Canon Discussion: The Dying Detective

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

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

The landlady stood in the deepest awe of him and never dared to interfere with him, however outrageous his proceedings might seem. I’m surprised really how passive and submissive Mrs. Hudson seems. I mean, she’s apparently a widowed woman on her own, responsible for running a household and earning her own living, and responsible for making sure her servants are paid too. Is she just deferential where Holmes is concerned? Is Watson exaggerating things for the sake of the story?

“Good God! Why did you not call in a doctor?” How do you feel about Mrs. Hudson taking so long to get a doctor? Admittedly, Holmes isn’t actually ill and is manipulating her. But what if Holmes had been ill? Do you feel sympathy with Mrs. Hudson’s hesitation? Or do you feel angry that she was so passive?

He disliked and distrusted the sex, but he was always a chivalrous opponent. I am not convinced Holmes does dislike women. It seems to be one of those generalisations that continually breaks down when it comes to individual women. Holmes worries about Violet Hunter like a brother, and about Violet de Merville like a father. In TWIS Holmes says to Watson about Mrs. Neville St. Clair: “I was wondering what I should say to this dear little woman to-night when she meets me at the door.” He and Watson are alone then: there’s no reason for him to pretend he has sympathy with her if he doesn’t. Also, I always think that Holmes understands women better than Watson. He sees them as they are, rather than romanticising them.

...when she came to my rooms in the second year of my married life… Where is Mrs. Watson? Watson rushes away to Baker Street without speaking to her or leaving a note.

“You are not angry?” he asked, gasping for breath. I realise this is a hugely contentious point: was Holmes right to use this plan? To make Watson and Mrs. Hudson believe that he was truly dying? They both go through a nightmarish experience. (There is that heartbreaking line: Mrs. Hudson was waiting, trembling and weeping, in the passage.)

I don’t want to diminish their suffering—knowing that someone you care about is close to death is terrifying and unbearable. But I do still believe that Holmes was right to act as he did—that there was a necessary ruthlessness to his actions.

...I walked slowly round the room, examining the pictures of celebrated criminals with which every wall was adorned. Odd choice of decoration for a bedroom. I’m sure these are people Holmes finds interesting but why does he choose to have them out on display at all times?

It was a dreadful cry that he gave—a yell which might have been heard down the street. My skin went cold and my hair bristled at that horrible scream. It doesn’t exactly balance things out but this does demonstrate to me how intensely Holmes cares about Watson. He’s not just anxious—he’s terrified when he thinks Watson is about to open the deadly box.

“There are the wheels, Watson. Quick, man, if you love me!” Time is short but should Holmes have still made an attempt to tell Watson that he wasn’t ill and it was a trick aimed at Culverton Smith? Watson doesn’t know he’s hiding in order to be a witness to a confession—at any moment he might have given the game away.

“Coals of fire, Holmes—coals of fire!” Which I gather is a reference to Romans 12:20: "Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head"; the next verse being: “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Is Holmes overcoming evil with good, or is he using evil to fight evil?

“Poor Victor was a dead man on the fourth day—a strong, hearty young fellow.” Victor Savage is really just a plot point in the story—we don’t know much about him. Any thoughts on him?

“That pretence I have carried out with the thoroughness of the true artist.” This seems an odd statement to make about yourself. Is Holmes trying to convince himself that he made the right choice in what to do? Or does the statement actually come from the author, Watson, because he was trying to convince himself Holmes had made the right choice?

Next Sunday, 20th December, we’ll be looking at the first half of The Valley of Fear: chaps 1-7. Hope you can join us for that.


And the following Sunday, 27th December, should have been a discussion for the second half—however, I believe someone from the Marylebone Monthly Illustrated will be standing in for me then and doing something a little more fun and festive…

Comments

[laurose8.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I still incline to a theory which emerged in earlier discussions; that Watson knew about Holmes' deception and he (or Doyle) just wrote it like this to add suspense. To me, the idea of Watson hanging around a sick man's bed for two hours doing nothing carries no conviction whatsoever.

[scfrankles.livejournal.com]

To me, the idea of Watson hanging around a sick man's bed for two hours doing nothing carries no conviction whatsoever. I agree it is stretching belief that Watson allows a presumably weak man to keep the door key from him, and just waits to be let out for two hours. If Holmes was seriously ill every minute would count.

I do still think myself that Watson was actually fooled but he is a doctor, an intelligent man and knows Holmes well - it would make sense if he had quickly picked up that Holmes was faking.