Canon Discussion: The Three Gables
Nov. 23rd, 2014 08:28 am![[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 having a look at The Three Gables. As always, I’ve typed up a few thoughts to get the discussion started.
“I won’t ask you to sit down, for I don’t like the smell of you, but aren’t you Steve Dixie, the bruiser?” The racism directed at Dixie is cringeworthy now. And I just don’t know how to fit Holmes’ behaviour into my personal interpretation of him—a man who looks past external appearances and personal qualities to see the truth, being an out-and-out racist? I just can’t make sense of it.
I suppose though there’s another possibility of where the racism is coming from. Watson is the one who actually wrote the story and relates Holmes’ behaviour to us. Could he be muddying the truth a little? Perhaps Dixie came round and Watson and Holmes weren’t so calm and collected, and Dixie wasn’t so easy to put off—perhaps there was an awkward struggle, and years later Watson is trying to soothe his injured pride by belittling Dixie in this way. (Must admit I’m not sure if I’ve read this theory somewhere or come up with it on my own.) But then I don’t like this version of events either. I don’t want the good doctor to be so petty.
In the end, of course, the blame has to be laid at ACD’s door. I realise he was a man of his time but I just don’t understand how we got from YELL to 3GAB.
She entered with ungainly struggle like some huge awkward chicken, torn, squawking, out of its coop. The comic business with Susan also strikes me as somewhat bizarre. (I don’t whether it’s because we’ve just looked at MAZA but the scene feels like a bit of knockabout comedy done as comic relief in a play in order to get a huge (and cheap) laugh from the audience.) Holmes’ behaviour is slightly “off” all the way through. The story reads as though he’s having a breakdown.
“It can only mean,” said I, “that the object, whatever it may be, has only just come into the house.” Though the story has many faults, I have to say that the puzzle at its heart is very appealing to me. It is a rather neat and satisfying explanation as to why someone would want to buy up all Mrs. Maberley’s possessions. (Though I suppose if you look at it too closely, it does become a bit ridiculous.)
“I will come to-morrow and hear your report.” Once again Holmes delays his own involvement in order to allow the plot to unfold in an unfortunate manner. (DANC comes to mind: “We must leave at once to warn the Cubitts—they are in immediate, terrible danger! Oh, isn’t there a train? Right, we’ll warn them in the morning then.”) Holmes already believes Mrs. Maberley to be potentially in danger before he sees her son’s belongings. Why doesn’t he wait and ask her to go through the things there and then? It’s a delicate situation but Holmes needn’t stand over Mrs. Maberley while she does so—just stay in the house until she reports to him whether or not there’s anything of interest.
Holmes discreetly helped Langdale to knowledge, and on occasion was helped in turn. This is an odd relationship, isn’t it? Holmes helping a professional scandalmonger? This previous discussion post offers an excellent potential explanation though: …is this the way he extracts punishment from people he otherwise cannot touch for justice, no matter how much they deserve it?
…a bustling, rubicund inspector, who greeted Holmes as an old friend. Is it perhaps a bit odd that this inspector is never given a name? What could be the reason for that?
“Before he could get away I sprang up and seized him.” Mrs. Maberley—what a woman! She’s lost her husband, and then her son in tragic circumstances. But she keeps going—even wanting to travel round the world on her own. When she realises what an odd offer has been made on her home she has the strength of character to turn down the money, rather than meekly agreeing to those terms. And then when she’s burgled she fights back as well as she’s able, presenting a dignified face to Holmes the next day even though she’s been assaulted and chloroformed.
“Now, Mr. Holmes, granting that I was too hard on Douglas—and, God knows, I am sorry for it!—what else could I do with my whole future at stake?" I do have some sympathy for Mrs. Klein. I don’t think she was ever dishonest and gave any indication that she had serious feelings for Maberley. And he was perfectly prepared to be her lover before grandly offering her marriage. He can’t have been so innocent as not to understand the rules of the affair. Mrs. Klein certainly shouldn’t have had him beaten up but: “Because I had given he seemed to think that I still must give, and to him only.” Nowadays we’d call that being a stalker and the police would be involved. However, though she doesn’t have to take responsibility for his broken heart, I do wonder if he developed pneumonia as a result of his physical injuries—she might actually be guilty of his manslaughter.
“I think you will sign me a cheque for that, and I will see that it comes to Mrs. Maberley.” But will Mrs. Maberley accept it? Surely she will query where the money has come from?
Next Sunday, 30th November, we’ll be heading to Lamberley to investigate The Sussex Vampire. Hope you can join us then. (Bring garlic and a packed lunch.)
“I won’t ask you to sit down, for I don’t like the smell of you, but aren’t you Steve Dixie, the bruiser?” The racism directed at Dixie is cringeworthy now. And I just don’t know how to fit Holmes’ behaviour into my personal interpretation of him—a man who looks past external appearances and personal qualities to see the truth, being an out-and-out racist? I just can’t make sense of it.
I suppose though there’s another possibility of where the racism is coming from. Watson is the one who actually wrote the story and relates Holmes’ behaviour to us. Could he be muddying the truth a little? Perhaps Dixie came round and Watson and Holmes weren’t so calm and collected, and Dixie wasn’t so easy to put off—perhaps there was an awkward struggle, and years later Watson is trying to soothe his injured pride by belittling Dixie in this way. (Must admit I’m not sure if I’ve read this theory somewhere or come up with it on my own.) But then I don’t like this version of events either. I don’t want the good doctor to be so petty.
In the end, of course, the blame has to be laid at ACD’s door. I realise he was a man of his time but I just don’t understand how we got from YELL to 3GAB.
She entered with ungainly struggle like some huge awkward chicken, torn, squawking, out of its coop. The comic business with Susan also strikes me as somewhat bizarre. (I don’t whether it’s because we’ve just looked at MAZA but the scene feels like a bit of knockabout comedy done as comic relief in a play in order to get a huge (and cheap) laugh from the audience.) Holmes’ behaviour is slightly “off” all the way through. The story reads as though he’s having a breakdown.
“It can only mean,” said I, “that the object, whatever it may be, has only just come into the house.” Though the story has many faults, I have to say that the puzzle at its heart is very appealing to me. It is a rather neat and satisfying explanation as to why someone would want to buy up all Mrs. Maberley’s possessions. (Though I suppose if you look at it too closely, it does become a bit ridiculous.)
“I will come to-morrow and hear your report.” Once again Holmes delays his own involvement in order to allow the plot to unfold in an unfortunate manner. (DANC comes to mind: “We must leave at once to warn the Cubitts—they are in immediate, terrible danger! Oh, isn’t there a train? Right, we’ll warn them in the morning then.”) Holmes already believes Mrs. Maberley to be potentially in danger before he sees her son’s belongings. Why doesn’t he wait and ask her to go through the things there and then? It’s a delicate situation but Holmes needn’t stand over Mrs. Maberley while she does so—just stay in the house until she reports to him whether or not there’s anything of interest.
Holmes discreetly helped Langdale to knowledge, and on occasion was helped in turn. This is an odd relationship, isn’t it? Holmes helping a professional scandalmonger? This previous discussion post offers an excellent potential explanation though: …is this the way he extracts punishment from people he otherwise cannot touch for justice, no matter how much they deserve it?
…a bustling, rubicund inspector, who greeted Holmes as an old friend. Is it perhaps a bit odd that this inspector is never given a name? What could be the reason for that?
“Before he could get away I sprang up and seized him.” Mrs. Maberley—what a woman! She’s lost her husband, and then her son in tragic circumstances. But she keeps going—even wanting to travel round the world on her own. When she realises what an odd offer has been made on her home she has the strength of character to turn down the money, rather than meekly agreeing to those terms. And then when she’s burgled she fights back as well as she’s able, presenting a dignified face to Holmes the next day even though she’s been assaulted and chloroformed.
“Now, Mr. Holmes, granting that I was too hard on Douglas—and, God knows, I am sorry for it!—what else could I do with my whole future at stake?" I do have some sympathy for Mrs. Klein. I don’t think she was ever dishonest and gave any indication that she had serious feelings for Maberley. And he was perfectly prepared to be her lover before grandly offering her marriage. He can’t have been so innocent as not to understand the rules of the affair. Mrs. Klein certainly shouldn’t have had him beaten up but: “Because I had given he seemed to think that I still must give, and to him only.” Nowadays we’d call that being a stalker and the police would be involved. However, though she doesn’t have to take responsibility for his broken heart, I do wonder if he developed pneumonia as a result of his physical injuries—she might actually be guilty of his manslaughter.
“I think you will sign me a cheque for that, and I will see that it comes to Mrs. Maberley.” But will Mrs. Maberley accept it? Surely she will query where the money has come from?
Next Sunday, 30th November, we’ll be heading to Lamberley to investigate The Sussex Vampire. Hope you can join us then. (Bring garlic and a packed lunch.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Racism-I cringed, too.
Date: 2014-11-23 08:54 pm (UTC)Between the wars periods are often bad for that sort of thing--and for homophobia and trying to force women to be more domestic. Shortage of breeders and the need for babies to repopulate and all that.