Canon Discussion: The Valley of Fear, Part 1

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

This week we’re having a look at the first half of The Valley of Fear. As always, I’ve typed up a few thoughts to get the discussion going.

Part 1, Chap. 1

“You have heard me speak of Professor Moriarty?" OK—let’s start with the big one. In FINA Watson has apparently never heard of Moriarty; here, many years before, he is engaging in banter with Holmes about him. Any thoughts on a possible explanation?

"Porlock, Watson, is a nom-de-plume, a mere identification mark; but behind it lies a shifty and evasive personality.” Any thoughts on the identity of the mysterious Porlock and why he is willing to help Holmes?

"But why 'Douglas' and 'Birlstone'?" I have to say that the solving of the cipher is both hugely impressive and rather unsatisfying. I can’t help but admire Holmes’ cleverness in working out what the numbers refer to—it’s all very elegant. But then you clumsily have Douglas and Birlstone in the middle of the message. I would have thought that would be enough information for Holmes on its own. I suppose he might have set off for the Isle of Man to look for a Mr. Birlstone in Douglas but apart from that possibility, I think those non-coded words would have been enough for Holmes to have worked out that Douglas was in danger and be able to find him. I don’t think solving the code really adds anything greatly important. And then of course MacDonald immediately arrives with his news which would have given the solution anyway.

Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius, and MacDonald had talent enough for his profession to enable him to perceive that there was no humiliation in seeking the assistance of one who already stood alone in Europe, both in his gifts and in his experience. MacDonald is an interesting character. He looks up to Holmes but seems to approach him as an equal. He’s not overawed by him.

Chap 2

Without having a tinge of cruelty in his singular composition, he was undoubtedly callous from long overstimulation… There was no trace then of the horror which I had myself felt at this curt declaration; but his face showed rather the quiet and interested composure of the chemist who sees the crystals falling into position from his oversaturated solution. An interesting description of Holmes’ personality. But he doesn’t seem to me to be particularly “callous”. Isn’t this just a side effect of maturing and becoming detached from youthful emotions? Would many people in their 30s be particularly moved to hear that a complete stranger had been murdered? I’m more surprised by Watson—an army doctor—being so shocked.

"That painting was by Jean Baptiste Greuze." It’s intriguing that Moriarty has the painting openly on show. Is it arrogance? Or is he confident that possession of the painting can’t be linked to any criminal behaviour?

Next Sunday, 12th October, we’ll be moving on to part 2 of The Valley of Fear, and looking at the story that Douglas gave to Watson. Hope you can join us for that.

Comments

[thesmallhobbit.livejournal.com]

I have to admit this is one of the stories I really don't like.

I have however provided a solution to the problem of Watson's knowledge of Moriarty.

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

And it is a most neat solution ^_^

The novel does feel like a minor one compared to the others (and the second half is relentlessly depressing - something to look forward to ^^"). But it does have bits and pieces that I like: the solving of the cipher at the beginning, the relationship between Holmes and MacDonald, the solution to the mystery, and I think the characterisation of Holmes is excellent in this story.

[thesmallhobbit.livejournal.com]

And there's also the question of Moriarty's brother. Was he a Colonel (FINA) or station master in the west of England (VEIL)? He could have had both occupations, but it seems unlikely from the way both are mentioned.

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

I suppose if we accept that both Professor Moriartys are the same person, it is possible he had two brothers. I don't think there's anything in FINA to say conclusively that Colonel Moriarty was his only sibling - though the brother in VALL does present problems. Holmes definitely implies that the station master is Moriarty's only sibling because he's using him to demonstrate that nobody in Moriarty's family is well-off. If there were other siblings, he would have mentioned their financial status too.

On the other hand, I suppose it is possible a station master could later join the army and become a Colonel but, yes, seems unlikely.

[thesmallhobbit.livejournal.com]

Hence the continuing need for my solution ;)

[laurose8.livejournal.com]

Of MacDonald, I do like how, in their discussion of the crime, he offers good ideas and Holmes acknowledges them.

If it's okay to offer others' ideas about Watson never having heard of Moriarty in FINA, I did read somewhere that Watson found it better story telling to have Holmes explain Moriarty to him, rather than infodump.

Porlock is very intriguing. A possible, if not probable, explantion, is that 'Porlock' felt wronged by Moriarty. I did wonder if it was a maid, or some other female. Besides the Victorian obvious: organised crime is pretty male chauvinist, and she might have been tired of men getting more pay for less work, and felt Moriarty owed her. edit: I suppose the nom de plume meant he or she wanted to stop Moriarty's grandiose dreams?

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

It's always OK to discuss other people's ideas ^_^ Though I don't think I'd agree with that idea of Watson pretending not to know about Moriarty so in FINA Holmes would have to explain. FINA is written by a man still grieving for his best friend. Would he really be concerned about telling a good story?

I really like your idea about Porlock being female. Another layer of disguise ^^ A maid makes sense - someone in Moriarty's household, who always ran the danger of the professor coming to check up on them. Though perhaps a mere female would be less likely to attract the professor's suspicions. "Porlock" does say that "he" can't send the key to the cipher because Moriarty suspects but that might be, as Holmes says, only a guilty conscience.

[thesmallhobbit.livejournal.com]

I think it's an excellent idea that Porlock is female.

And I also think that, as you say, the choice of name was significant.