Canon Discussion: The Norwood Builder

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

This week we’re having a look at The Norwood Builder. I’ve typed up a few thoughts and questions to get the discussion going—please leave your own ideas in the comments!

"London has become a singularly uninteresting city since the death of the late lamented Professor Moriarty." Isn’t this a rather thoughtless thing for Holmes to be saying in front of the friend who thought—for three years—he’d died fighting Moriarty? And hasn’t Holmes undergone something of a sea change in his personality? In FINA he says: “I tell you, Watson, in all seriousness, that if I could beat that man, if I could free society of him, I should feel that my own career had reached its summit, and I should be prepared to turn to some more placid line in life. ...I could continue to live in the quiet fashion which is most congenial to me, and to concentrate my attention upon my chemical researches.” Yet here he says: "The community is certainly the gainer, and no one the loser, save the poor out-of-work specialist, whose occupation has gone.” Holmes seems to have gone from someone who nobly strives against villains for the sake of his community, to someone who enjoys having villains around for the intellectual challenge.

...I, at his request, had sold my practice and returned to share the old quarters in Baker Street. There’s surely a bigger story behind this simple statement. Watson is giving up his former marital home and his business at Holmes’ request. Any thoughts?

...an incident which only explained itself some years later when I found that Verner was a distant relation of Holmes's… Any thoughts on how Watson eventually found out that Verner was related to Holmes? And how he felt about Holmes supplying the money? The fact that Holmes keeps the information to himself, suggests that he thought Watson might be uncomfortable with the situation. Perhaps he simply didn’t want Watson to feel beholden to him.

...the case of the papers of Ex-President Murillo, and also the shocking affair of the Dutch steamship Friesland… Any thoughts on these cases? The former may be a reference to a case that Watson does eventually write up, though the details are a little different.

...he bound me in the most stringent terms to say no further word of himself, his methods, or his successes—a prohibition which, as I have explained, has only now been removed. It is a bit odd that Holmes doesn’t allow Watson to write about him for nine years. And how does John Hector McFarlane know that Holmes is alive and taking cases when the wider public doesn’t? And also why does Holmes eventually remove the prohibition and allow Watson to start publishing again?

“His name was familiar to me, for many years ago my parents were acquainted with him…” I wonder in what circumstances Oldacre’s name came up. McFarlane’s parents have mentioned Oldacre enough for their son to be familiar with the name, yet they have managed to give him no idea of the man’s character and their dislike of him.

He was a strange little, ferret-like man…” I can’t help but notice that Watson and McFarlane both bear the name and initial John H., and both have a tendency to compare people with ferrets…

...she produced a photograph of a woman, shamefully defaced and mutilated with a knife. I wonder why Mrs. McFarlane kept this disturbing momento.

"He was able to fix up his own little hiding-place without any confederate…” Was it a brilliant idea to hide in the house, or was it a really daft idea? Was it best to lie low until the fuss died down, or would it have been better for Oldacre to have run away the night he was “murdered”?

Next Sunday, 23rd August, we’ll be having a look at The Dancing Men. Hope you can join us then.


PS Yesterday on LJ there was a general attack of spam posting by bots. The bots were joining our comm in order to post and so sherlock60 has switched from open membership to moderated membership to avoid getting spammed in that way again. Please rest assured though that any requests to join will be processed as quickly as possible—usually within 24 hours.

Comments

[debriswoman]

I am a little puzzled as to how long Mr Oldacre was intending to stay in his hides hole, feeling pleased with himself. Success seemed so much more likely if he had moved away.

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think it might have been a better idea if he'd just scarpered immediately. With a disguise and keeping a low profile, he could have got far away while the police still assumed him dead.

[thesmallhobbit.livejournal.com]

I think Oldacre was gloating over his "success" and assumed he would be able to slip away after a few days.

And, perhaps inevitably, I have had thoughts about the: Dutch steamship Friesland (http://watsons-woes.livejournal.com/1261972.html)

[laurose8.livejournal.com]

Of the first question, I think debriswoman's comment to Mrs Hudson a very good answer. Actually, to me the opening scene of this case is the exemplar of Holmes. It falls off a little - after the reading you'd expect Holmes to say something like "His customary energy and sagacity. Indeed.". And we agree, the very end, about rabbits, is definitely not Holmes at his best.

Like you, I'm puzzled by the mother and son's different accounts of the McFarlanes' relation with Oldacre. My only suggestion, not a good one, is that they were neighbours for a while. That's a good point about Mrs McFarlane keeping the photo.

Sorry you had that spam attack, and hope it wasn't too much bother.

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

It was a brilliant hiding place. But I think he was trying to be too clever for his own good - the straightforward option of just leaving the same night would probably have been safer.

Yes, I remember that story. They were very good thoughts indeed ^_^

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

Yes, there's far more vigorous discussions going on under the poems and stories than there is on the actual discussion post ^_^

I didn't think about that - it's not like Holmes to miss a chance to disparage Lestrade ^^" And gardnerhill was definitely right about the rabbits - how on earth could anyone mistake charred bunnies for human remains?

And that's a possibility - that Oldacre lived near to the McFarlanes when McFarlane was a child. McFarlane would see him about and hear his name but his parents might have been more cautious about talking openly about his character in those circumstances.

The spam attack wasn't too much bother, to be honest. It was just rather annoying. Small Hobbit was on the ball and immediately let me know too, and we sorted things out between us. Thanks for your kind words about it ^^

[rachelindeed.livejournal.com]

Hello friends! I hope to be able to come by later and join the discussion, but things are a bit hectic just now. But I didn't want to let Norwood Builder pass by without paying tribute to one of my favorite lines in the canon, and one that I quote the most often in real life: "He lacked that supreme gift of the artist, the knowledge of when to stop."

My husband and I are movie buffs, and whenever we feel like something in the acting or directing that was overdone, we just shake our heads at each other and say, "supreme gift of the artist."

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

Hello! ^^ I hope you can take part in the discussion later on - there's no rush ^^

And that's rather lovely - that a line from canon has become part of your everyday life. It is a great line ^_^