Structuralism Criticism In Sherlock Holmes By Arthur Conan Doyle

Throughout the story, readers see Watson doing some investigating without much luck. However, when Holmes shows back up it is like all the little thing that Watson is looking over is starting to make since. When readers first learn of Ronald Adair’s murder, Watson notices a bullet lodged in his head, but that is about the only clues the readers get to see besides a pile of money laid upon a table. As soon as Holmes shows up though these little clues start to piece together. After the capture of Colonel Moran and his air-gun Holmes says, “…I knew of the existence of this remarkable gun, and I knew also that one of the best shots in the world would be behind it” (Doyle, 1994, p. 246). At first the clues look pointless, but Holmes shows the reader how Moran is using them in his attacks. Even though the clues did little to nothing to help the reader in solving the crime themselves, Doyle did provide clues for the reader that sparked the uncertainty of the

Another way Doyle creates suspense in his stories is that he makes deliberate culprits that seem suspicious; straight away the readers will think they have found whoever Holmes is looking for, but in the end the story is twisted around and the real offender is found the total opposite to what the reader was probably thinking. In Silver Blaze, to everyone it seems as if ‘Fitzroy Simpson’ was the culprit but everyone soon found out that it was the actual horse ‘Silver Blaze’. No one would have even thought of it to be the horse, so this one of the main ways suspense is created. Also it has the readers guessing who the actual criminal is.

In chapter five, “When in Doubt, It’s from Shakespeare” talks about the reappearance of different well known figures in literature. Foster follows this by giving an idea that literature is made based on other literary stories. He states that one of the reasons why story borrowing occurs is because there is only one story and it’s the human experience. Book critics usually refer to the literary works and texts as ‘intertextually’. According to the author, intertextuality is sometimes used to challenge a reader. If the person reading the story can point out the similarities or repetitiveness in the text then the meaning will easily be revealed to them. In conclusion, being able to identify different meaning of literary text and analyze it gives

“…and to listen with a mocking smile to the general chorus of misplaced congratulation.”(The adventure of the Devils foot)

Watson describes Holmes’s process of looking for clues and evidence of the murder as thus: “…he lounged up and down the down the pavement, and gazed vacantly at the ground, the sky, the opposite houses and the line of railings. […] he proceeded slowly down the path, or rather down the fringe of grass which flanked the path, keeping his eyes riveted upon the ground” (17). This shows that he focuses his attention first on any possible clues from the surrounding area outside and then concentrates on the ground once he’s determined where to look. It is also indicated that he has lowered levels of stress since he was lounging while looking for

“They tend to share certain key characteristics. They're manipulative, cold, and lack what we might call a moral compass--they know right from wrong but are not invested in that distinction. Their only concern with their ‘wrong’ behavior is getting caught, but because they are deceitful, callous and not subject to anxiety, they easily elude capture” (Spikol, 5). These sort of criminals were ones that the Chicago Police Department had never been introduced to before, causing them to change their entire perspective on cases once Holmes’ had passed. According to John Bartlow Martin, a writer for the “Harper’s Archive”, Holmes’ murder castle was filled with trapdoors, gas chambers, secret passageways, and even pits of acid used to get rid of bodies and other pieces of evidence. These were all things that the law enforcers had never even heard of in a story, much less seen or thought of in real life. It’s safe to say that Holmes drastically affected the police’s outlook on the cases in the near, and even far, future of criminals after his mystery; or at least part of his mystery had been

In “The Dying Detective,” it explained that Sherlock Holmes was literally dying from the prick of poison. To add, it explained that Mr. Culverton Smith was an expert on the poison that was injected into the ivory box; later we learned that Mr. Culverton Smith was indeed the one who injected it into the box in the first place. In “An Invitation to a Murder,” the crossbones on the prescription medication was believed to be a symbol of poison. Additionally, all of the supplies on the center of the table were items that would typically kill a person; yet, none of those belongings killed Mr. Abbott. Furthermore, both stories were premeditated murders. Mrs. Abbott knew that the twelve intelligent inspectors would prevent her from giving her husband the suspicious medication. Therefore, Mr. Abbott’s heart would stop beating and he would eventually die. On the other hand, Sherlock Holmes planned out every detail of the situation and what would happen. He knew that Dr. Watson would be concerned about Mr. Culverton Smith arriving and would like to stay. This created a witness for Mr. Culverton Smith confessing the crime he committed. Lastly, both of the passages had evidence that exemplified situational irony. Mrs. Abbott was dressed in black to grieve the death of herself and her disabled husband. Moreover, the investigators that were going to witness the murder, became the murderers. In the other story,

Logic Watson! Give me logic Miss Walden!" Not only was this man rude but he was also bossy; just what I needed in my life. At least his friend 'Watson' is nice enough. I wish they would really make up their minds, was it psychology they wanted or was it philosophy? Clearing my throat I spoke, "How about I get you a both, Sherlock if you don't mind telling me what you need this book for it would be a lot easier to help find you a logical selection." Sherlock seemed surprised to find someone complying so quickly after just denouncing a whole branch of science, one I found some truth in. "Well you see, I'm a consulting detective, the only one in fact, and John and I have a case regarding a man with what I believe to be 'Mommy issues' going around kidnapping single mothers. Please be quick about all of this, we need this information now!" Sherlock described. All the while he's describing this all the pieces are coming together for me, Sherlock, the curly hair, Watson, consulting detective: Sherlock Holmes the main all over the papers lately with that silly hate of

Let us begin with Holmes. Holmes lived in Chicago and owned a pharmacy. He had medical training and loved money and women (Larson 36-37). He was able to smooth talk and gave people a sense of happiness. Holmes could convince people of anything, which he used as a way to sell stories as to why the people he killed had just disappeared. He also used this in constructing his building/hotel. He barely paid a dime because he convinced workers that their job was unsatisfactory (Larson 67). The furniture companies would come looking for H. S. Campbell, the alias he used as the owner of the building, and he would tell them he was out on business (Larson 71-72). A man named Belknap, the uncle of one of Holmes’s three wives, described him as “warm and ingratiating, but also telegraph that some important element of humanness is missing”. For a long time this was known as “moral insanity” and later the term psychopath was used (Larson 87-88). Holmes himself was intrigued by Jack the Ripper (Larson 70).

Sherlock Holmes’s intelligence is demonstrated in both “The Red-Headed League” and “A Scandal in Bohemia”. During “A Scandal in Bohemia” he first demonstrates his intuitive thinking by figuring out that Count Kramm, the man introducing him on the case, is actually the King of Bohemia himself. This shows that he is able to make a quick determination about people’s lives just by having a brief conversation with them. This allows Holmes to solve mysteries that others cannot by simply looking at a suspect or location associated with the scenario. He uses this ability later in the story to find where the incriminating photo of the king with Adler is. He does this by creating a situation for himself where he will be able to get into Adler’s home. He then fakes a fire to see where Adler goes first so he can see where she keeps her most valuable possession, the photo. Holmes states “When a woman thinks that her house is on fire, her instinct is at once to rush to the thing which she values the most… Now it was clear to me that our lady of to-day had nothing in the house more precious to her then what we are questing for” (Doyle 19). This line of thinking shows that Holmes knows how to get people to inadvertently give him the information that he needs by putting them in the right situation and observing what they do. This skill

At the opening of this novel we meet Dr. Watson and Sherlock Holmes, whom has an unexpected visitor by the name of Dr. Mortimer, who introduces the detectives to a puzzling mystery of Baskerville

In relation to dialogue and narration, Watson’s style of storytelling is more straightforward and adopts a suspenseful tone that suits the mystery genre well. Since Watson tends to only see things as they are, there are more blind spots in his sight compared to Holmes. Because he is more visual and tends to impart very little of his own style, it makes readers anxious to discover what Watson will encounter next and what Holmes will reveal. The Red-Headed League is a good case in point, in which Watson writes, “What a time it seemed! From comparing notes afterwards it was but an hour and a quarter, yet it appeared to me that

Not only can the dialogue bring life to the story, but it can tell the story itself, as seen in many instances in which Holmes has wrapped up another mystery. Most cases are concluded with a recollection of events and revealing hints that only Holmes knew of, presented almost conversationally from Holmes to Watson. With his first-person account of the mystery, Doyle uses Holmes to clarify any remaining confusion or questions that linger in readers’ minds as the chapter ends. While it is repetitive after several cases, granting Holmes with such large chunks of dialogue eliminates the need for boring, lengthy straight-forward narration. A good example of the use of retelling in dialogue in place for narration can be found in The Red-Headed League. A combination of complex writing and sophisticated vocabulary also follow the genius detectives’ mysteries and help to represent his intelligence through Doyle’s skillful work. Each story is written with extensive vocabulary as well as depth, which also alludes/attributes to Holmes himself. Therefore, Doyle was careful to ensure that the professional nature of Holmes was also conveyed

Not only can the dialogue bring life to the story, but it can tell the story itself, as seen in many instances in which Holmes has wrapped up another mystery. Most cases are concluded with a recollection of events and revealing hints that only Holmes knew of, presented almost conversationally from Holmes to Watson. With his first-person account of the mystery, Doyle uses Holmes to clarify any remaining confusion or questions that linger in readers’ minds as the chapter ends. While it is repetitive after several cases, granting Holmes with such large chunks of dialogue eliminates the need for boring, lengthy straightforward narration. A combination of complex writing and sophisticated vocabulary also follow the genius detectives’ mysteries and help to represent his intelligence through Doyle’s skillful work. Each story is written with extensive vocabulary as well as depth, which also alludes/attributes to Holmes himself. Therefore, Doyle was careful to ensure that the professional nature of Holmes was also conveyed through Watson’s retellings. An excerpt of The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle shows the use of vocabulary, stating,

Another factor to consider is how Holmes questions Watson despite already knowing the answer. This curious habit in their interactions may also elevate the status Holmes imposes on the text and to the readers by differentiating/comparing their sense of understanding.