmes</strong>‟s popular stereotype. But if <strong>Holmes</strong> had existed, which the original products<br />
clearly state, consider for a moment the dramatic shift it would cause in a reader‟s<br />
perspective, for the possibility that <strong>The</strong> Great Detective was alive while you read about<br />
him transforms the text‟s ability to cultivate and casts a spell <strong>of</strong> enchantment near<br />
impossible to break. This was Starrett‟s (2008) original audience. Today, however, no<br />
amount <strong>of</strong> advertising and marketing could cultivate that kind <strong>of</strong> intrigue:<br />
[For] there can be no grave for <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> or Watson . . . Shall they not<br />
always live in Baker Street? Are they not there this instant, as one writes? . . . So<br />
they still live for all that love them well: in a romantic chamber <strong>of</strong> the heart: in a<br />
nostalgic country <strong>of</strong> the mind: where it is always 1895. (Starrett, 2008, p. 93)<br />
Cultivation analysis: Un<strong>of</strong>ficial secondary products<br />
Un<strong>of</strong>ficial secondary products are produced by fans for fans. Abercrombie and<br />
Longhurst (1998) would classify this category as petty producers. However, due to the<br />
expansion <strong>of</strong> technology since the creation <strong>of</strong> that term, a pretty producer is now a far<br />
more accessible position. Un<strong>of</strong>ficial products are <strong>of</strong>ten published online, in either video<br />
or text format, and are accompanied with a copyright disclaimer. Due to the number <strong>of</strong><br />
un<strong>of</strong>ficial products, I chose only to interact those works published on Youtube, an<br />
online video sharing platform, and Fanfiction.com, an extensive community based<br />
website in which amateur authors upload pastiches, a term used rather loosely in this<br />
instance, for entertainment and criticism.<br />
Un<strong>of</strong>ficial secondary products: Youtube images<br />
After my initial viewing <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> (<strong>2009</strong>) and before I began reading the<br />
original products, I turned to Youtube for information. Having soon become acquainted<br />
with cast interviews for <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> (<strong>2009</strong>), which qualify as <strong>of</strong>ficial secondary<br />
products because they are produced by media outlets only uploaded by fans, I decided<br />
to expand my search and ventured towards previous <strong>Holmes</strong> adaptations. While<br />
browsing corresponding playlists would <strong>of</strong>fer various videos featuring related material,<br />
it was here that I first viewed a clip <strong>of</strong> Granada‟s <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> (1984-1994). This<br />
was a pivotal point in my cultivation process. Before <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> (<strong>2009</strong>),<br />
Granada‟s “Jeremy Brett . . . was quickly transformed from a Shakespearean actor . . .<br />
into the best-known <strong>Sherlock</strong> <strong>Holmes</strong> <strong>of</strong> the electronic era by far” (Redmond, <strong>2009</strong>, p.<br />
68