sherlock60 | Canon Discussion: The Valley of Fear [REPOST]

[This is a conflation of one post from Round 4 and another from Round 3, with slight revision.]

This week we’re having a look at The Valley of Fear.

Part 1

Chap. 1

"Really, Holmes," said I severely, "you are a little trying at times." “Being the seventh of January…” Holmes is quite irritable at the beginning of the story, and as the story proceeds says some rather cutting things. By tradition, the day before—the sixth—is his birthday. Has Watson perhaps forgotten and Holmes is rather firmly pretending he doesn’t care in the slightest?

"Porlock, Watson, is a nom-de-plume, a mere identification mark; but behind it lies a shifty and evasive personality. Any thoughts on ‘Porlock’ and why he is willing to help Holmes at such a risk to himself?

“You have heard me speak of Professor Moriarty?" Well, here we have a major problem with continuity: in FINA, set in 1891, Watson has never heard of Moriarty. In this story, set at the end of the '80's, apparently he does know who Moriarty is. Any ideas?

"But why 'Douglas' and 'Birlstone'?" Holmes’ solving of the code is so elegant and so flaming unsatisfying. Surely those two words clumsily inserted into the code would have been enough just on their own? And then Inspector MacDonald turns up with the news Douglas is dead anyway.

Those were the early days at the end of the '80's, when Alec MacDonald was far from having attained the national fame which he has now achieved. I rather like MacDonald and the friendship between him and Holmes. (I notice they have matching “bushy eyebrows”—has Holmes started a trend?)

Chap. 2

"That painting was by Jean Baptiste Greuze." Why does Moriarty have it openly on show like this? Arrogance? Is he absolutely certain that no criminal activity can be traced back to him?

“His younger brother is a station master in the west of England.” Surely this can’t be the brother mentioned in FINA: Colonel James Moriarty? Professor Moriarty could have two brothers I suppose, but it seems odd that Holmes doesn’t mention the other one at this juncture. He’s trying to make the point that Moriarty’s family isn’t wealthy—surely Holmes would have mentioned other siblings if there had been any?

Chap. 7

“You will excuse these remarks from one who, though a mere connoisseur of crime, is still rather older and perhaps more experienced than yourself." This strikes me as an odd thing for Holmes to say to MacDonald. If this story does indeed take place “at the end of the '80's” and if Holmes was indeed born in 1854, then he’s at most 35. MacDonald is an Inspector—surely he’ll have had to work his way up. He can’t be that much younger than Holmes.

I have to say that I don’t particularly enjoy the second half of VALL. It is so relentlessly depressing—the violence and the murders seem horribly realistic. It’s a look at humanity at its worst. I suppose I prefer a bit of escapism in the Holmes stories, though part 2 is very well done.

Part 2

Chap. 2

He was no backward suitor. On the second day he told her that he loved her, and from then onward he repeated the same story with an absolute disregard of what she might say to discourage him. It seems rather unprofessional for “McMurdo” to be courting Ettie in these circumstances. And Edwards is definitely a professional in all other areas—he never tells Ettie the truth about himself while he’s undercover. Was the courtship perhaps at first part of his assumed persona, and then the affection became real? And I wonder how Ettie felt when she found out the truth. She must have experienced some relief but how did she feel about being misled? It’s an odd situation—the man she fell in love with is not exactly the man she ends up marrying.

The man was popular; for he had a rough, jovial disposition which formed a mask, covering a great deal which lay behind it. This description of McGinty made me think of how Watson sometimes describes Holmes as having a cold mask. It’s strange but it’s never occurred to me before—the point of a mask is that it’s only a cover. Watson is always aware that Holmes is not truly a cold man.

Chap. 4

“…and it would be my little Fred that would be screaming for his father.” It’s probably just a coincidence but it is intriguing that “Porlock” uses the same first name as Morris’ son.

Epilogue

Jack has been lost overboard in gale off St. Helena. No one knows how accident occurred. A previous 60 suggests that Douglas has faked his own death, Holmes having planned it. I really hope that’s what happened. I suppose Moriarty’s note might simply be him mocking Holmes for “fate” beating him in the end.

And there’s this 60 which suggests the murder attempt happened—but Douglas survives to take up a new identity and a new life. Which I have to say really works for me. To quote my own comment: It kind of makes more dramatic sense for the canon story too. The man is a survivor - it's almost an anti-climax that he's apparently murdered at the end.

I must just also give the link back to

spacemutineer’s original discussion post for part 2 of VALL. She gives some information about the real story behind the Scowrers and also makes a fascinating connection between Edwards’ undercover work, and Holmes’ eventual undercover work in LAST.