There's Something About Molly

Spoiler Warning: This post will discuss some events from the current season of the BBC's Sherlock as well as past seasons.  

Now, I know that there were varied reactions to the final episode of Sherlock season 4. On a personal note, I don’t really understand what most people are upset about in terms of the narrative of the episode itself. Unpopular opinion: I enjoyed the psychological drama that was going on in the episode rather than a traditional mystery. However, that isn’t what I want to talk about.

I think of all of the characters in the series, I connect the most with Molly Hooper. She is relatable in that everyone has had that one person in their life who they care about deeply but that person doesn’t feel the same way. From the very first episode, it is clear that Molly cares about Sherlock deeply and is hurt by his lack of notice. He has used her affections to his advantage when he needs something, but there’s a moment in season 2 when we begin to see that Sherlock cares about Molly if not in the way that she would like. Sherlock remarks that Moriarty’s ultimate mistake in attacking the people that he cares about was that he didn’t include Molly in this group when she was the “one person who mattered the most.”

I think that’s what makes Eurus’ game involving Molly so heartbreaking. Not because Sherlock was forced to say something he doesn’t mean, but because Molly was forced to say “I love you” and finally voice what we knew all along, including Sherlock. We feel so much for Molly because we know how much courage it takes to tell someone that you love them as well as the anguish when you that they won’t or can’t honestly say it back.

However, in the final montage of the episode, the audience sees Molly skipping into the flat at 221B Baker Street as though nothing has changed. How could this be? It doesn’t make sense in terms of basic human relationships. Anyone who has been in love with someone who doesn’t love them back can attest to this, especially once those feelings are declared. Perhaps that’s why I was angered by Steven Moffat’s response to the question after the final episode aired. He casually dismissed Molly’s feelings, indicating that she would be fine once it was explained to her, saying “She probably had a drink and went and shagged someone, I dunno. Molly was fine.” Either Moffat has never experienced a similar situation or is possibly as emotionally stunted as Sherlock has been prior to this. Despite his assertions, people don’t just move on, forgive, and get over it. Things like this create scars. Sure, we try to hide them and may fool everyone, but they are still there. It takes significant time to heal, especially when the feelings have been there for so long. Most people don't just get over it, and I would argue that if they do, the feelings weren't really as deep as they thought.

He goes on to wonder if Sherlock is the same after the events. As the viewer, there was comfort in Sherlock’s emotional reaction to the pain that he knows he has caused Molly. This is further evidence that he does care for even if it’s not in the way Molly would like. She sees through all of his bullshit so much so that she is the one person that both John and Sherlock trust to do so. Molly sees him, and in many ways, Sherlock sees her as well. Perhaps that is part of the attraction. Even though he is significantly emotionally stunted (I think the final episode of Season 4 has established that Sherlock really isn’t a high-functioning sociopath like he claims), Sherlock’s deductive ability allows him to see through the facades people use to mask emotions. In part, Sherlock’s destruction of the casket in a burst of emotion is because there is no going back for him. Even when he explains the situation to Molly and takes back his declaration of love, he will be able to see the pain that this “game” caused her, no matter how much she tries to hide it. Sherlock understands how this burden will affect both of them. Their relationship is forever changed.

Molly is more than a plot device, and she means more to Sherlock than the proverbial damsel in distress. The dismissal of her feelings are just another example of the way in which the entertainment industry reduces women to tropes. It isn’t anti-feminist or reductive to create a character who loves someone from afar for a long period of time. What makes this anti-feminist is that these characters are only women. This isn’t a problem that only women face, and when that longing must be vocalized only to be rebuffed, it’s never just ok and no big deal. The pain and emotions are real.