Amateur Holmesian Scholarship

Vital Stats
This is the longest of the `short stories’ published before Holmes’s death and was published in two parts in Harper’s Weekly in New York on the 14th and 21st October, 1893 and later the Strand Magazine in October & November 1893. It’s also one of the first spy genre stories.

Dating
Watson opens the story with `the July which immediately succeeded my marriage…’ and I’m one of those people who like to believe Watson (unless it’s really outlandish) and in this case I find it interesting so I’m sticking with what he tells us. It is indeed July 1889 (assuming Watson did get married in the same year as he met Mary) , which also means that he refers to the events of `The Second Stain’ almost a decade before he publishes the story.

Versions
1952 – BBC Radio version starring Carleton Hobbs and Norman Shelley
1985 – Granada version starring Jeremy Brett and David Burke
Somewhere around the mid 90s – BBC Radio version starring Clive Merrison and Michael Williams

Plot Summary
An old flame of Watson’s called Percy Phelps gets back in contact to tell him he’s managed to lose a very important and top secret document that could plunge the country into a horrifying war, but more importantly really upset his uncle who gave him the job as a favour.

Watson goes off on a fond journey down memory lane about the school yard bullying he willingly participated, which Phelps must have liked otherwise he wouldn’t be asking the bully for help would he? Mary, no doubt aware of the effect this letter has had on her husband decides she can’t be bothered with him (she doesn’t know where the wicket is for one) and instead dispatches him to see Holmes.

(No doubt the actual letter is full of colourful reminders about Watson’s past relationship with `Tadpole’ (why tadpole I wonder…) but alas Watson doesn’t tell us these, no doubt because it put Holmes into a terrible sulk.)

Watson arrives in time to interrupt Holmes’s conclusions about a`common place little murder’ (which amusingly Howard Brody suggestions that this murder was the poisoning by carbolic acid of Mary Sutherland from IDEN, chronologists have dated this story as just before NAVA ). Holmes, silently thanking Mary (he knows where the wicket is) prepares himself for disappointment as all Watson wants to do is share a letter
from his ex.

Eventually Holmes is persuaded to go pay a visit, partially because he wants to size up the competition and partly because he’s bored and wants something to do. Upon arrival they’re greeted by a man who Watson lovingly describes as `a plump and mischievous boy’, he turns out to be the brother of the man Phelps is engaged to be married to… I mean woman (Joseph Harrison). Holmes does his usual trick and I’m sure in that instant he solves the entire case but decides to have a bit of fun at Phelps’s expense (particularly after the mutual `tache admiring.)

Phelps tells his story in intricate detail, thoughtfully providing a map so that the nice Mr Holmes is fully informed and can quickly find his lost treaty thus saving his job and possibly even his life as no doubt suspicion will fall on him eventually and he might find the gallows calling.

After a baffling moment of rose admiration it’s a quick hop back to London to have a poke around in the rooms where the very important, top secret Naval Treaty (which now the police know about, the commissionaire, Holmes, Watson, Phelps fiancée and his brother in law to be all know now about) was being copied.

Watson of course willingly abandons his source of income and his professional duties to go off on a little adventure with ol’ grey eyes. Holmes is quick to put his plans in order, dispatching a few telegrams and place and advert in the local newspaper, he shows off to Watson a bit with his theories concerning suspects (Lord Holdhurst being one of them).

They meet up with a frosty police inspector who is no doubt feeling his alpha male status questioned by Holmes being brought up, but he soon warms up them after Holmes flashes his eyelashes and Watson’s magic crotch come into play. Holmes asks a few questions about the other clerk (Garot) and the commissioner and soon eliminates them from his enquires so off the trot to size up a certain Lord and stare at his shoes for a bit.

Either Watson did something to upset Holmes or Holmes can’t take the tension any longer and so sends him off back to his `legitimate work’ so he can spend the evening by himself. The next day though Watson is round there quick enough to listen to a random lecture from Holmes all about the Bertillon system and the French savant (curious time to be squee’ing over French things) before they’re off back again to meet with Watson’s ex – who has a new development! Apparently that night he was `aroused by a slight noise’ (rather like a mouse gnawing on a plank… awww) then suddenly someone tried to sneak into his room! Shock! Horror!

Holmes proceeds to give a serious of bizarre instructions, one of which no doubt made Watson think “threesome!” until he realised that Holmes was planning to stay behind to do spend some more time with himself out of doors and spending the night sitting in a flower patch. Phelps, no doubt delighted heads off to London with Watson.

At some point during the night Holmes gets into a bit of wrestling match with the real criminal (and I bet he knew from the beginning) and unfortunately suffers a slight hand injury whilst allowing Joseph Harrison to run away into the loving arms of the law… probably. Not only that, but he recovers the document.

Meanwhile Watson spends the night tossing and turning… nothing is said of what Phelps is doing
at the time. Before getting rid of Phelps so he can have some well-deserved TLC from Watson he decides to play a rather cruel trick and enlists Mrs Hudson’s help in almost giving this rather weak-nerved man a heart attack.

To think all this could have been avoided if someone had invested in one of those new fangled autographic copying do-dahs.

Read the rest of this entry »

(originally published in my personnel journal and on Holmesslash)

This discussion brought to you by sheer disappointment with the Tour de France, strange goings on with my Dictaphone and a sore knee.

I wish I had one of those transcribing software things on my computer, I originally did all my note taking via Dictaphone and it would have been easier to just plug it into the computer and go “here ya go, transcribe for me.” Ah well… nothing like almost TWO HOURS trying to figure out what you’ve just said (I have a heavy cold and currently talking in a very gravely voice… anyone want to hear my rambles heck I’ll put them up… lol)

PUB: Strand (UK) Nov 1891, Strand (US) Dec 1891

Date: September 1887.

Dispute(s):
… well, I don’t think there is any dispute. The evidence within the text all supports September 1887, and the reference to Watson having a wife will be dealt with later as will the one concerning him (Holmes) being defeated by a woman. Plus I’m not really into this part of ‘the game’, I like to believe Watson. There is also a question whether or not Watson wrote this story or if it is indeed is Sherlock Holmes.

Plot:
John Openshaw comes to see Holmes with a story about murder, oranges and secret goings on. Holmes gives him rather strange advice, and the guy falls victim to this secret gang.

Versions:
I cannot find any pastiches or anything, but there is an episode of Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd Century based on this plot (which makes faaaar more sense), and there is a Basil Rathbone film based on this idea called ‘Sherlock Holmes Faces Death’. With the exception of the BBC Radio 4 adaptations, there have been *no* canon adaptations of this on TV. (For random trivia: the voice of Sherlock Holmes in SH22 is the guy who plays Lt. Randall Disher in ‘Monk’).

Discussion:
The opening line of the case begins:

“When I glance over my notes and records of the Sherlock Holmes cases between the years ’82 and ’90, I am faced by so many which present strange and interesting features that it is no easy matter to know which to choose and which to leave.”

Why doesn’t Watson mention 1881? Gavin Brend suggests that during 1881 Watson was busy writing up STUD and was not involved in any of Holmes’s investigations, or at least ones which aren’t in the public eye all ready or didn’t have particularly interesting plots. However, Watson also drops some great hints about cases that he might write up at a later date… which we know he didn’t. I would have loved Watson to tell the tale of when Holmes wound up the guy’s watch to prove the case… That would have been great.

Holmes also has had a bit of press celebration (“Some, however, have already gained publicity through the papers.”). Why doesn’t Watson feel that these are worth mentioning? Does he feel a bit left out when Holmes is getting all this glory, has there been some tension between the pair?

One of the disputes about the date surrounds this line: “I have been beaten four times – three times by men, and once by a woman.” Which is why people dispute September 1887, and want the case to be after SCAN. However, what about Effie Munro (YELL)? Doesn’t she effectively beat him, she doesn’t beat him in terms of she beats him but she defeats him that it wasn’t what he thought (perhaps he should have thought about this later). Perhaps he is referred to Watson and the “wife” reference, he’s been beaten in love… I digress though .

Has Watson changed anything about this story? Has he covered up things or has he left them exactly as there were. We get a rather cosy view of them together by the fire, Holmes working on his index and Watson absorbed in a book that happens to make the weather outside a little more fun. Incidentally, we (in England) do get terrible weather in September, in fact at the moment we are having terrible weather with July. All the fun of being an island I suppose.  It’s all very domestic.

Watson mentions:

My wife was on a visit to her mother’s, and for a few days I was a dweller once more in my old quarters at Baker Street.

This is September 1887 though, he doesn’t marry Mary until 1888, and Mary has no mother. Klinger points out that the Double-day editions of ‘The Adventures…’ follows the Strand version with ‘mother’, however in the first book publication of the story the word mother is changed to ‘aunt’. This wife reference is the reason people say “oh it can’t be 1887…” What if though Watson’s relationship with Holmes has been remarked upon by someone and struck by the domestic bliss that he seems to show he’s inserted a reference to a ‘wife’ just as a passing thought as if saying “I AM NOT A PUFF!”

Read the rest of this entry »

(originally published on my personal journal for online community ‘holmesslash‘)

Vital Stats:

First published in England in ‘The Strand Magazine’ in February 1892, first published in the American ‘Strand Magazine’ in March 1892. It was serialised in ‘New York World’ (20th August 1905) as ‘The Spotted Band’, in ‘Glasgow Weekly Mail’ March 189, ‘Scottish Border Record’ Dec 1904, ‘Tit-Bits’ July – Aug 1910, ‘Grand Magazine’ July 1927 and ‘The Sunday Chronicle’ May – June 1930.

Random Trivia:
Written at 12 Tennison Road, South Norwood and completed during the last week of October 1891. It was 33 folio pages, 2 in someone else’s hand with corrections by Doyle. It was sold at Sotheby’s on 26th March 1934 for £82, later sold to a Chicago dealer in 1935 by Scribner’s Bookstore. Now lost.

Dating:
April 1883 – my rule is to believe Watson, but some chronologists of course disagree. I didn’t do any more research on the other dates.

Freudian Fun:
Snake = phallus, ventilator = vagina.

Versions:
This seems to be the one story that is done the most so… my favourites:
‘The Speckled Band’ – Russian series, they put this in the middle of STUD.
‘The Speckled Band’ – Granada series
‘The Speckled Band’ – BBC Radio 4

Plot Outline:
It all starts with Mrs Hudson, Holmes and Watson being knocked up by one Helen Stoner. Ms Stoner then gives a somewhat harrowing account of her sisters death. Holmes’s spidey-sense tells him all is not well and Watson has a craving for breakfast. After the departure of their new client and before Holmes can suck on his before breakfast pipe they are rudely interrupted by the evil Dr Roylott (Boo! Hiss!), after a charming spot of bending Holmes heads off to a location that did not exist at that moment starting the general ‘what is he smoking?!’ train of thought. After being locked together in a dark room with a gun, a candle and a stick – all is solved.

Discourse:
In 1927, ACD listed ‘The Speckled Band’ as his favourite Holmes story and is has consistently held the top spot in various SH society polls It’s really not difficult to see why it is a favourite, it has everything a good mystery needs – a locked room, no sign of foul play (other than a dead body), a collection of Indian creatures and a sinister doctor.

For slashers there is a mountain of material to get our plot hedgehogs/bunnies into. Firstly, Watson wakes to find Holmes standing fully dressed in his room smoking a cigarette, he doesn’t seem fazed by this. Watson then gets dressed whilst Holmes is still in the room , they are certainly very comfortable around each other for two Victorian gentlemen. They then spend some time together in a bedroom on the look out for a magical snake, perhaps this was more of the one eyed variety.

Throughout this case is definitely something not quite right with Holmes. Firstly, Doctor’s Commons no longer existed and was no longer where you went to read a will! Doctor’s Commons held wills until 1867 when it was demolished during the construction of Queen Victoria Street (1867 – 1871). The wills were moved to the Births and Registry people at Somerset House and opened in 1874. Of course, Holmes could have been speaking in literal fashion (ie ‘Scotland Yard’). Secondly – a snake that climbs up and down a rope when told, drinks milk and has a fondness for whistles… dude, where’s our Holmes!

This has led to speculation that there was in fact something much more sinister going on. Dr Roylott may well have been a voyeuristic pervert – standing on the chair to spy through the vent at his step-daughter (or possibly daughter – in the original draft they were Helen and Julia Roylott) undressing/having a bath. Perhaps it went further and the rope was used for incestuous sex acts which went horribly wrong when the girl was due to be married – she might reveal the Secrets at Stock-Moran! Maybe we all have the wrong end of the stick – Julia was the one committing these acts, Helen killed her in self defence and her step-father helped her cover things up, or perhaps was the witness and Helen needed to get rid of him. Maybe Helen was the abuser. Whatever was really going on Watson couldn’t let the truth be known, it would never be published and the world would be starved of the little clues he dropped about his relationship with Holmes.

There’s some evidence that this could have originally meant to be more than a locked-room mystery. ACD wrote his MD on syphilis and wrote a story called ‘The Third Generation’ about a bridegroom’s pre-nuptial discovery that he was inherited syphilis from his father. From his medical training, he was familiar (apparently) with the ‘hideous and distorted’ children who were a product of incest – the baboon is described as being a ‘household member’ is this a subtle hint the baboon was really the child of Julia Stoner that Helen saw as her ‘brother’? (Doyle seems to be a bit obsessed in the sex area…)

Status of the Relationship:
For Victorian gentlemen, Watson has no problem getting dressed in front of Holmes – c’mon he would have slept in a full night gown he would have had to get un dressed in order to get dressed again! He didn’t seem surprised at all to find Holmes standing in his room, watching him sleep and smoking a cigarette… maybe he neglected to mention the suggestive stains on his trousers and the fact he was fastening his fly at the time? Perhaps Watson is a heavy sleeper and Mrs Hudson found it easier to wake his bed mate.

I think it’s still quite early in their friendship (despite their familiarity), Holmes is cautious about putting Watson in danger and Watson is still quite keen to prove his place in their partnership. They spend some time together in a darkened bedroom, who knows what they really got up to before Holmes spotted a snake… unless he spotted the snake first.

Some questions:
- Are Holmes and Watson sleeping in the same room, but Holmes is easier to wake?
- Is Holmes stoned to the eye balls, living off caffeine and this case is just one psychedelic trip?
- What was really going on?
- If the Speckled Band had nothing to do with a snake, then what?
- Did Watson ever write the ‘truth’ and keep it locked in his dispatch box?
- How did they cope with three babies?
- Did Watson get to have a wash and shave?

Sources:
‘Arthur Conan Doyle and the Meaning of Masculinity’ by Diana Barsham
‘The Case Files of Sherlock Holmes: The Speckled Band’ by various authors (mostly Christopher & Barbara Roden)
‘ Decoding the Subtext: The Speckled Band ‘ by nekosmuse

Some reading:
‘ The Truth about the Speckled Band ‘ by Laurence M. Klauber

Humour:
A short article written by Brad Keefauver called ‘Boys Will Be Boys’ which says that Holmes is thinking about sex (and shagging Ms Stoner) throughout the case, suggested at one point that maybe Ms Stoner was employed to seduce him by Moriarty.