Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

Jingyao Shi Professor Lynda Haas Writing 37 2/2/2012 Conan Doyle Essay There is always an incredibly smart detective

in a mystery genre novel who seems to know everything. However, at this genius side, there is always someone who knows very little but rounds the other aspects of the genius. In Conan Doyles fictional detective stories, standing at Sherlock Holmes side, John Watson is the less intelligent and emotional one but also who has made practical Sherlock Holmes more human and understandable throughout the story. In the novel The Sign of the Four, John Watson acted more humanely than Holmes who was just languid and careless after meeting Miss Morstan at the first time and hearing Mrs. Hudson talking about Sherlock Holmes weird movements at night. Also in The Hound of Baskervilles, after Watson found out that Holmes was the man on the tor, Watson was mad at Holmes mistrust, but Holmes calmly explained everything was for safetys sake of the whole case. At the beginning of The Sign of the Four, after Miss Morstan left, John Watson turned to Holmes and exclaimed as people would usually do, What a very attractive woman!(Doyle 21) However, Holmes had lit his pipe again, and was leaning back with drooping eyelids. Is she? he said, languidly. I did not observe(Doyle 21). According to this short conversation, even though it shows that Holmes was not interested in Miss Morstan by describing his lit pipe, his drooping eyelids, and his languid tone, his conversation with Watson did make him more reasonable of being emotionless. Additionally, Holmes said, a client is to me a mere unit,--a factor in a problem. The emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning(Doyle 22).

Comparing to Holmes viewing Miss Morstan only as a unit, Watson viewed her more as a lady who needed help than just a client that they had to deal with. Watson is certainly more capable of making emotional observation than Holmes, and through the interaction between Watson and Holmes, Sherlocks emotionlessness became somehow reasonable and less eccentric. As the article Excerpt from Theory and Practice of Classic Detective Fiction mentions, Holmess collection of knowledge, too, is eccentric, is some areas highly detailed and in others demonstrating astonishing ignorance and indifference, Holmes is indifferent and ignorant in most of emotional situations. For example, as Mrs. Hudson said to Holmes, I ventured to say something to him about cooling medicine, but he turned on me, sir, with such a look that I dont know how ever I got out of the room(Doyle 118). Holmes could not observe that Mrs. Hudson was worrying about him and scared her away. Contrary, Watson tried to speak lightly to our worthy landlady, but [he] was [himself] somewhat uneasy when through the long night [he] still from time to time hear the dull sound of his tread(Doyle 118). Even with some uneasy feeling himself, Watson showed his care to Mrs. Hudsons worries by lightly explaining Holmes was just having something on his mind which made him restless. Watson represented the role of normal readers in the story, which made his character understandable. Meanwhile, as he gave some explanations about Holmes actions based on his own emotions, Holmes character became more real to the readers. Lastly, in The Hound of Baskervilles, when Watson found out that Holmes was the man on the tor, Watson cried with some bitterness, questioned on the trust between he and Holmes, and blamed Holmes on keeping secrets from him(Doyle 205). However, this time, even though Holmes answered to Watson, you would have wished to tell me something, or in your kindness you would have brought me out some comfort or other, and so an unnecessary risk would be

run, Holmes still appreciated and explained how important Watsons reports had been helped him solving the crime(Doyle 205). Holmes even showed that because of the danger which [Watson] ran, he decided to examine the matter for myself(Doyle 205). From this situation, the readers can somehow actually tell that Holmes actually cared not only the cases, but also his friend Watson. Watson had brought out the other side of Holmes in this case, which made the story and Holmes round and smooth to the audience. In general, Watson played a significant role in Conan Doyles stories. Despite he does not have genius intelligence, he, as a companion of Holmes, has a desirable level of emotional intelligence. The conversation between Watson and Holmes could fill up the gap between Holmes and the readers, just like how Watson made readers understand why Holmes had been so practical when solving the cases, why Holmes reacted so badly to Mrs. Hudsons worry, and how Holmes actually was not totally careless to the people around him. The role of Watson has made the Holmes character more flawless and approachable. It says that in Twenty rules for writing detective stories, there must be but one detective in mystery genre. Because of the smartness and eccentricity of the detectives, the character like Watson becomes essential. Without Watson, Holmes might only be an eccentric genius who plays violin and addicts to cocain.

Citation "Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories"(1928). Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories (1928) by S.S. Van Dine. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Feb. 2014. Excerpt from Theory and Practice of Classic Detective Fiction(1997). Writing Studio. N.p. Web. 03 Feb. 2014.