![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
spacemutineer.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
sherlock60Welcome back, everyone! Let's have some canon Sherlock Holmes discussion, shall we? What did you all think of Shoscombe Old Place? As always, I've written up a few of my own random thoughts and questions, which are behind the jump. Please add your own in the comments!
Discussion about the Granada adaptation of this story is available in this week's Granada discussion post.
- I was intrigued by the vague edges we see of the case of the dead policeman at St. Pancras. So a policeman has been killed, Merivale (who?) is on the case and brings in Holmes, and Holmes, using a microscope and SCIENCE, realizes the accused picture-frame maker is indeed the guilty party. There's lots of fun stuff to speculate about frivolously here. Who is Merivale and how did he come to be called a friend by Sherlock Holmes? Who was the dead policeman, and what was his relationship to the two? And who is the picture-frame maker? Why did he kill the policeman?
- This is a totally insane, desperate plot that Sir Robert concocts. Three weeks with a dead body decaying in a crypt without refrigeration? WHAT? How was that ever supposed to work? Let's say everything went to exactly to the plan. Somehow no one ever suspects (or smells) anything, Holmes never gets involved, and Sir Robert wins his race. Then what? Is he going to say his sister just died? Presumably someone, a coroner, a doctor, police, etc. is going to have to see the body - and immediately recognize Beatrice didn't die yesterday. What does Robert say to that? Is there a story he has planned to explain why she was overlooked for so long?
- As Watson notes, there should have been some kind of comeuppance for Sir Robert. What he did is at least partially illegal, if not fully immoral. Certainly it is intensely questionable in every regard. Did Robert even really care about his sister at all? We're told she was devoted to him, but it's not clear that he ever loved her - only her money. Her death was about the loss of his dream, and he went to enormous, hideous lengths to maintain that dream. If he actually felt something for Beatrice, would he have been able to completely hide his grief over her death so efficiently? If he cared, could he possibly have done all he did: first, physically carry her dead body to one hiding place, then discover the heart-breaking scene of the lady's beloved dog crying for her at the door, then after that, move her body once again only to finally abandon her in an old ruin? Robert is despicable. "It is easy to preach." I wish Holmes had punched him.
- That "easy to preach" line kind of cracked me up, though. "Oh, sure, you SAY you wouldn't dump your sister's body in an ancient grave and have a man wear her clothes and pretend to be her for weeks so you can cover your ruinous gambling debts by winning a horse race, but we'll see what you say when it happens to you, Mr. High-and-Mighty!"
Comment away, and join us next week for a story no Sherlockian fic writer or reader should dare miss: The Three Garridebs!
Discussion about the Granada adaptation of this story is available in this week's Granada discussion post.
- I was intrigued by the vague edges we see of the case of the dead policeman at St. Pancras. So a policeman has been killed, Merivale (who?) is on the case and brings in Holmes, and Holmes, using a microscope and SCIENCE, realizes the accused picture-frame maker is indeed the guilty party. There's lots of fun stuff to speculate about frivolously here. Who is Merivale and how did he come to be called a friend by Sherlock Holmes? Who was the dead policeman, and what was his relationship to the two? And who is the picture-frame maker? Why did he kill the policeman?
- This is a totally insane, desperate plot that Sir Robert concocts. Three weeks with a dead body decaying in a crypt without refrigeration? WHAT? How was that ever supposed to work? Let's say everything went to exactly to the plan. Somehow no one ever suspects (or smells) anything, Holmes never gets involved, and Sir Robert wins his race. Then what? Is he going to say his sister just died? Presumably someone, a coroner, a doctor, police, etc. is going to have to see the body - and immediately recognize Beatrice didn't die yesterday. What does Robert say to that? Is there a story he has planned to explain why she was overlooked for so long?
- As Watson notes, there should have been some kind of comeuppance for Sir Robert. What he did is at least partially illegal, if not fully immoral. Certainly it is intensely questionable in every regard. Did Robert even really care about his sister at all? We're told she was devoted to him, but it's not clear that he ever loved her - only her money. Her death was about the loss of his dream, and he went to enormous, hideous lengths to maintain that dream. If he actually felt something for Beatrice, would he have been able to completely hide his grief over her death so efficiently? If he cared, could he possibly have done all he did: first, physically carry her dead body to one hiding place, then discover the heart-breaking scene of the lady's beloved dog crying for her at the door, then after that, move her body once again only to finally abandon her in an old ruin? Robert is despicable. "It is easy to preach." I wish Holmes had punched him.
- That "easy to preach" line kind of cracked me up, though. "Oh, sure, you SAY you wouldn't dump your sister's body in an ancient grave and have a man wear her clothes and pretend to be her for weeks so you can cover your ruinous gambling debts by winning a horse race, but we'll see what you say when it happens to you, Mr. High-and-Mighty!"
Comment away, and join us next week for a story no Sherlockian fic writer or reader should dare miss: The Three Garridebs!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-08-18 10:17 am (UTC)You're absolutely right - there's no way Sir Robert could have hidden the fact his sister had been dead for weeks. I can only assume he was so desperate that he thought he would cross that bridge when he came to it. In the event, Sir Robert does seem to completely get away with it. I suppose there are different rules for those of "good" families - he also seems to have remained unpunished after nearly killing Brewer.
Sir Robert is not much of a man - selfish and violent, and I don't think he can truly see things from another person's point of view - but I do believe he cared for his sister in his own way. I think he does indirectly demonstrate some grief - Mason thinks by his behaviour that he's gone mad: His eyes are wild. This could just be the stress of the situation but I don't think that's entirely it. Also, Mason thought that Sir Robert was so angry he was going to kill the dog. But he didn't - he gave it away instead. That perhaps shows some affection for his sister - he knew she loved the animal.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-20 09:14 pm (UTC)And you're probably right too about Sir Robert having some sort of feeling for his sister, but I find myself much more inclined to believe he was driven by the selfish and violent bit of part of his personality you mentioned. His kindnesses are small, but his self-obsessed behavior is rampant. Can we really take the fact he didn't kill a dog as evidence of humanity? That's a low bar.
Ugh, I still wish he could have been trampled by his horse or crushed by a fallen stone in the ruined chapel.
no subject
Date: 2013-08-20 10:42 pm (UTC)And I entirely agree with you that the self-obsessed part of Sir Robert's personality was always in charge, whatever feelings he had for his sister ^^"
Sunday, 18 August 2013
Date: 2013-08-18 09:14 pm (UTC)