![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
scfrankles.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
sherlock60This week we’re looking at The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge. As usual I’ve typed up a few thoughts to get the discussion started.
I find it recorded in my notebook that it was a bleak and windy day towards the end of March in the year 1892. Well, this is a bizarre statement for Watson to begin with, seeing as Holmes was “dead” in 1892. It seems pretty unlikely that this adventure took place in that year—and Watson’s reading public would know that. Any ideas as to why Watson has chosen to say that WIST takes place in 1892?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
vaysh has drawn my attention to this article which cleverly connects up several works of literature to try and explain who Murillo was and where he actually came from. The article also points out that Murillo is mentioned in NORW: Our months of partnership had not been so uneventful as he had stated, for I find, on looking over my notes, that this period includes the case of the papers of Ex-President Murillo…. NORW, of course, is quite definitely set a few months after Holmes has returned from being “dead”. At the time of which I speak Holmes had been back for some months…
"My dear Watson, you know how bored I have been since we locked up Colonel Carruthers.” An intriguing reference. (Must admit my mind keeps running in the direction of farce—I imagine a respectable old soldier locked in somewhere as a practical joke, while two “gentlemen” in early middle-age run away giggling.) I wonder what Colonel Carruthers’ crime was.
Inspector Baynes, of the Surrey Constabulary. This is a bit of an odd story all told. Baynes is not just a competent policeman—he is the equal of Holmes. If Holmes hadn’t involved himself in the case at all, we would still have ended up with the same result. The only thing that Holmes definitely contributes is getting Warner to watch for Miss Burnet to make sure she remained safe. The plains clothes policeman who was watching the household had to stick with Henderson—Warner was able to assist Miss Burnet and take her to Holmes.
“Near the end of dinner a note was handed in by the servant.” “…the address is either done with another pen or by someone else. It is thicker and bolder, as you see." Why doesn’t the fact that the address looks different cause Garcia any alarm? “Miss Burnet” wouldn’t have asked someone else to address the note. She wouldn’t have wanted to alert anyone in the “Henderson” household that she knew someone who was living at Wisteria Lodge. I suppose maybe Garcia is distracted and anxious about what he is about to do, and just assumes that the address was done with another pen.
…a huge and hideous mulatto, with yellowish features of a pronounced negroid type. …Constable Downing was badly bitten by the savage. In this story, ACD seems to be both indulging in some racism (Holmes perhaps a little too, unfortunately), and also playing around with his (original) readers’ prejudices. They may have been quicker to assume that the cook was the murderer, so it would have been a bigger twist when it turned out Baynes had deliberately arrested the wrong man.
“You see, Watson, we have come already upon two sets of foreigners—one at Wisteria Lodge and one at High Gable—so our gaps are beginning to close.” Yes, Holmes, all non-Britons and all people who don’t have white skin know one another. Well, in this case the two households are connected but it’s a bit of a jump. I would have thought Holmes would want more data.
"But how come you into this matter, Miss Burnet?" asked Holmes. "How can an English lady join in such a murderous affair?" I’m not sure whether to admire Signora Durando or to be repelled by her. She calmly takes care of two children knowing that she will be involved in the death of their father. Don Murillo certainly should have faced justice but this all seems closer to revenge.
“Murillo twisted my arm round until I gave him the address. I swear that he might have twisted it off had I understood what it would mean to Garcia.” But surely she must have known that giving them Garcia’s address would lead to something terrible happening to him?
Some six months afterwards the Marquess of Montalva and Signor Rulli, his secretary, were both murdered in their rooms at the Hotel Escurial at Madrid. I wonder what became of Murillo’s children. Is their mother dead? Or is she still alive in San Pedro—maybe she refused to go with Murillo?
Next Sunday, 25th May, we’ll be having a look at The Adventure of The Dying Detective. Hope you can join us then.
I find it recorded in my notebook that it was a bleak and windy day towards the end of March in the year 1892. Well, this is a bizarre statement for Watson to begin with, seeing as Holmes was “dead” in 1892. It seems pretty unlikely that this adventure took place in that year—and Watson’s reading public would know that. Any ideas as to why Watson has chosen to say that WIST takes place in 1892?
vaysh has drawn my attention to this article which cleverly connects up several works of literature to try and explain who Murillo was and where he actually came from. The article also points out that Murillo is mentioned in NORW: Our months of partnership had not been so uneventful as he had stated, for I find, on looking over my notes, that this period includes the case of the papers of Ex-President Murillo…. NORW, of course, is quite definitely set a few months after Holmes has returned from being “dead”. At the time of which I speak Holmes had been back for some months…"My dear Watson, you know how bored I have been since we locked up Colonel Carruthers.” An intriguing reference. (Must admit my mind keeps running in the direction of farce—I imagine a respectable old soldier locked in somewhere as a practical joke, while two “gentlemen” in early middle-age run away giggling.) I wonder what Colonel Carruthers’ crime was.
Inspector Baynes, of the Surrey Constabulary. This is a bit of an odd story all told. Baynes is not just a competent policeman—he is the equal of Holmes. If Holmes hadn’t involved himself in the case at all, we would still have ended up with the same result. The only thing that Holmes definitely contributes is getting Warner to watch for Miss Burnet to make sure she remained safe. The plains clothes policeman who was watching the household had to stick with Henderson—Warner was able to assist Miss Burnet and take her to Holmes.
“Near the end of dinner a note was handed in by the servant.” “…the address is either done with another pen or by someone else. It is thicker and bolder, as you see." Why doesn’t the fact that the address looks different cause Garcia any alarm? “Miss Burnet” wouldn’t have asked someone else to address the note. She wouldn’t have wanted to alert anyone in the “Henderson” household that she knew someone who was living at Wisteria Lodge. I suppose maybe Garcia is distracted and anxious about what he is about to do, and just assumes that the address was done with another pen.
…a huge and hideous mulatto, with yellowish features of a pronounced negroid type. …Constable Downing was badly bitten by the savage. In this story, ACD seems to be both indulging in some racism (Holmes perhaps a little too, unfortunately), and also playing around with his (original) readers’ prejudices. They may have been quicker to assume that the cook was the murderer, so it would have been a bigger twist when it turned out Baynes had deliberately arrested the wrong man.
“You see, Watson, we have come already upon two sets of foreigners—one at Wisteria Lodge and one at High Gable—so our gaps are beginning to close.” Yes, Holmes, all non-Britons and all people who don’t have white skin know one another. Well, in this case the two households are connected but it’s a bit of a jump. I would have thought Holmes would want more data.
"But how come you into this matter, Miss Burnet?" asked Holmes. "How can an English lady join in such a murderous affair?" I’m not sure whether to admire Signora Durando or to be repelled by her. She calmly takes care of two children knowing that she will be involved in the death of their father. Don Murillo certainly should have faced justice but this all seems closer to revenge.
“Murillo twisted my arm round until I gave him the address. I swear that he might have twisted it off had I understood what it would mean to Garcia.” But surely she must have known that giving them Garcia’s address would lead to something terrible happening to him?
Some six months afterwards the Marquess of Montalva and Signor Rulli, his secretary, were both murdered in their rooms at the Hotel Escurial at Madrid. I wonder what became of Murillo’s children. Is their mother dead? Or is she still alive in San Pedro—maybe she refused to go with Murillo?
Next Sunday, 25th May, we’ll be having a look at The Adventure of The Dying Detective. Hope you can join us then.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 02:10 pm (UTC)I suppose that given the times, having two foreign households would have stood out a bit, and since Holmes was looking for connections this would be a reasonable place to start.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 06:27 pm (UTC)I agree the two foreign households would have been a good place to start but Holmes appears to just assume they must be connected.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 04:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 06:15 pm (UTC)What you say is very, very persuasive. It does make a lot of sense and fits together very neatly. I think I'm happy to go along with you on this one ^_^
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 06:35 pm (UTC)Loved your bit about Colonel Carruthers.
I agree about Miss Burnett. Except for the cook, to me it's the most jarring bit of the story. She surely didn't think Murillo was going to write a stiff letter to him. Perhaps she was treated far worse than Watson reports - some things he couldn't write. Still, she seems to feel her conduct needed excusing. She might have found she had far less physical courage than she thought she had. I think she makes no pretence she was after revenge.
I think Murillo would have left his children with their mother if she was alive. To me, the likeliest thing that without a home and teacher, he'd put the children in a convent.
I love the smart Inspector Baynes, and the positive Warner (I wish I knew just how he and Murillo fell out), but I wouldn't mind a bit more from Holmes at the same time.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 08:00 pm (UTC)I would agree that Signora Durando must have known at some level that once she gave Garcia's address to Murillo then Garcia's fate was sealed. But she couldn't face the fact that her information had led to her friend's death. We shouldn't judge her harshly though - she was tortured for the information.
I disagree that Murillo would have left the children with their mother. He's the kind of man who would have viewed his children as being his possessions. If the mother didn't want to escape with him (or he simply didn't want the mother any more), he wouldn't have thought twice about taking the children from her. And also he was a hated man - his children would have been vulnerable. He'd want to have them near him to protect them. As long as he was alive, I think he would keep the children with him. I do wonder what happened to the children after his murder though.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 09:20 pm (UTC)Btw, I have remembered where I read of Holmes and Watson being Catholic. It was in an Asimov short story, The Ultimate Crime. My opinion is Moriarty (who doesn't appear in person) is definitely oc.
no subject
Date: 2014-05-18 09:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-05-19 01:00 am (UTC)I agree with you about the main point being very convincing. Thank you for bringing this article to our attention.
Especially at first, the Haitian cook must have had a real time of it, procuring food for the household
no subject
Date: 2014-05-19 10:56 am (UTC)