I think it is a fair statement that the crime is not complicated but to understand how one makes that shift from normal guy to raging psychopath….or perhaps he (or she) was always a psychopath….is a question many struggle with. Though maybe he does not focus on the criminal intentionally? Maybe it is a deep underlying want to understand criminology? Holmes himself relies on reason, logic, science, facts, and the process of deduction…however it is curious that Doyle has such a focus on the psychology of the criminal. For example, in the Hounds of Baskervilles, the mysterious dog on the moors had to be explained away by logic, it could never be a ghost or phantom….always a logical explanation. Victorian society is focused on logic, science, and discouraged fantastical ideas. Holmes as a character speaks for Victorian society and is clearly a product of that environment. The why of a crime/murder is often incomprehensible to a normal person however, society demands an answer, a reason, a why. Science can easily explain the “how” of the crime but not necessarily the why. Clearly the focus of the novel is criminal psychology or the proverbial “why” of the crime. Like A Study in Scarlet, VOF contains a fairly long narrative and background on the murderer. Like Holmes I have deduced this from the novels: the crime and criminal have not changed only the style and the way the story is told. So as I read VOF, I began wondering why the same formula over and over again….I came up with a couple of different possibilities. Holmes must have been a wildly popular character as he is colorful and interesting….plus people just naturally have a morbid curiosity about murder and crime….admit it, you know you watch The First 48, Forensic Files, and Cold Case just as much as the next person! Obviously the series came out at a time when science, psychology, and industrial advancement were at a pinnacle. While some find the predictable plot boring, there is some comfort in knowing what to expect. Holmes often does not disclose his theories until late in the story while the audience (like Watson) is forced to try and make heads or tails of the facts. I started noticing a formula/pattern to Doyle’s writing pretty early on as most of the stories begin with a little background on Holmes’ “deduction” methods and a set up from the client via Dr. So I was totally hoping The Valley of Fear (VOF) was going to be more promising, sadly I was a little on the disappointed side. All of the first three novels that I read were a little on the long-ish and boring side, except for the various forensic science methods/techniques and the short lived love story between Mary and Dr. The first three novels were a little hit and miss for me. As most of you know, I am finishing up the last of the four novels of Sherlock Holmes ( A Study in Scarlet, The Sign of Four, and The Hound of Baskervilles being the first three) titled The Valley of Fear.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |