A study in scarlet

[antihippy]

A local bookshop has an excellent sale on the classics at present so picked up a few books I had never gotten around to reading. Amongst them was the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.

Story number one is "A Study in Scarlet". I have to confess to having seen some adaptations of the Holmes stories so I pretty much knew what was going on - or so I thought. I've never actually read it before.

Right in the middle of the book it jumps to western setting and goes on to discuss the latter day saints in quite umcomplimentary ways. It even alludes to the early settlers creating a religous totalitarian state.

I've had a wee look at the net and it seems there is a little controversy about this.

The fact that Doyle breaks the normal conventions of detective novels (well they were only being created when he wrote this) is really a side issue; I was wanting to know what other readers thought of the sudden change in the book.

Your opinions!

[SteveW]

I presume you have been in Afghanistan?

Actually, there are several Holmes stories that have an American connection (The Advernture of the Dancing Men, for one). Study in Scarlet was an excellent book and, I guess I was suprised at the western setting but I don't remember since it has been probably 40 years since I first read it.

And I still want to know what happened to Watson's dog.

[TruthSeeker]

Hey! I just finished reading it last night - it is one of the readings for my book club this month.

I found the switch a bit jarring to the narrative but intriguing. I don't know the history of the Mormons, but the picture he paints is believable. The requirement of complete obedience with violent punishment for disobedience fits with what we know about the beginnings of break-away groups.

[Hutch]

Doyle uses the same type of technique in probably the least-known Holmes novel "The Valley of Fear", having Holmes solve the murder and then going back in the second half to describe why the murder took place--in this case, in the Coal mines of Pennsylvania and the "Molly Maguires".

Not one of the better Holmes stories, but interesting.

[drkitten]

A
The fact that Doyle breaks the normal conventions of detective novels (well they were only being created when he wrote this) is really a side issue; I was wanting to know what other readers thought of the sudden change in the book.

Your opinions!

Well, I personally don't like it very much. Conventions of detective fictions be damned; the general conventions of narrative have been around since the "Aristotelian unities," and this kind of flashback breaks them. I don't mind brief illustrative flashbacks, and I also don't mind narratives that are all flashback (e.g. Wells' Time Machine), but extensive jumps from the present to the past and back indicate, to me, an inability to commit to a narrative framework.

I suspect this is one reason why the conventions of detective fiction evolved the way they did; other writers than Conan Doyle found the structure annoying and figured out a set of conventions for retelling past events within the narrative itself, e.g. either through witness testimony or through a detective's reconstruction of events.

[Lamuella]

a quite lovely companion piece to this is Neil Gaiman's "A Study In Emerald". A Sherlock Holmes story set in a Lovecraftian world. It's online here:

http://www.neilgaiman.com/exclusive/shortstories

[ImaginalDisc]

The fact that Doyle breaks the normal conventions of detective novels (well they were only being created when he wrote this) is really a side issue...

Excuse me, but it is Poe who invented the detective story, in the Purloined Letter, not Doyle.

[TruthSeeker]

Excuse me, but it is Poe who invented the detective story, in the Purloined Letter, not Doyle.

Yes, or at a minimum, the consulting detective story. Holmes even refers to Dupin in "A Study in Scarlet".

[drkitten]

Excuse me, but it is Poe who invented the detective story, in the Purloined Letter, not Doyle.

I'm not sure it's fair to say that Poe invented all the modern conventions of detective fiction, any more than it's fair to say that the Wright brothers invented the Boeing 747. Certainly "the Purloined Letter" was influential, but most of the elements of the modern mystery novel were hammered out much later. This site reprints a 1929 list of "The Ten Commandments of Detective Fiction (http://www.classiccrimefiction.com/commandments.htm)," from what has become widely recognized as the "Golden Age" of mystery writing.

Any reasonable history of detective fiction would start with Poe, note the long and largely deserted gap between Poe and Conan Doyle, and then discuss how detective fiction, as distinguished from mere cheap thrillers or Gothic novels, really only came into its own as a genre in the Golden Age with the development of the "cozy" mysteries on one side of the Atlantic and the corresponding "hard-boiled" ones on the other. But almost everything that today we associate with detective fiction originated in one of those two groups.

[ImaginalDisc]

I'm not sure it's fair to say that Poe invented all the modern conventions of detective fiction, any more than it's fair to say that the Wright brothers invented the Boeing 747.

Whoa there. I said that Poe invented the Detective story, I didn't say he invented all its conventions.

[Pope130]

antihippy,
I just finished re-reading "A Study in Scarlet" (my wife got me "The New Annotated Sherlock Holmes" for my birthday).
The insertion of the back story right at the end is a bit odd. Don't let it put you off the rest of the stories. Although he does something of the sort in "The Vally of Fear" (noted by Hutch above) and "The Sign of the Four", it is less extensive. The short stories are more straightforward with a minimum of flashbacks, which are much more relevant to the narative.
My understanding of the "In the Land of the Saints" insert is that Doyle had a pretty good Detective short story, and a pretty good Western short story in mind, and a potential sale of a novellette in hand. He grafted the two together and paid the rent.
I hope you will read, and enjoy, the rest of the stories.

Robert Klaus

[ceo_esq]

Actually, there are several Holmes stories that have an American connection (The Advernture of the Dancing Men, for one). Study in Scarlet was an excellent book and, I guess I was suprised at the western setting but I don't remember since it has been probably 40 years since I first read it.

[ETA: Doyle "spoiler" ahead.]

I always remember the unexpected (and implausible) American connection from "The Five Orange Pips", where Holmes discovers that the Ku Klux Klan "dunnit".

[antihippy]

Excuse me, but it is Poe who invented the detective story, in the Purloined Letter, not Doyle.

Excuse me, but I wasn't asserting anything of the kind.

My point was that the rules were in flux and not fully set down.

[antihippy]

antihippy,
I just finished re-reading "A Study in Scarlet" (my wife got me "The New Annotated Sherlock Holmes" for my birthday).
The insertion of the back story right at the end is a bit odd. Don't let it put you off the rest of the stories. Although he does something of the sort in "The Vally of Fear" (noted by Hutch above) and "The Sign of the Four", it is less extensive. The short stories are more straightforward with a minimum of flashbacks, which are much more relevant to the narative.
My understanding of the "In the Land of the Saints" insert is that Doyle had a pretty good Detective short story, and a pretty good Western short story in mind, and a potential sale of a novellette in hand. He grafted the two together and paid the rent.
I hope you will read, and enjoy, the rest of the stories.

Robert Klaus

Thanks Robert.

I had guessed as much myself. And I intend to read the rest of the stories in the book I've got. The Sign of Four was quite good as well.
----

The things that struck me were:


The complete disconnect between the London part and the American part was: completely jarring and, in my opinion, it ruins the narrative somewhat. It seems odd that a writer of Doyle's calibre would have made such a mistake without a reason. As Robert Klaus mentions - it might well have been "about the money". Does anyone know of a good biography? I might as well do some supplementary reading while my curiosity is aroused.
And, I might be over-asserting here, his apparent dislike for the Mormons. Of course he might be reflecting contemporary prejuidice, but it seems fairly overt that he really didn't like the idea of the mormons. Does anyone know if he's on record somewhere as stating this? I've had a wee look at the net and the noise to signal is a bit too high to get an objective view.
It's almost as if he was stating something, dare I say, political... I'm very wary of reinterpreting stories from other eras as there is the danger of projecting your own prejuidices and opinions - especially if you fail to consider the attitudes of the day.

----

a quite lovely companion piece to this is Neil Gaiman's "A Study In Emerald". A Sherlock Holmes story set in a Lovecraftian world. It's online here:

http://www.neilgaiman.com/exclusive/shortstories

I love Lovecraft! Neil Gaiman has talent of his own! I'll try to find the time to check that out. Thanks for the recommendation.

As complete aside (but in a similar vein): do you like Alice in Wonderland? If you do check out "Automated Alice" by Jeff Noon. A brilliant piece of writing. Completely captures the barmy nature of Alice in Wonderland and is a trippy a piece of Science Fiction as you could imagine.

----

It was the recent re-screening of the Jeremy Brett Holmes on a UK digital channel that had put the idea of reading Holmes into my head. I needed a break from reading history, science and SF so I thought the Holmes book would make a good diversion.

[TruthSeeker]

I found it helpful to re-read the chapter just prior to "In the land of the saints" before reading the chapter just after it. (if that makes sense :))

Don't know about the Doyle/Mormon issue. It is discussed in the amazon reviews but I haven't seen anything official.

[ImaginalDisc]

Excuse me, but I wasn't asserting anything of the kind.

My point was that the rules were in flux and not fully set down.

Oh. I misread what you had said. My apologies.

[kittynh]

well I like the Red Head story, because it was a bit amusing. What I like is that the stories really differ. So reading one isn't like reading another. That was part of his genius. And it's off how he really keeps the woo out of the Holmes stories.

None of them quite work up as well as a movie though as the HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES!!!!

[Luciana]

All non-English characters are "odd" in some way. His xenophobia was entirely typical of his era, and I don't think it detracts from the stories.

[Pope130]

Antihippy,
Doyles attitude toward the Mormons has been discussed extensively within the Sherlock Holmes fanbase. (Some of the debates make the squabbles in our "Politics" section look like schoolyard spats!) The concensus seems to be that the Mormons served as a "Bad Guy" for the purposes of the story, and do not represent any specific antipathy on Doyles part.
Consider that from the contemporary British point of view the Mormons appeared to be a dangerous foriegn cult advocating immoral and illegal practices. It was rumoured that Mormon agents recruited, seduced or kidnapped decent British girls for their harems, that they had a secret inner group responsible for armed protection of the leadership and enforcement of doctrine, and that they were attempting to establish a seperate nation in Utah. Given this general belief, "A Study In Scarlet" didn't seem too improbable.
In "The Valley of Fear" Doyle includes a fictionalised account of the Pinkerton Detective Agency operations against the Molly Maguires. This is actually a more slanted account than his treatment of the Mormons. The Scowrers in this story are unmitigated scoundrels. No appreciation of the broader issues of big business versus the nascent labor movement are considered.
In other stories where non-British characters are featured his treatment is more even handed I think.
I think you'll find the rest of the stories as interesting for their glimpses of Victorian life as for the mysteries themselves.

Robert Klaus

[tumnus]

Hi all, I'd like to add that I felt a similar and surprising discontinuity when I read A Study In Scarlet. It was not what i expected at all. I still enjoyed the story, and the info about the mormons will make me forever cautious when those smiley fellows knock on the door! I agree that part of the pleasure was the glimpse into victorian life. Similar to when I read Alan Moore's League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen (I'm sure there's a reference to almost every victorian piece of literature jammed in there).

My only contribution really here is to say thanks for the links to those Neil Gaiman lovecraft stories. Excellent! I'm re-reading The Case Of Charles Dexter Ward at the moment, and those babies are right up my street! Also the detective commandment links, very interesting as I drink my tea.

Take it easy,
Tobias van de Peer

[antihippy]

Doyles attitude toward the Mormons has been discussed extensively within the Sherlock Holmes fanbase. (Some of the debates make the squabbles in our "Politics" section look like schoolyard spats!) The concensus seems to be that the Mormons served as a "Bad Guy" for the purposes of the story, and do not represent any specific antipathy on Doyles part.

Thanks for this.

It (the sudden change to the US) almost spoiled my enjoyment of the story, but I battled through and moved onto the Sign of Four. SoF was much better even if the inherent xenophobia was obvious whenever an indian was mentioned. I was talking to a friend of mine the other night and he informed me of a disclaimer he found when he was researching Doyle for a dissertation: "We would like to point out that the natives of the Andaman Islands are not, in fact, cannibals; no we don't now why Conan Doyle chose to make them so either."

[Beady]

"We would like to point out that the natives of the Andaman Islands are not, in fact, cannibals; no we don't now why Conan Doyle chose to make them so either."

The simple fact is, there is no fantasy that Doyle would refuse to present as fact, if he wanted (not needed, but wanted) to use it as a plot device. I strongly suggest that this thread be suspended until all participants have read "The Creeping Man." *Then* we can come back and try to puzzle out why Doyle did what he did, even when he knew better.

[antihippy]

The simple fact is, there is no fantasy that Doyle would refuse to present as fact, if he wanted (not needed, but wanted) to use it as a plot device. I strongly suggest that this thread be suspended until all participants have read "The Creeping Man." *Then* we can come back and try to puzzle out why Doyle did what he did, even when he knew better.

ha ha!

Perhaps we should. A quick google demonstrated that that story may be quite a debate ...

[Luciana]

The simple fact is, there is no fantasy that Doyle would refuse to present as fact, if he wanted (not needed, but wanted) to use it as a plot device. I strongly suggest that this thread be suspended until all participants have read "The Creeping Man." *Then* we can come back and try to puzzle out why Doyle did what he did, even when he knew better.

I read the entire collection three times, but the last time was five years ago. I remember the story well, but have only a vague recollection of its inconsistencies. I have always enjoyed Holmes' methods more than the mysteries themselves.

To me that story is purely science fiction. The old professor is taking "rejuvenation seeds" so he could get married to a younger lady (to me that's an aphodisiac, right?). Then he acquires certain traits as that of a monkey! Doyle should know better than that, of course. I could buy that the professor's smell changed because of the poison, thus rendering him loathsome to his own dogs, but how do you explain the monkey-like agility? I think his knuckles were also oversized? Holmed guessed he was addicted to something that came from the mail and made him behave like that. That's part of the story that is cool.

On that vein, what about The Lion's Mane? Could this jellyfish ever live in a pool and kill a grown man? Well, this wouldn't have been a story at all today. When the dying man said "lion's mane", a Sherlock only had to type that in google and voila! Culprit. :D

[Lucky]

I read the entire collection three times, but the last time was five years ago. I remember the story well, but have only a vague recollection of its inconsistencies. I have always enjoyed Holmes' methods more than the mysteries themselves.

To me that story is purely science fiction. The old professor is taking "rejuvenation seeds" so he could get married to a younger lady (to me that's an aphodisiac, right?). Then he acquires certain traits as that of a monkey! Doyle should know better than that, of course. I could buy that the professor's smell changed because of the poison, thus rendering him loathsome to his own dogs, but how do you explain the monkey-like agility? I think his knuckles were also oversized? Holmed guessed he was addicted to something that came from the mail and made him behave like that. That's part of the story that is cool.

On that vein, what about The Lion's Mane? Could this jellyfish ever live in a pool and kill a grown man? Well, this wouldn't have been a story at all today. When the dying man said "lion's mane", a Sherlock only had to type that in google and voila! Culprit. :DIn The Adventure Of The Creeping Man the professor has been taking a ‘serum’ extracted from a Himalayan monkey. Doyle didn’t invent this idea; it belonged to the science of his day (though ‘fringe’ or ‘quack’ science, I suppose). I agree that the story is pure science fiction. The science doesn’t have to be right!

Similarly for The Adventure of the Lion’s Mane; as far as I know that jellyfish isn’t found in the UK. It’s literary licence, and I can’t see anything wrong with that.

I would say that Doyle was considerably less xenophobic and racist than than his contemporaries of a similar background. He has many sympathetic foreign characters, and not just Americans. The Adventure of the Yellow Face throws an interesting light on his feelings about race.

[Beady]

The Adventure of the Yellow Face throws an interesting light on his feelings about race.

Precisely my thoughts, while reading your post.

I'm really going to have to go back and reread the entire cannon. Haven't done that since my brother gave me Barring-Gould's 2-volume annoted collection, some 30 years ago.

[Pope130]

In defense of Sir Arthur: He was a working fiction writer, making his living by selling to the general public. He did not necessarily base his stories on what he believed to be true, but rather what his audience would accept within the story.
Even he understood the difference between his commercial and serious writing. In addition to the popular magazine work he did historical fiction and straight history work for which he did a great deal of research. He viewed his own popular work as a way to pay the bills, and his true calling the histories. It's ironic that a hundred years later his serious work is little known, but his most commercial character, Sherlock Holmes, can still be described as; "The Most Famous Man Who Never Lived".
Even with some of the improbable ideas included in the canon, and his later advocacy of spiritualism, Conan Doyle still deserves respect from the skeptical community for the creation of Sherlock Holmes. Holmes, while not the first 'scientific detective' of fiction, was the first to plausibly show how gathering of evidence, analysis, and logical inference worked. He still stands as a roll model for the forensic sciences and rational thought.

Robert

[Beady]

Holmes, while not the first 'scientific detective' of fiction, was the first to plausibly show how gathering of evidence, analysis, and logical inference worked.

Who came first, Holmes or Richard Thorndyke? Personally, I always preferred Thorndyke, even though the stories are harder to come by; you usually find them in anthologies entitled "The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes."

Thorndyke was the model for Columbo. First, you saw the crime committed, then spent the rest of the story watching it being solved.

[antihippy]

I would say that Doyle was considerably less xenophobic and racist than than his contemporaries of a similar background. He has many sympathetic foreign characters, and not just Americans. The Adventure of the Yellow Face throws an interesting light on his feelings about race.


I agree.

There is a bit of a logical inconsistency in one of the characters in The Sign of Four. Small has all the same prejuidices of his contemporaries and yet feels completely loyal to the rest of his band. But then; whoever said human nature was consistent?

Another interesting aspect of Holmes is how rounded he is as a character. You can imagine him as a real person. Watson has all the weird attitudes towards women that you would expect from a victorian and Holmes is more ... cold. However Holmes obviously values intellect over anything and so it is hinted that falls [sort of] in love in "A Scandal in Bohemia".

---
On the dissertation subject I mentioned above.

I wasn't suggesting that Doyle was stupid, or a racist, or anything similar. And the guy I chatted to knew full well that Doyle was just reflecting the attitudes of the day. I just thought it was an amusing anecdote.
---
Thanks for the Sutdy in Emerald recommendation. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[Pope130]

[QUOTE=Beady;1678223]Who came first, Holmes or Richard Thorndyke?/QUOTE]

Holmes. The earliest Thorndyke I could find was "The Blue Sequin", published 1908. "The Mystery of 31 New Inn" was apparently first written in 1905, rewritten and published in1911.

Robert