Is Sherlock Sexist?

Is Sherlock Sexist?

Summarise Jane Jones Objections to the Portrayal of women in Sherlock.

Jane jones believes the way Steven Moffatt has changed Sherlock makes it sexist. She refers to the episode  ‘A scandal in Bohemia’ where we are first introduced to Irene Adler and tells us how his adaptation of her makes her into a damsel in distress.

In the book written by Arthur Conan Doyle he portrays Irene Adler as ‘the woman’ an American adventuress who out smarted Sherlock and got away with it. However in the Series produced by Steven Moffatt Irene is portrayed as a dominatrix who tries to get the better of Sherlock but fails and in the end has to be rescued by him.

What upset Jane most was not the fact that Irene had been changed into this professional prostitute but the fact that she didn’t out smart Sherlock like she did in the books and she had to be rescued by the hero Sherlock. She thought that this new storyline discarded women to be seen as weak, unintelligent and always depending on the men to rescue and save them from danger.

Do you agree with her or not? Compare to portrayals of gender in Dr Who and Misfits.

I think in any drama there is always a hero and a antagonist and in this specific programme Sherlock is seen a hero a super smart hero in fact in this he is seen as almost super human the smartest individual in the programme even his government worker brother asks him for help along with the police who are all seen as average intelligence or stupid in some cases.

There are in effect us the viewers they ask the questions that we the public are wondering. So to make another character come in and challenge Sherlock’s intelligence and outsmart him doesn’t make him seem so special and it sort of ruins the whole plot of Sherlock.

I do however believe that the ending in which Sherlock swoops in and saves Irene is unneeded for a better ending would be her getting out of that situation herself. I think she should still be seen as the girl who almost outsmarted Sherlock as this also enables her to improve her methods and maybe in time attempt to outsmart him again.

In comparison to Dr who its very different as all of the women assistants that help the doctor out are different in personal quality’s for example Amy could be seen as a stereotypical princess who repeatedly needs saving and rescuing from the doctor but this is one assistant out of the many that have been with doctor who over the years for example Ace was a fiery loud teenage character that would assist the doctor and help him in a pose to him rescuing her. The same can be said about Martha, who travels the world to tell people about he doctor and Clara who enters the doctor’s time stream to save him. These assistants vary and although they each die or disperse from the doctor this is because the doctor is the main character and is supposed to always come out on top.

In comparison to misfits which is created solely on stereotypes of youth its hard to say whether it is sexist because no one is more important than the next everyone has different powers but none just yet are more powerful than the other. The women in misfits and men are represented differently according to common stereotypes as this links into their person powers for example Alisha is over confident and sex obsessed and her power is seduction to whoever touches her, Simon is isolated from the group and very quite and weird his power is invisibility. I don’t think there are any sexist elements to this programme as it has tried to equalise men and women in this.

Sherlock Series 1 Ep 3 The Great Game

Identify those narrative elements contained within this episode?

The great game follows the 3 act structure being the set up- the audience establishing that sherlock is desperate for a case, the development sherlock gets two cases, the resolution- the cases are solved.In this episode the main enigma is solved Who is Moriarty? we are shown him at the very end and suddenly everything makes sense.
This episode also has many lines of action there is one main case being the people strapped with bombs and Moriarty being the person behind it but also there is the man with the missile plans who jumped the train tracks as well as the gallery man found at sea.All of these cases however are related to Moriarty, the man who jumped the tracks being the distraction as Moriarty knew sherlock wouldn't be interested in a case from his brother, setting up other cases for him whilst he solved the case as he wanted the missile plans or so it seemed. I don't think the theory of TODOROV could be applied to this episode because it is left as a cliffhanger and with more enigmas a raised. Did sherlock shoot the bomb?

Identify those elements developed from episode 1 STUDY IN PINK?

The study in pink also follows the 3 act structure the setup being the introduction to Dr Watson the development being the case and the resolution being the conclusion to what happened to these people. However in this episode the enigma of who is Moriarty is first started but to sherlock old fans they are already informed who Moriarty is Moriarty being Sherlocks arch enemy. I could also say that the TODOROV theory could be applied to this episode as equilibrium is resolved at the end that being the case is solved. This episode follows a slightly non linear make up as in the setup we are shown flashbacks to days in afghanistan supposed to be John Watsons dreams, we are also showed flashbacks to what the people were doing before they died and they all seem to be taking this strange pill.

Research Proposal

The title for my research project is going to be 'Do Music Videos need a strong Narrative in order to be successful? In order to explore this investigation I will use the following music videos as media texts that will form the focus of my investigation. 'Kanye West- All falls down' and 'Drake hold on we're going home'. Both videos are very different in the narrative, which is why I decided to pick these two; Drake has a very clear story-like narrative in perfect Harmony with the track whilst Kanye's narrative in his music video is almost random in contrast to his song.

The Song by Kanye West features a famous actress Syleena Johnson. The song itself in its lyrical form is about how no one really knows what they want to achieve life, some people are influenced by parents to do degrees but in the end it doesn't amount to anything, He is basically criticizing people for not having a passion.

Within the video however the narrative is based around Kanye following the actress Syleena Johnson to the airport where by he is rapping as in some shots he appears in front of the camera whilst others he appears to be holding it.

The video itself is well put together, the airport looks realistic which wouldn't of been possible without the various security checks and various terminals and staff, Towards the end of the video a iconic face appeared it was Common [a highly recognized hip hop artist] so for him to be included was kind of attracting three audiences fans of Syleena, Kanye's and Commons.

There are also quite a few smart editing skills used such as the effect being used enabling kanye to show on the outside of Syleena's glasses, there was also a x-ray effect where kanye was supposedly put through the x-ray conveyor belt. There is also various scenes where we see Kanye through mirrors or car windows but when we see him he doesn't appear to be holding a camera so to connotate what we are seeing is from Kanye’s eyes.

At the start of this video we have Syleena in the taxi waiting to get to the airport then by the bridge of the song we have Kanye in the bathroom rapping but not as high quality sound as before, Then by the end of the song we have Kanye back in the taxi looking at the open roof top as the aero plane flies away.

 My hunches are that in this investigation I'm going to find out that the answer to my question is no, It doesn't matter how a narrative is structured or how clear the storyline is as long as the music video or even the music track attracts attention from the audience it is still effective. I’m worried that the answer is too obvious but hopefully with my gathering of sources I can prolong a argument and somehow make my question unanswerable.

To support my research I'm going to use information from a book by Carol Verrallis called Experiencing Music video, a book by Kevin Williams called Why I still want my MTV, a Book called Exploring the Media by Christine Bell, an Extract from the magazine Media magazine and http://www.imageandnarrative.be/inarchive/issue08/heidipeeters.htm website.

Out of all of these I would say that the books would be the most reliable sources as these would of have to have been cross referenced for any mistakes by various other peers before publishing and if inaccurate information in inside one of these books [unless its fiction] then that could have serious consequences for the publishing company.

The Hampton press publishing company published for Example the book why I still want my MTV in 2003. Although the book maybe out of date slightly I'm positive some of the terms still remain now. Hampton press is a well-established publishing company that varies in publishing books to monographs to journals. Currently, Hampton press has a backlist of over 400 titles and publishes 35-40 new books annually; therefore I would say that this book is a very reliable source. This is my Proposal.

Music Video Analysis: ' Hold On We're Going Home' - Drake

This music video im analyising is called'Hold On We're Going Home' is a music tracksung by rapper Drake.This video is really interesting because as well as the music video being like a movie the song heard without the music video actually makes the viewer think of a classic love song. As the lyrics are of the conventions of a standard love song, however the video puts a very big twist on the lyrical vision and produces a unconventional one.

The plot of this video is that Drake's girlfriend has been kidnapped by some sort of mafia leader and drake and his clan go to get her.
The music video began with a helicopter shot of the sea and Miami, we are told this in the text frame that comes on the screen stating also that it is the year 1985.

In this video I can connotate that Drake and  his crew are in some sort of dangerous business and I can guess this because in the setup of the music video no music is played but Drake and his fellow friends are all in a club sitting around a table drinking and one male is standing up making a toast. I can tell everyone is sitting because of the camera angle which is a low angle shot for this scene. As the male is toasting about their accomplishments for the last 3 years he mentions that they still have alot to do but he wont mention the in's and out's of them because of the female company.This hint enabled me to come to the conclusion that these people are in some type of dangerous gangster job.We are first shown Drake when the camera gives us a closeup of him nodding his head agreeing to the speech in this frame he looks laided back and comfertable.As another guy starts to make his speech we are shown a over the shoulder shot of the back of Drake to another table this was used to convey the people sitting at this table are listening in waiting for something.

We are then shown a establishing wide shot of a mansion this flickes to a long shot of a woman at her dressing table in her lingerie,The camera then pans her up and down reethesising that she is'nt wearing alot of clothing.The music is then airy and a close up of the woman is shown looking quite worried then a pin drops and we are shown a quick close up of a man smiling with pure gold teeth. The scene then goes back to the long shot of the woman in her dressing room but it shows her having a black bag put on her head then it fades out.

We then go back to the club and we are showed a medium shot of a man walking carring a telephone to Drakes table and haning the handset to him. Drake picks up the handset and a deep voice speaks the antagonist in this music video, drakes face then is put in a close up as his relaxed glare changes to anger.
A wide shot is shown with Drakes friends all relizing something is wrong and getting up after him and following him.It is now when the music starts which i personally think is really effective because it kinda says to the audience that here we go everything starts now and it does.

After this a wide shot is shown with all the men walking into the house we were shown earlier,Drakes men spread out and enter a weapon room which is also shown in a wide shot to enthesis how many guns their are , Whilst Drake walks into another room and we are given a close up as he flashbacks to a memory he had of his girlfriend.

Then  we are shown a long shot of one of Drakes men on the phone exclaiming 'Its all falling into plan' And that pans left to show another member of Drakes crew watching the phonecall. This scene is important because it theys us that this friend of Drake's has betrayed him and the friend wathing now has the responsibility to let Drake know.

After this scene we are shown scenes of the men putting on armour and black masks as well as loading up with guns then we change to a car scene. At the front of the car Drake is sitting with the friend who witnesses the betrayal it is here when the friend decides to let drake know. And we have a wide shot of the back of the car and Drake's eyes scaring at the man in the screenmirror, which then switches to the man looking ashamed its almost like he knows Drake knows and hes beginning to regret his descision.

Meanwhile, We are shown a scene of inside the warehiuse with the woman tied up to a chair an a man enters the room looks at her either in sorrow or twisted excitment and undos her handcuffs .
Then we are shown a wide shot of all of the men infront of the warehouse building and this lifts up to a crane shot of a quick preview of the villans headquarters. Drake then pulls out a gun and points it first at the lights and shots allowing the girl to run away and second at the traitor who is oblivious to this and with a help of the special effects he fires the gun at the man.

Hes then signaled to pull his mask down and in the bridge of the song alot of flash slowmotion scemces follow of men dying amd exchanged fire. Then to almost end the battle their is a massive explosion which someone caused by shooting a barrell and the man who shoots the barrel flies of the roof of the trailer hes on top of to convey the imapct of the explosion.

While this is happening the girlfriend is still running but one of the antagonists catches up to her and fights her either to kill her although he had no weapon or to rape her, and just as shes losing the tumble the hero shows up and shoots the antagonist, the hero then pulls back his mask and its Drake .

They exchange hugs and kisses as the song comes to and end and we are shown a wide shot of the warehouse area smoke clearing and Drake his girl friend and his remaining men although non were clearly killed walk out of the ware house.

I really liked this music video because as I said before listening to the lyrics of the song would make you visualise Drake in a bar admiring a lafy by to completely change the innocence interpretation of the song makes it much more interesting to me.
The video was also in a Linear order and set out like a short film which is unconventional for music videos.Also I love that the build up to this story line was good only when the video was 2mins in did the actual music track begin to play which was really effective as the track had time to flow into its new meaning.
I dont think there is any real meaning to this song because of its movie structure but the plot of it is quite simple.

Overal I throughly enjoyed watching and analysing this video it was a very effective narrative which was so different to the expectations of the track.

Eastenders Genre and Narrative Conventions.

EastEnders is a British television soap opera, first broadcast in the United Kingdom on BBC One on 19 February 1985. It has conventions of a soap opera because the Characters are the same every week with new story's or story's are carried on now and again we  get either brand new characters or characters from the past. The episodes are always filled with suspense and drama and each argument that ends in a hurtful phrase is given most attention by the camera.

This week we had Ronnie return a character that used to be on the show but was sent to prison after kidnapping a neighbors baby and replacing it with her own stillborn.
This was actually a very much talked about case as many people got very upset by the nature of it. However this week she returned to the area in which she kidnapped the baby and the whole episode was set around her comeback and dealing with her sister who is now engaged to the victim.

In the setup there was a lot of conversations about Ronnie and close ups of peoples reactions to her return most importantly her sister and the victim sharing a intimate argument about her all these scenes helped develop the mood before we actually saw Ronnie which was very effective.

When we did see Ronnie in the development it showed us her reaction to other peoples reactions of her and a argument between her and the victim. This scene is actually hard to determine who's the protagonist and who's the antagonist because Ronnie doesn't seem evil in any way and she's doing no harm by seeing her sister, also Alfie (the victim) is only reacting as a normal person would so in this development its more close to binary opposition between two characters.


The resolution in this is quite a good one the victim offers the sister whom he's engaged to an ultimatum he asks her to choose Ronnie or him, and despite her love for her sister she chooses Alfie and the programme ends with the rather suspenseful three beats.