Health to you (hello), reader, blogger or random browser. Okay, enough pleasure-time to get to business. My reading project revolves around the detective story and its obvious protagonist-the sleuth. These are the things I'm here to find out:
-how has the detective story changed over the years since its birth at the hands of Edgar Allan Poe; has it evolved or devolved?
-the sleuths; what's different about them? what's similar? why should we even care? would any of them thrive solving contemporary gritty crimes?
-and finally, how has technology influenced the detective story genre?(bet you didn't see that one coming) Have technological advances sped up and increased the efficiency of crime solving, or have they simply overcomplicated the process and altered the sleuthing?
I decided to begin my reading with Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes in a short story called "A study in Scarlet". As soon as I am finished reading this story, i will begin the real blogging. Till then, i remain, yours, Adrian.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Okay, I am done with my first Sherlock Holmes Independent Reading Story. I wish to begin my enlightenment of the dear reader by expounding on the life of the author. I will not, however, give a detailed biography but only hint upon the more interesting bits of the great author’s life.
Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle was a Doctor and studied Ophthalmology. His practice, unfortunately, was very unsuccessful and during these long periods of sitting in wait for patients who never came, he began writing the unforgettable stories of Sherlock Holmes. The character of Sherlock Holmes, Doyle said, was modeled after his professor’s unique ability to discern from people’s personal belongings- their personal traits and behaviors.
Not very detailed, I know but I’m eager to get into the story itself. The mystery in “A Study In Scarlet” is this;
-A man is found murdered in a house known to be vacant,
-On his face-an expression of utmost derision,
-Without a mark on his body,
-But with blood of unknown origin on his clothes,
-And on the wall, written in blood, is the word RACHE, the German word for revenge.
-Also, lying by the corpse is an old wedding ring.
These are all the clues that the master sleuth needed to solve the crime; can you?
Being the first of the Sherlock Holmes stories ever, “A Study In Scarlet” begins with Sherlock Holmes meeting our faithful and trusted narrator, Dr. Watson, who, after being returned to England from the frontlines of the war in Afghanistan due to a bullet wound, decides to rent a room with the sleuth. At first, Watson is very skeptical of Holmes and does not really understand what Holmes is doing with his life, seeing as he is always in a lab testing chemicals on himself and performing other experiments to see their effect on the human body-yet he denies that he is a doctor of sorts. Watson does not learn that Holmes is a master-detective whom the police constables turn to for enlightenment when faced with the most troubling cases until later on in the story. This occurs when Watson finally grows weary of all the secrecy that shrouds Holmes’ meetings with unidentified parties in the house and asks Holmes to explain himself and what exactly he does. At this point in time, Holmes explains to Watson the “Science of Deduction” and how it has been pivotal to his success as a detective. Sherlock Holmes’ method is this; unlike the rest of us, whom when presented with the occurrences that lead up to an event can make an educated guess as to the outcome, Holmes, when presented with the outcome, can use the facts and accurately deduce (in reverse) the events that led to this named outcome. For example, upon first meeting Watson, Holmes accurately deduces that Watson is an injured army doctor returning from the war by Watson’s demeanor, the tan of his skin and the awkward way in which he carries his arm.
Okay, firstly, the thing that sent the alarm bells rining...a wedding ring? I smell Scandal! Now, after reading this short story, and possibly others I'm not sure, I have only this question- does the detective story need to be ripe with scandal to be interesting. Does it have to be by the wronged divorcee or can it just be someone was killed. I suppose it's just that...is it neccesary to have that one major underlying scandal to be catchy or to have that as the catalyst powering the story along? As you go forth in your research, I'd like to see the pattern between then and now...just an idea.
Well, for the Sherlock Holmes stories, at least the ones i have read, there has to be a "scandal" or some other diabolical alterior motive for commiting the murders-people dont just get killed randomly without a strong (or convincing) cause. In this particular story, the murderer turns out to be an outlaw from Ohio named Jefferson Hope. The ingenious arrest of Hope is orchestrated by Holmes who summons Hope to his room while in the presence of two other famous detectives (who are each other's nemeses and have come to Holmes for help solving the crime)and cordially slips the handcuffs onto Hope's wrists (who is a cabdriver at this point) much to the suprise of everyone in the room. Hope puts up a viscious fight but once subdued, cordially accepts his fate and obliges to the detectives' wishes. The story digresses into a narrative about a man (John Ferrier) and his daughter who are discovered wasting away (lost) in the desert of the Sierra Nevada and are taken in by the nomadic mormons who incorporate the pair into their lifestyle and expect of them, in return for their rescue and hospitality, to abide by the Mormon rules. The Mormons are similar to the Puritans, but with a more intricate and secretive annhilation service (mafia type organization) that snuffs out any opposition in the society. This is where our murderer comes in; Jefferson Hope is a rider (bad-boy type) who comes riding through the town and falls in love with John Ferrier's daughter-soon she is betrothed to marry him, an outsider, much to the dismay of the Mormons who alert John Ferrier (the dad) on this and give him 30 days to announce his daughter's marriage to one of the Mormon's eligible bachelors-specifically between Enoch Drebber and Joseph Stangerson. The threat on Ferrier's life increases by the day as he is unwilling to take away his daughter's freedom by betrothing her to a man she does not love and they both lie in wait for the return of Hope (the murderer, bad-boy type) who eventually returns and helps them escape from the village. However, once outside the village, Hope leaves to hunt some food and returns to find John Ferrier dead and already buried in the ground and his love (the daughter-Lucy Ferrier) taken back to the village to be wed. When Hope returns to the village, he finds Lucy has been married off to Enoch Drebber and has deteriorated and died, leaving her father's estate to Drebber (as was Drebber's plan from the beginning). Hope (a wanted man now)makes an appearance in the village and removes from Lucy's finger the wedding ring-saying "She will not be buried in this" and he keeps the ring. Hope pursues Drebber and Stangerson and keeps making attempts on their lives till they flee to London, where he catches up with Drebber first and kills him (Drebber is the victim found in the house)-accidentally forgetting the ring behind after showing it to Brebber to jog his memory and forcing Drebber to choose from a small case containing two pills, one a poisonous arsenic the other a commonplace pharmaceutical-so as to let fate decide his death (Hope swallowed the other pill and they stared each other down waiting to see who was going to die-thus the look of contempt on Drebber's limp body's face). Hope's motive is therefore, entirely revenge-a dish that was best served cold.
Okay, I know I'm super behind on your comments. Forgive me? Well, I'll try to make it up by being a good reader from now on. Here we go, second comment on your first blog. So as you noted Sherlock Homes is actaully based off a real life character. I think your blog could take a real interesting turn if as you read you continue to delve into the life of Sir Doyle, what was going on in his life that led to his aspirations of the book, or how was his time period affecting his work. I'm gunna go ahead and asumme that yah, this guy is British, and what is Holmes-British, Scotish? So I suppose a good focus may be how does the cultrue of the time period affect the story if at all. the Holmes stories are basically the root of mysery novles, or the modern ones right? So it's also importatn fo ryou to look at how the ideas and styles in this book have managed to last this long and still be a Great read. And I thought that it was cool that you listed out the facts of the case, are you going alon gthe case the same as Holmes, in that are you studyilng the facts and trying to come to your own conclusions, some times the great mysteries are based on that one big surprise at the end, so it would be interesteing to see how you are interpreting the clues verus how this, "master sleuth" is. I like commenting, in fact, I think I'll make another one right now (scroll down...) oh, and I'm real sorry for the grammar, I don't look at the keys, or the screen when I type, so yah it sucks. Sorry.
Okay, so first comment on your second blog. How does the fact that Watson is straight from the front lines affect his POV and his attitude towards Holmes. A lot of veterans of war, are often characterized in the same way, mostly for some reason I'm thinking of Jake from "The Sun Also Rises" by Hemmingway and the guys from "Fallen Angels" by Walter Dean Myers (I think that's how you spell it, could be-Mayers..) anyway, they just seem to have this distinctive character, so I'm wondering, does this affect him in the book at all. Also, you say that Watson doesn't really quesition Holmes, yet is curious. If it were my roommate, and he/she were experimenting on themselves, there would be soem questioning goin' on. So why doesn't Watson ask, or does he? And how is the relationship between the two of them, stressed, good, nonexistent? Enlighten me, por favor.
Okay, seriously, this is the final one for tonight. yah, I am trying to catch up but at the same time (no, I'm not lying) now, that I've started reading and commenting on your blog I can't stop. I have so many Ideas, and you have so many places you can go. At first I was skeptical, I'm not exactly into the whole Sherlock thing, but I'm really interested so far. Okay, thought I'd give you some props, but now time for the commenting.
So for the last one, I focused on Watson, so now ofcourse it's Holmes. At this point in the book, it doesn't seem like you know a lot about the life of Holmes, much more, I suppose, of Watson's. We do know, however, that whenever Holmes meets a person he seems to instinctively begin to analyze them. Does he analyze or fear being anzalyed himself? He is a mystery in himself and that is interesting, what about the fact that this man is a mystery, a ghost, no past-just the present. Does this affect his relationship with Watson. This would be a good time to ask, what about his personality Makes him such a skilled slueth. Do you think his method of detachment help him in his line of the "nitty-gritty" work? I think it's time to start truly analyzing how Holmes works and how this affects his life, friendships, past, and future. Have fun. I'm going to go read MY book. Nights.
laugh. Your last post was great. A lot of story behind it. So, here we are, at the end. I believe, at least this is the end...
Anyway, I like that you adressed one of my questions, because it shows me that through the story you've been able to better your understanding of the genre. However, I'm gunna take some time out from praising you-and give you my first real criticism. Almost all of that last blog is summarization, I think it would be to your best advantage to not waste time telling me about the story (though i Do enjoy that) and start focusing on certain aspects and analyzing them, for you to summarize is important, but I think for this book it's time that you sit down and do strict analysis-of the characters, setting, mood. Anything, even theme...At the end, I thought you were going to elaborate on the idea that Hope actually let the Fates decide whether Debber would die or not, Hope had put his own life on the line, saying that his hate was so great for that other man, he was willing to die for it. And if fate said Debber would live, then that was fine with him, Hope would die instead. Allusions in the text? The thing is, I can't say because I haven't read the book, you need to start looking more deeply into your text, from the look of you summaries its full of awesome stuff you could elaborate on.
You're doing a good job, don't get me wrong. I was posting on your page, Halloween night, I liked it so much. But now, I think it's time for you to go to the next level. I know this was harsh from me...but I hope you can see past that and take my critism in hand and make your blogs even better than they are now.
okay, so this is it. After this I should be all caught up on your blogs. yay for me. I hope there are no bad feelings after my last one...
Sobeing that it's the end of your first book, this is an importatn moment. Now, you have to connect the book/theme of it all back to your essential questions. Did you learn anythign from it? Will it affect teh way you intend to tackle the next one? Now that you've gotten through the basic, what happened, let's dive deeper. What has it taught you-anything about reality? I think this is also a great time to think about one of your questions, would these sleuths be interested/capable fo solivng today's mysteries. While this book is still fresh in your mind you should make up a list of Holmes' characteristics, adn techinques so that you can later compare them to detectives of more modern times.
I look forward to coming back to this blog and seeing that you've adressed some of the commetns I've been lieaving you, I think some of them can really help you to broaden your understanding of the book. Good job on your first book!
Post a Comment