“My dear doctor,” said he kindly, “pray accept my apologies. Viewing the matter as an abstract problem, I had forgotten how personal and painful a thing it might be to you. I assure you, however, that I never even knew that you had a brother until you handed me the watch.”
— The Sign of the Four
We sat in silence for some minutes, Holmes more depressed and shaken than I had ever seen him. “That hurts my pride, Watson,” he said at last. “It is a petty feeling, no doubt, but it hurts my pride. It becomes a personal matter with me now, and, if God sends me health, I shall set my hand upon this gang. That he should come to me for help, and that I should send him away to his death—!” He sprang from his chair and paced about the room in uncontrollable agitation, with a flush upon his sallow cheeks and a nervous clasping and unclasping of his long thin hands.
— The Five Orange Pips, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
“I hate to meet her, Watson, when I have no news of her husband. Here we are.” […] “In your heart of hearts, do you think that Neville is alive?” Sherlock Holmes seemed to be embarrassed by the question. “Frankly, now!” she repeated, standing upon the rug and looking keenly down at him as he leaned back in a basket-chair. “Frankly, then, madam, I do not.”
— The Man with the Twisted Lip, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
“But have you told me all?” “Yes, all.” “Miss Roylott, you have not. You are screening your stepfather.” “Why, what do you mean?” For answer Holmes pushed back the frill of black lace which fringed the hand that lay upon our visitor’s knee. Five little livid spots, the marks of four fingers and a thumb, were printed upon the white wrist. “You have been cruelly used,” said Holmes. The lady coloured deeply and covered over her injured wrist. “He is a hard man,” she said, “and perhaps he hardly knows his own strength.” There was a long silence, during which Holmes leaned his chin upon his hands and stared into the crackling fire. “This is a very deep business,” he said at last.
— The Adventure of the Speckled Band, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
When it was concluded he settled our new acquaintance upon the sofa, placed a pillow beneath his head, and laid a glass of brandy and water within his reach. “It is easy to see that your experience has been no common one, Mr. Hatherley,” said he. “Pray, lie down there and make yourself absolutely at home. Tell us what you can, but stop when you are tired and keep up your strength with a little stimulant.”
— The Adventure of the Engineer’s Thumb, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
And it’s only some examples from two books. Yes, Sherlock Holmes is arrogant, but he also knows when someone is hurt, and if he’s the cause, then he apologizes. Some people would say it’s manipulation, I think it’s his human side.
YES, over and over, he is kind to people, protective of the vulnerable. He may be blunt about the truth, but even that he can soften where necessary.
Exactly that. So, what excuse was groundbreaking and history making about Sherlock BBC?
Luckily for you, I’m in a good mood, so I’m going to go through this nice and rationally.
Yes, as a matter of fact, I am aware of that. As it happens, I’m an English literature undergrad, and have not only read all 4 novels and 56 short stories, but studied them extensively.
Perhaps you’re unaware of other adaptations, so let me inform you that in The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, Holmes is gay (see point 6), in Elementary, Watson is a woman, Moriarty is also Irene Adler and the series is set in New York, and in Basil the Great Mouse Detective, the characters are mice. Also, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle cared very little for Sherlock Holmes, even going as far to say that ‘If in 100 years I am only known as the man who invented Sherlock Holmes then I will have considered my life a failure’, and, despite claiming that ‘Holmes is as inhuman as a Babbage’s Calculating Machine, and just about as likely to fall in love’ in 1892, he later wrote a play, and when appealed to by William Gillette, who was to portray Holmes, for permission to alter his character, Doyle replied ‘You may marry him, murder him, or do anything you like to him.’ He didn’t care about his characters being altered.
You are completely avoiding sociohistorical context. Between 1887 and 1927, men could not marry men and women could not marry women. In fact, homosexuality was a criminal offence in Britain until 1967 and the Marriage Equality Bill was only passed in England THIS YEAR. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s close friend, Oscar Wilde, was sentenced to two years of hard labour as punishment for ‘gross indecency’, i.e. homosexuality. Do you know what was used against him in court? The Picture of Dorian Gray – his novel – because it contained queer subtext. Doyle wanted to portray Watson as a heart in contrast to Holmes’ head, and as such, he had to be romantic. Hetero romance was the only option in the period in which he was writing. Also, arguably the only reason that Watson was even originally given a wife was that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wanted to conclude the Sherlock Holmes narrative after The Sign of Four, and so needed a reason for Holmes and Watson to go their separate ways. When he then returned to it, Mary’s presence made the stories clunky through Watson’s repetitive descriptions of how Holmes would contact him and he’d say goodbye to Mary to go with him on a case, and so Sir Arthur Conan Doyle made use of a time jump to write Mary out in a single line when he made his third reluctant revival of the narrative with The Adventure of the Empty House.
Men don’t have to be straight to marry women. Wilde was not straight, and he was married to a woman called Constance Lloyd. Biromantic/sexual and panromantic/sexual men marry women. That doesn’t make them unable to also experience romantic and/or sexual attraction to men. John never says that he is straight, only that he isn’t gay (true) and isn’t Sherlock’s date (also true). That’s very open-ended phrasing that doesn’t rule out attraction to men/a man (and, in fact, series 3 creates plenty of space for a bisexual reading).
On that note, I’m immensely amused that you are so scandalised by the concept of Holmes and Watson being written into a romantic relationship, yet have no issues with the fact that the stories have been translated into the 21st century (a decision which, at Anatomy of a Hit, the writers stated they felt automatically provided them with ‘license to be heretical’), that Irene Adler was portrayed as a lesbian dominatrix, that the meaning of ‘RACHE’ was inverted, that the Reichenbach Falls were exchanged for St. Bart’s Hospital, that Mary Morstan was portrayed as a contract killer and that Charles Augustus’ surname was changed from Milverton to Magnussen to account for his change of nationality from English to Danish and that he was portrayed as the head of a media corporation.
There is nothing wrong with wanting something that you enjoy to happen on screen and hence be more accessible to you, particularly if that thing would also be socially beneficial by providing (much needed) positive representation to marginalised groups.
Shipping makes me happy. Fandom makes me happy. Sherlock makes me happy. It’s so unnecessarily rude of you to come into my ask box under the cowardly cover of anonymity to try to take that happiness away from me (you failed completely, I might add), when it literally affects you in exactly 0 ways.
The first Sherlock Holmes story ever written. Half of the book is about a completely different person, and Holmes’s characterization here is slightly different, but it’s a good start for anyone unfamiliar with the canon.
Sherlock Holmes at his edgiest. Best known as “the one where Watson gets married and Holmes does cocaine”. Contains moderate amounts of racism towards the end of the book.
The easiest novel to get into without any prior knowledge imo. It seems to be one of the few stories in the canon that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle put actual effort into. Sherlock Holmes himself doesn’t have a lot of screentime, though.
A redux of A Study in Scarlet for the most part, albeit a good one. Has a few Moriarty cameos in it, but if you read it exclusively for him you’re probably going to be disappointed.
Short Stories
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes*
Probably the most iconic set of stories in the canon. This is a great place to start if you’ve never read a Sherlock Holmes story before.
Another great place to start; these stories tend to focus more on Sherlock Holmes’s backstory (or what little we get of it) than the others. It’s also home to the story where Sherlock Holmes “dies”.
He’s back, and this time we get a number of really good Sherlock Holmes stories. I’d probably read some of the stories from previous books first, but I’d certainly recommend most of these.
These ones tend to be a bit off-genre at points, containing three short stories not even narrated by Watson, as well as a few parts that are Just Plain Weird, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t like them anyways.
A short story written
by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle that features an unnamed “amateur reasoner of some celebrity”. It is published in French anthologies of Sherlock Holmes stories.
A joint effort between ACD and William Gillette, it stands as one of the most influential pieces of Sherlock Holmes media outside of the canon itself. It is the origin of the phrase “Elementary, my dear Watson”, as well as many other curiosities.
The play that would inevitably become canon through “The Mazarin Stone”. It is also where the “Moriarty steals the crown jewels” plotline originated.
Note: there were two other Sherlock Holmes-related plays penned by ACD (Angels of Darkness and The Stonor Case), but I was unable to find a pdf of them. 😦 Please let me know if you find a copy.
funny story I was listening to classic fm earlier and the radio presenter was like ‘this next piece of music is related to Sherlock Holmes somehow, see if you can work out how’ and this beautiful romantic string piece came on, it was exquisite, and I was like he’s gonna say it’s related to Irene or some shit, but when it finished he said it was the music from the concert that Holmes and Watson attend in the Red Headed League (one of my favourite canon stories) where Holmes sits and gets lost in the music and Watson spends the whole time staring at Holmes like ‘wow, look at how much he loves this’ and yeah. ACD intentionally wrote that as romantically as it could have been.
“All the afternoon he sat in the stalls wrapped in the most perfect happiness, gently waving his long, thin fingers in time to the music, while his gently smiling face and languid, dreamy eyes were as unlike those of Holmes, the sleuth-hound Holmes, the relentless, keen-witted, ready-handed criminal agent as it was possible to conceive.”
Upon further consideration, I’ll use Irene Adler’s married
name, Norton. Because in the text she was married. To Norton. And she referred to herself by Norton. And I’m cranky enough about adaptations of Adler – it’s always
“Adler” – into Holmes’s love interest that I’ll use
“Norton” just on the same silly principle by which I would order a “large” at Starbucks because “venti” is ridiculous.
Even a ‘’nuisance’ threat could be expensive and time consuming. It’s worth keeping all this in mind when we look for answers. Note: THE THREE GARRIDEBS IS STILL UNDER COPYRIGHT.
Throw a plethora of other films/books at the plot and make it all so unrecognisable that it confuses all who watch it. Sum it all up by placing Holmes and Watson right back where they have always been; who you are doesn’t matter. It is what it is, and it’s shit. Sounds like a pissed off statement to me.
“…in the early days of my association with Holmes, when we were sharing rooms as bachelors in Baker Street” (italics mine)
I can’t decide whether this is a signal of propriety or impropriety. why would you need to specify that you were sharing them as bachelors, as opposed to any other way? Is this a big Victorian no homo? Or is it quite the opposite, given the connotations of bachelorhood, a signal that only those in the know could read but that could be easily denied should suspicions arise?
This is a topic I have been trying to research, here are some of the things I have found…I am going to be quoting heavily from a book that I ADORE called Queer London: Perils and Pleasures in the Sexual Metropolis 1918-1937 by Matt Houlbrook.
Wow, this is great information!
I don’t have much to contribute, just this:
Watson convincing Holmes to stay at a friend’s house by assuring him that it is a “bachelor” establishment. (from The Reigate Squires)
“One night — it was on the twentieth of March, 1888 — I was returning from a journey to a patient (for I had now returned to civil practice), when my way led me through Baker Street.
As I passed the well-remembered door, which must always be associated in my mind with my wooing, and with the dark incidents of the Study in Scarlet, I was seized with a keen desire to see Holmes again, and to know how he was employing his extraordinary powers.”
In case you’re not familiar, here are some plot elements to whet your interest:
a skeptical physiologist (Austin Gilroy) who allows himself to become a subject in a mesmerism / mind control experiment
a woman with mind control abilities
(Miss Penclosa)
who is generally unimpressive and walks with a crutch, but is surprisingly powerful
two people about whom Gilroy cares–his fiancée Agatha and his colleague, Charles Sadler–who are also both mesmerised (to offer some comfort to more tender readers of this meta, I read both Agatha and Charles as Sherlock equivalents when translated into the BBC Sherlock narrative)
obsession–specifically, Miss Penclosa’s desire to seduce Gilroy
supernatural mind control abilities that cause Gilroy to behave erratically, cause missing time, and, eventually, make him do things he would never otherwise do, some of them criminal
narrative bonus feature: the story is told from Gilroy’s perspective, in the form of his journal entries
Sound like it might, maybe, have some relevance to s4? I think it does, especially in terms of figuring out what the fuck is happening to both John and Sherlock.
Reading s4 through the code of The Parasite may help explain Sherlock’s sudden propensity for intuition / premonition, and John’s erratic behaviour. Ultimately,
including The Parasite as one of the many intertexts of s4
offers a great deal of support to readings like @jenna221b‘s theory about Mary manipulating John using TD12, which in turn adds support to the ever growing pile of evidence that Mary is a villain (thanks to @teaandqueerbaiting for that monster post). It also informs readings of Mary as femme fatale and the Woman in Green (femme fatale thread by @inevitably-johnlocked, Woman in Green addition by @deducingbbcsherlock). Although I’m not sure mofftiss should ever be let off any hooks for s4, this reading might offer John fans (myself included) a much needed opportunity for a more positive reading of John in this series.
Reading through your brilliant post @may-shepard my mind kept screaming parasite = virus in the data 😱 Series 4 indeed introduced so many threads connecting Mary to Moriarty (with a side of Magnussen); the most explicit being Culverton Smith. In addition to the serial-killer-meet-and-greet accompanied by double-ghost-Mary, the creepy scene in Smith’s murder room reminded me so much of Mary’s “You don’t tell John” warning from HLV – as in both “You don’t tell John about me” and “You don’t tell John you love him” – gave up the ghost and… off you pop. John, in the meantime, unable to fulfill his role as the blogger, remained in the narrative while it was being led astray. As Mary clearly had the last word, with the help of series of DVDs (a broadcaster), everyone’s memory (including ours) had been thoroughly corrupted and modified: Eurus, a personification of Sherlock lost, without his blogger.
Gilroy’s missing days also reminded me of Sherlock’s joke during his best man speech (chemical compounds and John’s missing Wednesday) – the jellyfish in TST haunts me still, because of the deaths by poison in The Adventure of Lion’s Mane. Now we have Blessington the Poisoner – could it be that before he was shot, John had already been poisoned little by little? But since when?
Has the real Three Garridebs been ongoing for 6 months before Sherlock’s exile? But wouldn’t that be.. before the wedding if John’s blog was to be trusted? (omg The Poison Giant post was dated May 27……where Sherlock and John never figured out who wanted them dead!) I think Mary’s intent to kill was the real sign of three (666 – the baby as the omen and the exorcist), but Sherlock made a mistake in his deduction then because he was heart broken and metaphorically bleeding out during the wedding 😭 . Did he finally realized it after TAB, and then we spent the entire series 4 watching him trying to figure out when/what/how it all went so wrong while trying to beat the clock to save John Watson?
me: Thank you Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for creating the Sherlock Holmes stories, I love them and I love you
ACD:
I fear that Mr. Sherlock Holmes may become like one of those popular tenors who, having outlived their time, are still tempted to make repeated farewell bows to their indulgent audiences. This must cease and he must go the way of all flesh, material or imaginary…
Sherlock Fandom Archive 