By Keith Alan Morgan on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 09:19 am:

Maybe I just heard wrong, but I thought Picard said they would rendezvous with the Victory in 2 days, then later Data says 3 days.

The solution Data gives indicates that the first case the Holodeck was playing out was A Scandal In Bohemia, if this is correct then there are some nits. Earlier Data was explaining the significance of Holmes' belongings, in particular there was a tie pin from The Adventure Of The Bruce-Partington Plans, a book from The Valley Of Fear and snuff box from someone who's name I didn't catch. The first problem is that A Scandal In Bohemia is set in 1888 whereas both The Adventure Of The Bruce-Partington Plans and The Valley Of Fear are set in 1895. If the case Data was to originally solve was A Scandal In Bohemia, then those items should not have been in Holmes study. (I believe A Scandal In Bohemia was the third Holmes story.) The second problem is that the Holodeck chose an unusual way to begin the story with a policeman bringing in the mysterious man who turns out to be the blackmailer. A Scandal In Bohemia begins with Holmes and Watson talking, then receiving a note about a masked visitor about to arrive and the lone visitor turning out to be Wilhelm Gottsreich Sigismond von Ormstein, the King of Bohemia. However if the computer had used the opening in the book, even skipping over Holmes and Watson's chit chat it would have taken longer for Geordi to get upset about Data jumping the gun and 'solving' the case. (Of course, I could be wrong in my identification of A Scandal In Bohemia as the Holodeck's first program since I am not a Holmes expert, there was not a lot to go on, and I did not have a copy of the Holmes canon as reference while the episode aired.)

The outfit Data wears as Sherlock Holmes is also a bit of a problem. I don't believe Doyle ever described the Deerstalker cap and that coat in any story. I believe it was first seen as an illustration for one story and was later popularized on stage, in film and television as Holmes' costume. Holmes' big bowled pipe was originally used by a stage actor who just found it easier to use than other pipes. Of course, Data's original examination of Sherlock Holmes, in Lonely Among Us, may have included TV and film adaptations and he just considered the outfit proper and adopted it. (Hmmm, in Lonely Among Us Data smokes a pipe because Holmes smoked a pipe, but Holmes also used Cocaine. If Data was willing to copy one bad habit, don't you think he might have been willing to copy two?)

Dr. Pulaski says that Data couldn't solve a mystery because he is a machine and can not understand Human emotions. Then to prove her point they go to the Holodeck for a new mystery, which will be created and performed by the computer, a machine.

Actually Dr. Pulaski could have cried foul before they set foot in the Holodeck. Data says that he asked for a Holmes type mystery, but not one written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Many people have written Sherlock Holmes stories, not just Arthur Conan Doyle. I believe the first to 'borrow' Holmes was Mark Twain.

Dr. Pulaski thinks that Data's circuits would blow out if confronted by a real mystery. Obviously Dr. Pulaski has never reviewed Data's service record as the first season is replete with mysteries that have confronted Data, the most obvious being Lonely Among Us where he discovered Holmes, but he also was confronted by the mystery of Farpoint Station in the pilot episode, the death of the crew of the Tsiolkovsky in The Naked Now, the purpose of the bars on Ligon II in Code Of Honor, etc., etc. Even if Pulaski didn't review Data's previous missions she should have remembered that Data was present when they were discussing the mystery of Troi's baby in The Child and he was on the Bridge when they were trying to figure out the nature of the area of blackness in Where Silence Has Lease. Of course the other explanation is that Pulaski just likes being confrontational herself and simply said all that to get a rise out of Data and maybe be invited to go to the Holodeck. Frankly, I thought her claims that Data couldn't deduce didn't hold water. Sherlock Holmes didn't need to understand Human emotions to solve a crime, he deduced by examining facts and evidence, a stain here, a footprint there, etc., etc. As for just remembering elements, well Holmes did that too, he remembered what different types of shoeprints looked like, what different accents sounded like, what different tobaccos smelled like. Based on this evidence, I would say that Pulaski is just a troublemaker. Elementary, my dear nitpickers, Elementary.

When Picard and Data enter the Holodeck the creators intentionally show the grid lines glowing through the image, but it appears that the lines shown are all ceiling lines, which indicates that this is a much bigger Holodeck than all the others ever shown on the series. (Hmmm, are the Holodeck walls retractable?)

If Data was playing Sherlock Holmes was Captain Picard playing his smarter brother Mycroft?

Moriarty claims that he is no longer evil, but he later holds the ship hostage in Ship In A Bottle.

In the NextGen Guide Phil said that Moriarty is sentient, but what makes Moriarty so different from Cyrus Redblock in The Big Goodbye, or Minuet in 11001001, or even the Doctor in Star Trek: Voyager? Is it simply the fact that he can destroy the ship that grants him sentience over these other computer generated characters? (Well, okay, judging from Human history that argument does have a certain logic to it.)

In Encounter at Farpoint Data explains that the Holodeck functions similar to the transporter, and I believe that Riker says that trees and rocks are simpler patterns than humanoids. (Not an exact quote, but I believe that was the gist of it.) Water is very simple, two parts Hydrogen to one part Oxygen, so Wesley could drip water outside of the Holodeck and a snowball (frozen water) could fly out the door. The lipstick in The Big Goodbye and the paper in this episode are also relatively simple and inactive items which could have been created by a Replicator, which I believe is also part of the Holodeck functions. (It would also explain Dr. Pulaski getting stuffed on crumpets.) Humanoids on the other hand are complex, active objects and could not be easily duplicated by a Transporter/Replicator, what with all that breathing, blood pumping, sweating, etc., etc., so a combination of light projection and force fields are used instead of a Transporter/Replicater. So does this explanation have any problems?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Mike Konczewski on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 02:35 pm:

Holmes wore his deerstalker cap in the country; he wore a top hat in the city. He also only smoked a pipe when deep in thought; normally he was a cigarette smoker.

I think you're right in placing most of the first story in "A Scandal in Bohemia", except that the blackmailer was a women (Irene Adler), and the blackmaillee was the Prince of Bohemia. Also, if this did take place during "Scandal", Holmes had already kicked his cocaine habit.

The first "Holmes-style" mystery, actually the first true mystery, period, was by Edgar Allen Poe ("The Purloined Letter"), not Twain. Twain also wrote most of his work before Doyle.

Holmes often used his knowledge of human behavior to solve crimes. He was an excellent profiler.

Moriarty's actions in "Ship in a Bottle" were based on self-preservation, but not inherently evil. After all, Picard had promised to help him out of his predicament at the end of this episode, then never gave it another thought.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Murray Leeder on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 02:48 pm:

Wouldn't it be "The Murders in Rue Morgue", which introduced C. Auguste Dupin?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Charles Cabe (Ccabe) on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 04:38 pm:

Given the recent illegialization of tobacco in public places, would Data be allowed to smoke a pipe on the Bridge?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By ScottN on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 06:36 pm:

It must be Synthebacco (no relation to Chewbacca or Chewing Tobacco).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Keith Alan Morgan on Tuesday, April 20, 1999 - 05:35 am:

Well, since some people think that Arthur Conan Doyle had based Holmes on Poe's C. Auguste Dupin, I suppose the first Holmes style mystery was written before Sherlock Holmes was created.

Mark Twain did write a story with Sherlock Holmes in it, without Doyle's permission, in 1902. It was called A Double-Barreled Detective Story.

The Murders In The Rue Morgue was the first mystery story and The Purloined Letter was the 3rd C. Auguste Dupin story.

ScottN: I love Synthebacco... all the pleasure of inhaling smoke without any of those negative side effects!

The end of this episode is often amusing for what Moriarty says to Pulaski:
"I'll still fill you with crumpets!"

Now, there's a superb alternative to the familiar "I'll be back!" line uttered by many villains (or semi-villains in this case)...
***
PICARD: Now, unless you wish to be made an example of, I'd suggest you return to Romulan space!
ROMULAN COMMANDER: (pouts) Very well, Picard. You win... for now. But I swear to you this is not over. One day, the Romulan Star Empire will fill each and every one of you with hot buttered crumpets, and you will wish you had died here at my hands...
***
JANEWAY: You've proved your point. Now leave!
Q: As you wish, Kathie dear. I'll just have to stuff you with crumpets another time...

It takes on a whole new meaning when you consider "a bit of crumpet" is a euphemism for sex.

And on DS9 members of the Dominion could say, "We will fill you with tapioca another time."

Either that or "We'll bash Bashir's head in another time." ;-)

Of course, the Klingons would say...

(Suddenly KAM is crushed under a ton of stale crumpets, successfully preventing him from repeating every NitCentral running gag around. May the pants be with you.)

And let us not forget the Borg: "We are the Borg. You will be stuffed with Crumpets. Resistance is futile."

Species 8472: "The weak will be stuffed with Crumpets."


Pulaski's aditude towards Data doesn't get any better in this episode than it did for the previous two! What is her problem?

It's been years since any man has stuffed her with crumpets.

Not a major nit here, but did anyone else find it strange that Moriaty called the computer "Mr. Computer" even though it speaks with a female voice?

I'm sure he would recognise this even if it had an American accent.

Yeah, I noticed it too. He does this three times in the episode. Must be his 19th century sexism.

In the episode The Neutral Zone, Data told Sonny Clemonds that television fell into disuse by 2040. Literature, of course, has remained, as evidenced by various episodes with references to books, famous writers and plays. So why is Data wearing the familiar deerstalker cap, trenchcoat and telltale pipe that we associate with Holmes? None of these things were EVER mentioned in any of the original Holmes stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, which Data’s holodeck program appears to be heavily steeped in. All of these elements were invented when Holmes was brought to the screen. The first time Holmes wore the hat was when William Gillette played him on stage. Oh, and by the way, Holmes never said, "Elementary, my dear Watson," in any of the written stories either, any more than Kirk said "Beam me up, Scotty," or Humphrey Bogart said "Play it again, Sam." If TV is really dead by this episode’s time frame, and Data wanted to emulate the literary Holmes, maybe he should’ve tried smoking cocaine!

Moriarty notices Data, Geordi and Pulaski approaching the area of the arch before Geordi even calls it up! How did he do this if it was before Geordi reprogrammed the holodeck to make Moriarty sentient? Shouldn’t he ignore the three of them like all the other holodeck characters?

In Act 2, when Moriarty first commands the arch to appear, the blonde woman standing next to him doesn’t seemed perturbed by its appearance. Nor does she seem to react badly when Moriarty walks over to the arch and it talks back to him. Only when it disappears does she freak out and call it "dark magic."

After Data solves the murder of the abusive man by his wife at the end of Act 2, he notices Moriarty. How does he recognize him? Did Data familiarize himself with the computer’s visual interpretation of Moriarty off camera before starting the program?

In the very beginning of Act 3, Data and Geordi are running after Pulaski and her kidnapper. They stop, and in the long shots of them in the middle of the street, there is the corner of a brick wall in the foreground. Standing mostly in silhouette in front of the wall is a man in a top hat. At the end of their conversation, they hear footfalls again, and say together, "Footfalls!" As they do this, the man moves behind the wall. First of all, who was this guy? If it was Moriarty, who did those footfalls belong to? And where was Pulaski?

When Data first mentions the master criminal Professor Moriarty to Geordi in Act 3, he refers to him as the one whom Holmes could only defeat at the cost of his own life at Riechenbach Falls. While it’s true that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did kill off Holmes and Moriarty at the end of Hound of the Baskervilles, Doyle was inundated by demands by the fans to bring him back, and Doyle did so in the next story (I believe it was The Return of Sherlock Holmes), in which he revealed that Holmes survived, and allowed himself to heal from his injuries in private, even from Watson. (Moriarty’s body was never found.) Wouldn’t the knowledge Data has in his head include that story?

I must say that the contour drawing of the Enterprise that Moriarty made, which Geordi flipped over after Data gave it to him, is VERY neatly drawn, especially when you consider that Moriarty drew it while holding the paper in the air with one hand, and drew it with the other, and without the benefit of a surface to draw on! If I didn’t know better, I’d say it was drawn on that paper by a professional artist beforehand.(Wink, wink!)

Three times during the episode, Moriarty addresses or refers to the computer as "Mr.," despite the fact that it has a female voice.

While the crew meet in the observation lounge in Act 4, the ship shakes, and when Picard asks the computer for the cause, the computer says that attitude and stabilization control of the Enterprise was momentarily transferred to holodeck 2. I think the computer meant to say the ship’s attitude and stabilization was momentarily altered. The transfer of control over it to the holodeck wasn’t momentary; it was permanent. It only reverted to its rightful place when Moriarty released it at the end of the episode.

Also, Picard utters an French expletive, merde, which means s h i t. Is cursing allowed on network television so long as it’s in another language? Or did the censors miss it because Picard says it under his breath somewhat? When Superman III was broadcast on television, a scene featuring a man in Italy saying a curse word in Italian was altered to make it a different word. This same oddity shows up later in Scorpion part I(VOY).

While it’s true that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did kill off Holmes and Moriarty at the end of Hound of the Baskervilles, Doyle was inundated by demands by the fans to bring him back, and Doyle did so in the next story (I believe it was The Return of Sherlock Holmes)

I believe Holmes & Moriarty were killed in The Final Solution. (or was it The Final Problem?)
The Hound Of The Baskervilles was written after Holmes 'death', but set sometime before it.

Also, Picard utters an French expletive, merde, which means s h i t. Is cursing allowed on network television so long as it’s in another language?

Their are no set in stone rules for what you can and can't do on TV. It just all comes down to the judgment of the censors. Perhaps they missed it, or didn't know what it ment, or didn't figure enough people would understand it to go change it.

Thanks, Keith.

Brian, I'm not certain if that's true. The FCC has very strict rules for TV and radio. Doesn't the "seven dirty words" rule that came out of that debacle with George Carlin a while back apply? I'm not sure how derivatives or foreign versions of these words apply, though, or what the censors or the FCC would say about those scenes in Superman III or Scorpion part I(VOY).

Oh, and speaking of censorship, and for those comic book fans out there that may not know, the most recent issue of the Comics Buyer's Guide (issue #1437; June 1, 2001)reported that Marvel may be considering DROPPING the Comics Code seal from its books, in favor of a self-created ratings system. If it's true, YAAAY!

Ah, but there WERE several Sherlock Holmes stories that take place after his "death." They were chronicled in, as Luigi Nova said, "The Return of Sherlock Holmes."

You can't say "s'hit" on TV in the US? There is censorship???

Actualy you can say it. An ep of Chicago Hope used the expression "$hit happens". I think that the 7 dirty words can't be said between a certan time that covers all daylight hours, but the S word is not one of the 7. Most of the FCCs rules are very ambiguous and filled with meaningless legal mumbo-jumbo like "purant interest, patantly offensive, and community standards"; all phrases that mean diferent thing to diferent people. For example on MTVs remake of Scaired Straight that they show at midnight they say (unbleeped) "Mother F**ker" Also network censors work for the networks, not the government. Basicaly what network's are told is "police your own brodcasts as you see fit but if we think that your not doing enough we will make it very hard to get your brodcast licence renewed." Which is why the kids on South Park (Comedy central) say "GD", but they couldn't on Dawson's Creek (WB). Or most networks let you say SOB but the sci-fi channel bleeps it.

To the "lucky European" I could go on for hours about the unjust limits that we have on our freedoms in this supposed "land of the free".

Thank you, Merat, and by the way, it's Novi, not Nova. I'm not a Chevy, nor an exploding star. (Though many have made that mistake before.)

Sorry, I was typing quickly because I was at work. I am there now, in fact. :-)

Don't worry. At least you didn't ask me "where Mario is." (I'm really sick of that one. That video game ruined my life back in high school, I tell you!)

Merat, I didn't say there weren't any stories set after his death. Simply that Hound of The Baskervilles was written after, but set before the story of his death. Doyle wasn't ready to bring Holmes back to life yet.

Luigi, apparently 4 of the 7 words can be said if they are phrased right. This came out when Julia Louis-Dreyfuss (sp?) & someone else were introducing George Carlin on a comedy special, a few years back, & they used those four words in the introduction.

Also Luigi there is a Comic Books board if you'd like to discuss the Comics Code. (Go to Topics & scroll down to the basement.)

In Howard Stern's movie they do the same thing while on the radio. "Fill in the blank,
______-a-doodle-do" "Well Howard, I'd have to say ••••(pause)-a-doodle-do".
Very good "______ willow"..............

>I'm not a Chevy, nor an exploding star<

How about an exploding Chevy? (Sorry! I couldn't resist! I'm only fooling!)

No thanks. If I'm gonna be a car, It's not going to have a name that means "don't go" in Italian or Spanish. (It's kinda like the owner of the Virgin Airlines naming all his products with the "Virgin" brand name. He's got Virgin Airways, Virgin Cola, the Virgin Megastore in Times Square, NY, etc. That's fine, but they even sell condoms at the check out counter called-you guessed it!-Virgin condoms. Not a very good name for a condom.) But I digress...

Virgin condoms...well, if they've never been used, I guess they could rightly be called that! :p

Well, I didn't see it that way. To me, calling a condom "Virgins" is like calling a car the "Broken-Down Lemon" Sedan. It's like saying, "This is the condom for losers!" Why don't they just go all out and call them the "You'll never get laid in your whole s tupid life" condoms?

Data deduces that the murdered man was released from Dartmoor Prison 'today'.

Not being an expert on 19th century trains and station locations, I hesitate to say that it couldn't happen, but he certainly didn't waste any time getting home to London.

Dartmoor Prison is in a remote location about 230 miles from London, and I'm guessing that the first part of the journey would be by horse and cart.

Yet another "Holodeck Hiccup" episode.

Um...John. This was the second one. That's like posting, "The Borg AGAIN?!" in the "Best Of Both Worlds" board.

I was browsing the TNG Script Library CD-ROM, and for this episode, the prostitute is referred to in the character listing as PROSTITUTE (WHORE).

Those script writers really don't want to leave any room for misinterpretation.

A very familiar guest cast to those into '90s television:

Daniel Davis (Moriarty) was the smart-mouthed butler Niles on "The Nanny," and is actually from Arkansas, NOT England.

Anne Elizabeth Ramsay (Clancy) was Jamie's ditzy sister Lisa on "Mad About You."

Recurring holodeck inconsistencies: Holographic objects are removed from the holodeck and continue to exist outside the holodeck! First it was water dripping off of Wesley and onto the carpeted deck, then a lipstick stain on Picard's face and here it's Moriarty's drawing of the Enterprise carried into the rest of the ship. All these things should not be!

Originally posted on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 09:19 am:

In Encounter at Farpoint Data explains that the Holodeck functions similar to the transporter, and I believe that Riker says that trees and rocks are simpler patterns than humanoids. (Not an exact quote, but I believe that was the gist of it.) Water is very simple, two parts Hydrogen to one part Oxygen, so Wesley could drip water outside of the Holodeck and a snowball (frozen water) could fly out the door. The lipstick in The Big Goodbye and the paper in this episode are also relatively simple and inactive items which could have been created by a Replicator, which I believe is also part of the Holodeck functions. (It would also explain Dr. Pulaski getting stuffed on crumpets.) Humanoids on the other hand are complex, active objects and could not be easily duplicated by a Transporter/Replicator, what with all that breathing, blood pumping, sweating, etc., etc., so a combination of light projection and force fields are used instead of a Transporter/Replicater. So does this explanation have any problems?

Are books considered simple or inactive enough under this theory? Picard threw a book out the holodeck door in order to explain to Moriarty in the beginning of Ship in a Bottle(TNG) why he couldn't leave it, and it promptly disappeared.

The holodeck begins as a blank slate. Unless the room functions as a big replicator (and I think it doesn't),all matter present there is generated and sustained only by the Holoemitter devices installed in the room. Projections of light and forcefields require a local source. Hypothetically, Transporter technology could provide a remote source.

Somebody's shadow can be seen on the brick walls of "London" when Data (Holmes) & LaForge (Watson) say, "Footfalls" (or whatever)

Not sure if anyone has ever poointed this out, but first of all, Data shouldn't seem to "remember" to get in character as Holmes. He should just *be* in character. He is an android.

Of a more troubling nature, though, why do we never see this Data anywhere else? Does he have a program for being a great detective? If so, why does he never use it? Think of how useful Data's deductive mind would be in thousands of situations! He seems to act like Holmes only on the holodeck, yet those same detection skills would be invaluable in other areas.

He's used those skills on other episodes. The Mind's Eye and Thine Own Self come to mind.

"Think of how useful Data's deductive mind would be in thousands of situations! He seems to act like Holmes only on the holodeck, yet those same detection skills would be invaluable in other areas."


Because smoking on the bridge would set up off the fire suppression systems.

Is it me, or does LeVar Burton sound like he has a cold in this episode?

I remember noticing that too, Amadeus!

I have a vague recollection of thinking that about Patrick Stewart in a first seasaon episode, though I can't recall which one.

He sounds perfectly normal to me.

I have to admit, this is one of my favorites from the second season. And it's also my favorite one with Dr. Pulaski. Yep, that's right. She just seemed more likable than usual here, and I liked how the script involved her in wanting to see if Data could solve a holodeck mystery that he had no prior knowledge of. Also, I read a few Sherlock Holmes stories as a kid, which I enjoyed. There are also the two recent films with Robert Downey Jr, but they take the characters in a slightly different direction, that's for sure.

And Phil was absolutely right. Geordi making the mistake of telling the computer to "create an adversary capable of defeating Data" as opposed to the Sherlock Holmes character, well, that was a bit of a stressful situation for the crew to deal with, once Professor Moriarty was made sentient and was aware of his own existence. Which, as Phil also said, seemed to heavily imply that the Enterprise computer itself was sentient! That sure did open up a can of worms, now didnt it?

At least Moriarty wasn't foolish and gullible like Cyrus Redblock from "The Big Goodbye". Notice how Moriarty didn't take the bait when Pulaski offered for him to "join her on the Enterprise". Redblock and his henchman fell for that, and they faded away in the corridor. I always thought that was a particularly amusing scene from that episode.

And when they brought Moriarty back four years later, it was unfortunate that Pulaski was no longer around, she only appeared in the non-canon novels after season two, AFAIK. Someone wondered why he didnt ask where she was on that episode's board, that was pretty funny.

I also wonder what would have happened if Worf had to have rescued Picard and Data, after he had dressed in the time period-appropriate attire. Riker joked that he would "be a big hit in London", but as we saw in "A Fistful Of Datas", Eli Hollander reacted rather mildly to Worf's appearance when, as someone on that board said, someone who looked like Worf entering an ancient west saloon would scare the patrons and make them run for the hills. And how would people in 1800's London have reacted to someone who looked like Worf? Not well, I would presume.

Like I said, I liked this one. And Pulaski was actually OK here as well!

Keith Alan Morgan on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 09:19 am: Maybe I just heard wrong, but I thought Picard said they would rendezvous with the Victory in 2 days, then later Data says 3 days. The crew of the Victory could have informed Enterprise of an additional delay between the two statements.

Moriarty claims that he is no longer evil, but he later holds the ship hostage in Ship in a Bottle.
Rogbodge (Nit_breaker): He was acting out of frustration, due to the crew 'forgetting' about him during the intervening period. Mike Konczewski on Monday, April 19, 1999 - 02:35 pm: Moriarty's actions in Ship in a Bottle were based on self-preservation, but not inherently evil. After all, Picard had promised to help him out of his predicament at the end of this episode, then never gave it another thought.

The Enterprise arrives at the rendez-vous location with the Victory 3 days early. The events in this episode take no more than a day though, yet we see the Victory arriving at the end. What happened to the other 2 days?