Amateur Holmesian Scholarship

I was reading an essay by Barbara Roden about why Doyle never put Holmes against Jack the Ripper. The essay isn’t the most interesting thing I’ve read but I did come across this snippet:

“Remarkably, one person who did attempt to solve the Ripper murders was Dr Joseph Bell. Aided by a friend, Bell scrutinised the Scotland Yard suspects and some of his own. He and his friend worked towards their separate conclusions; then each wrote down the name of the person they suspected, and exchanged papers. As Bell noted, ‘When two men set out to investigate a crime mystery, it is where their researches intersect that we have a result.’ When they opened their papers, both men had the same name. They presented their findings to Scotland Yard – and the murders ended a week later. Unfortunately, their results have never been made public.”

She lists her source as ‘Elementary, My Dear Watson’ by Graham Nown.

I’ve asked about this on the ‘Casebook of Jack the Ripper’ forum and they’ve speculated that this could be an urban myth, which would fit in with things I’ve read about the case. I’m going to attempt to find out more about this as it’s a very interesting area of speculation, particularly as I do know that Arthur Conan Doyle was a member of a crime solving club.

I was talking with some friends on the IRC #holmes channel about Richard L. Vaught’s article on Holmes’s eyesight awhile ago and this is what led me to speculate that he could be dyslexic.

I’m far-sighted and wear glasses all the time (otherwise I walk into things and it gets quite comical), I followspot with my specs on the end of my nose (a bad habit I know) so I can see the stage clearly and also read my cue sheet (which is close to me).

If Holmes was far-sighted that would explain why he gets Watson to read things to him (he can’t see them very clearly…) but then the big argument against this is the part in HOUND where he examines a document “holding it only an inch or two from his eyes.” If I take off my glasses and try this I can’t see a thing (actually even with my specs I can’t see this close up), so not only does this imply otherwise but he has excellent accommodation for thirty-five year old (HOUND was winter 1889, we generally accept Holmes being born in Jan 1854).

Perhaps he did wear spectacles for reading and wouldn’t allow Watson to ever publish this fact. Perhaps the line in HOUND originally said: “Holmes, putting on his reading glasses, held the paper only an inch or two from his eyes.” then Holmes pounced on Watson and scribbled madly on the said line, turned to face him and said “If you ever publish the fact I need glasses, I will make sure the public find out about your collection of lacy Edwardian undergarments.” And thus Watson kept quiet.

I’d imagine that it would be practically impossible to find your reading glasses in a sitting room as untidy as 221b, so that’s why Watson has to do all the reading. One of my friends amusingly said that Holmes would probably sit reading his book with his feet and just dare Watson to comment before making an effort to find his specs.

Personally, I think that Holmes had pretty good eye-sight and the reason he makes Watson read aloud is one of two:

1) He’s slightly dyslexic and so struggles getting the sounds in the right places in words when reading aloud. He’s too embarrassed by this to let Watson know and so avoids reading aloud anything he hasn’t first of all read thoroughly and practised a few times.

2) Watson has an incredibly sexy voice