- Email: [email protected]
The circumstances of the missing biographer or why Watson didn't narrate these four Sherlock Holmes stories
Whimsy I
II I
I
I
The circumstances of the missing biographer or why Watson didn't narrate these four Sherlock Holmes stories Richard M. Caplan, M.D. Iowa City, IA The author provides arguments to explain why four of Arthur Conan Doyle's sixty stories about Sherlock Holmes were not narrated by Dr. Watson. The arguments relate to logical demands of the plot in the cases of the two stories told by an unidentified narrator. The two told by Holmes seem to demand Watson's absence because the final elucidation requires skill in cutaneous diagnosis; the presence of a medical man would have, or should have, relieved the dramatic tension of the mystery too soon. The Sherlock Holmes stories can provide delightful diversion as well as serve constantly to enhance our appreciation for highly alert and careful physical examination. (J AM ACADDERMATOL 6:1112-1114, 1982.)
Why do so many dermatologists feel attracted to the fictional figure, Sherlock Holmes? The answer is really not difficult--it is because his methods are so like those of dermatologists. Let me count the ways: extremely close examination, often with magnification; occasional use of special examination in the laboratory (a " b i o p s y , " for example, of a bit of telltale cigar ash); often a relatively brief interview, employing a good sense of those few trenchant questions most likely to yield the key information; extensive ability to make inferences from even limited observation; frequent practice with those facts and skills that constitute his chosen domain; persistence in his efforts, even when seemingly stymied; concern for the weIl-being of his client and an optimum outcome; delight at the sensory details, so often cutaneous or at least external, that he finds so useful in stunning the reader and solving his puzzle. Thus, whatever atReprint requests to: Dr. Richard M. Caplan, Professor of Dermatology and Associate Dean for Continuing Medical Education, University o f Iowa College o f Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242.
1112
tracted us to dermatology and keeps our interest there likewise attracts us to Mr. Holmes. Another aspect that endears the stories to us is that his companion, roommate, straight man, and ultimately his narrator is a physician, Dr. John H. Watson. A knowledge of medicine and medical perspective thus gently permeates the stories and brings a comfortable familiarity and identification for us as we read. There are four stories, however, among those sixty that are generally accepted as the canon, 1 that are not narrated by Dr. Watson. Two of the stories are told by Holmes himself, and in each he explains to the reader how it happens that Watson was not present during those adventures, and why he therefore takes pen in hand himself ("The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier" and "The Adventure of the Lion's M a n e " ) . The other two are related by an anonymous third person with no explanation about the usurpation of Watson's customary role. (In Charles Higham's biography, The Adventures of Conan Doyle, ~ the discussion of "The Adventure of the Mazarin S t o n e " refers to it 0190-9622/82/061112+03500.30/0 © 1982 Am Acad Dermatol
Volume 6 Number 6 June, 1982
as "unique in the Holmes canon" for its third person narration; Higham's misstatement thus overlooks the third person narration of "His Last Bow. ") I will offer here literary and medical reasons that I believe explain why Dr. Arthur Conan Doyle chose a narrator other than Watson for these four tales. In each of the two stories that employs an anonymous, omniscient narrator, a vital component of the plot depends on the reader's knowledge of a conversation that takes place between two villains. If either Watson or Holmes seemed to be able to hear either of the conversations, the narration wouId totally lose its sense of anticipation and tension. In "The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone," the villain and his henchman discuss with each other, and thus explain to the reader, their criminal activity in abducting the famous jewel called the Mazarin Stone. Furthermore, they disclose the location of the gem. Sherlock Holmes in fact does hear the conversation by employing two somewhat hard-to-believe ploys: an exceedingly lifelike wax mannequin of himself (perhaps believable to those acquainted with the skills of Madam Tussaud) and a phonographic recording of himself playing the violin in an adjacent room. The surprise of the story occurs when it is revealed that Holmes has surreptitiously traded places with the mannequin while seeming to be playing the violin in his bedroom. Doyle used this plot for a play, The Crown Diamond, 3 which was produced for a mere twenty-nine performances in 1921, shortly before the modified story appeared in The Strand magazine as the "Adventure of the Mazarin S t o n e . " The visual surprise of the mannequin suddenly "coming to life" to confront the criminals proved no better on the stage than it does in a short story. "His Last B o w , " published in The Strand in 1917, seems to me a better story. A great deal of information must reach us via a sinister conversation between two highly placed German representatives in England just prior to the onset of World War I. Thus, neither Holmes nor Watson can serve to recount the conversation; hence the need for an omniscient narrator. The surprising appearance of Holmes and Watson occurs near the end of
Missing biographer
1113
the story, and in a way that reveals Holmes's responsibility for the pro-British events described in the conversation of the unwitting Germans. This story undoubtedly was welcomed by the British public, who were then naturally experiencing markedly anti-German sentiment along with their perennial pro-Holmes sentiment. The manifest patriotism displayed by Holmes in the story made it a "sure winner." This story, incidentally, is a good example of the diverse "adventures" in which Holmes figures. Many of the stories are specifically entitled "Adventure" although the public seems to want to think of Holmes as a solver of murders, or at least major crimes. Some of the most famous stories do involve murders, and thus the public stereotype can be understood. "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier" clearly drew on Dr. Doyle's visit to South Africa during the Boer War. He surely met the clinical problem of leprosy there; a British soldier serving in that war and the potential diagnosis of leprosy made a natural and effective combination. Holmes tells this tale, which opens with his explanation of why he happens to be writing, namely, that Watson always urged him to try his hand at it. Indeed, others may have urged Dr. Doyle to "allow" Holmes to tell his own story, for it would make an interesting contrast. As it happens, though, there is not much contrast, for Holmes's style as a writer seems incredibly " l i k e " Watson's. (Early in the story Holmes describes his methods in a dialogue with his client that reads just as if Watson had written it. It happens to include a comment of great dermatologic interest, as Holmes explains his technic to his visitor: "I see no more than you, but I have trained myself to notice what I see. ") But the real reason Watson must not be present in this adventure is precisely because he is a physician but not a dermatologist. The plot requires the "victim" of the piece to have a skin disease that mimicked leprosy in great detail but in fact was not leprosy. Holmes's inference that the mystery hinged on a mistaken diagnosis required verification--and verification of an undisputable sort. Watson's presence might have led to a diagnosis too soon, and thus put an end to the suspense in the story. Also, since Watson was
1114
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Caplan
not a specialist, his diagnosis would have "spilled the beans" and yet not have been corroborative nor persuasive t o the reading audience. An eminent fictional dermatologist, Sir James Saunders, served as the crucial validator. Watson had to be out of the way to allow for the comfortable appearance of this specialist. I grant that this story might have been told by Watson, since the issue of a specific cutaneous diagnosis arises only in the final paragraphs of explanation, and Dr. Saunders (Sir James) could have been consulted anyway. But that would have required either that Watson be made to seem grossly inadequate as a diagnostician, or that Holmes be made to wound his friend's pride by going over his medical head to bring in the eminent expert for the esoteric and crucial distinction required for the plot. It must have seemed easier to Dr. Doyle simply to do away with Dr. Watson for this story and allow Holmes the novelty of speaking "for himself." (Incidentally, it should be clear now why the Sherlockian club of dermatologists calls itself the Sir James Saunders Society,) Even if Dr. Watson had been allowed to participate in "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier," it became critical to omit him from "The Adventure of the Lion's M a n e . " He does not appear in even a " c a m e o " role; his name appears only at the opening when Holmes explains why he had seen little of his old friend at the time of the story. The adventure depends upon a detailed description of a dramatic cutaneous lesion, the multiple linear wheals and punctate hemorrhages produced by contact with the stinging tentacles and nematocysts of a giant jellyfish. If Watson had been present, he would (or should) have made a diagnosis at once and thus would have ruined completely the suspense of the unfolding story, or else he would have shown himself a total dimwit as a medical diagnostician. That Holmes himself failed to make the diagnosis for a full week--unusually long for
him--permitted a heightened tension to grow in the story and led Holmes to much self-deprecation. Yet the reader can easily forgive him, since what was required was a medical diagnosis. Many Sherlockians feel that these two stories that Holmes relates, both hinging on dramatic skin lesions and their correct interpretation, are relatively weak ones. Even so, one would not want to forego them; and after all, any compilation of sixty stories by one author will of necessity contain some stories of greater literary or dramatic merit than others. Also, Dr. Doyle might have been deliberately interested in attempting some stories in a slightly different format. After all, as early as 1891 he had grown so tired of writing Holmes stories that he planned to quit them forever by having Holmes appear to be killed by falling into the chasm at Reichenbach Falls. Those familiar with the Sherlockian canon will easily follow the arguments I have offered, and I hope find them persuasive. For those not acquainted with the stories (my true intended audience), I hope these comments may whet the appetite to read or re-read them. They are great fun, and as I tried to show at the outset, of special interest and charm for dermatologists. Happy reading !
NB: The Sir James Saunders Society meets annually in conjunction with the meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. Those wishing to attend should contact E. Ben Smith, M.D., Department of Dermatology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77550.) REFERENCES
1. Doyle AC: The complete Sherlock Holmes. New York, 1956, Doubleday & Co., Inc. 2. Higham C: The adventures of Conan Doyle. New York, 1976, W. W. Norton & Co., Inc. 3. Doyle AC: The Crown Diamond, in Tracy J: Sherlock Holmes, the published apocrypha. Boston, 1980, Houghton Mifflin Co., pp. 277-289.
II I
I
I
The circumstances of the missing biographer or why Watson didn't narrate these four Sherlock Holmes stories Richard M. Caplan, M.D. Iowa City, IA The author provides arguments to explain why four of Arthur Conan Doyle's sixty stories about Sherlock Holmes were not narrated by Dr. Watson. The arguments relate to logical demands of the plot in the cases of the two stories told by an unidentified narrator. The two told by Holmes seem to demand Watson's absence because the final elucidation requires skill in cutaneous diagnosis; the presence of a medical man would have, or should have, relieved the dramatic tension of the mystery too soon. The Sherlock Holmes stories can provide delightful diversion as well as serve constantly to enhance our appreciation for highly alert and careful physical examination. (J AM ACADDERMATOL 6:1112-1114, 1982.)
Why do so many dermatologists feel attracted to the fictional figure, Sherlock Holmes? The answer is really not difficult--it is because his methods are so like those of dermatologists. Let me count the ways: extremely close examination, often with magnification; occasional use of special examination in the laboratory (a " b i o p s y , " for example, of a bit of telltale cigar ash); often a relatively brief interview, employing a good sense of those few trenchant questions most likely to yield the key information; extensive ability to make inferences from even limited observation; frequent practice with those facts and skills that constitute his chosen domain; persistence in his efforts, even when seemingly stymied; concern for the weIl-being of his client and an optimum outcome; delight at the sensory details, so often cutaneous or at least external, that he finds so useful in stunning the reader and solving his puzzle. Thus, whatever atReprint requests to: Dr. Richard M. Caplan, Professor of Dermatology and Associate Dean for Continuing Medical Education, University o f Iowa College o f Medicine, Iowa City, IA 52242.
1112
tracted us to dermatology and keeps our interest there likewise attracts us to Mr. Holmes. Another aspect that endears the stories to us is that his companion, roommate, straight man, and ultimately his narrator is a physician, Dr. John H. Watson. A knowledge of medicine and medical perspective thus gently permeates the stories and brings a comfortable familiarity and identification for us as we read. There are four stories, however, among those sixty that are generally accepted as the canon, 1 that are not narrated by Dr. Watson. Two of the stories are told by Holmes himself, and in each he explains to the reader how it happens that Watson was not present during those adventures, and why he therefore takes pen in hand himself ("The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier" and "The Adventure of the Lion's M a n e " ) . The other two are related by an anonymous third person with no explanation about the usurpation of Watson's customary role. (In Charles Higham's biography, The Adventures of Conan Doyle, ~ the discussion of "The Adventure of the Mazarin S t o n e " refers to it 0190-9622/82/061112+03500.30/0 © 1982 Am Acad Dermatol
Volume 6 Number 6 June, 1982
as "unique in the Holmes canon" for its third person narration; Higham's misstatement thus overlooks the third person narration of "His Last Bow. ") I will offer here literary and medical reasons that I believe explain why Dr. Arthur Conan Doyle chose a narrator other than Watson for these four tales. In each of the two stories that employs an anonymous, omniscient narrator, a vital component of the plot depends on the reader's knowledge of a conversation that takes place between two villains. If either Watson or Holmes seemed to be able to hear either of the conversations, the narration wouId totally lose its sense of anticipation and tension. In "The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone," the villain and his henchman discuss with each other, and thus explain to the reader, their criminal activity in abducting the famous jewel called the Mazarin Stone. Furthermore, they disclose the location of the gem. Sherlock Holmes in fact does hear the conversation by employing two somewhat hard-to-believe ploys: an exceedingly lifelike wax mannequin of himself (perhaps believable to those acquainted with the skills of Madam Tussaud) and a phonographic recording of himself playing the violin in an adjacent room. The surprise of the story occurs when it is revealed that Holmes has surreptitiously traded places with the mannequin while seeming to be playing the violin in his bedroom. Doyle used this plot for a play, The Crown Diamond, 3 which was produced for a mere twenty-nine performances in 1921, shortly before the modified story appeared in The Strand magazine as the "Adventure of the Mazarin S t o n e . " The visual surprise of the mannequin suddenly "coming to life" to confront the criminals proved no better on the stage than it does in a short story. "His Last B o w , " published in The Strand in 1917, seems to me a better story. A great deal of information must reach us via a sinister conversation between two highly placed German representatives in England just prior to the onset of World War I. Thus, neither Holmes nor Watson can serve to recount the conversation; hence the need for an omniscient narrator. The surprising appearance of Holmes and Watson occurs near the end of
Missing biographer
1113
the story, and in a way that reveals Holmes's responsibility for the pro-British events described in the conversation of the unwitting Germans. This story undoubtedly was welcomed by the British public, who were then naturally experiencing markedly anti-German sentiment along with their perennial pro-Holmes sentiment. The manifest patriotism displayed by Holmes in the story made it a "sure winner." This story, incidentally, is a good example of the diverse "adventures" in which Holmes figures. Many of the stories are specifically entitled "Adventure" although the public seems to want to think of Holmes as a solver of murders, or at least major crimes. Some of the most famous stories do involve murders, and thus the public stereotype can be understood. "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier" clearly drew on Dr. Doyle's visit to South Africa during the Boer War. He surely met the clinical problem of leprosy there; a British soldier serving in that war and the potential diagnosis of leprosy made a natural and effective combination. Holmes tells this tale, which opens with his explanation of why he happens to be writing, namely, that Watson always urged him to try his hand at it. Indeed, others may have urged Dr. Doyle to "allow" Holmes to tell his own story, for it would make an interesting contrast. As it happens, though, there is not much contrast, for Holmes's style as a writer seems incredibly " l i k e " Watson's. (Early in the story Holmes describes his methods in a dialogue with his client that reads just as if Watson had written it. It happens to include a comment of great dermatologic interest, as Holmes explains his technic to his visitor: "I see no more than you, but I have trained myself to notice what I see. ") But the real reason Watson must not be present in this adventure is precisely because he is a physician but not a dermatologist. The plot requires the "victim" of the piece to have a skin disease that mimicked leprosy in great detail but in fact was not leprosy. Holmes's inference that the mystery hinged on a mistaken diagnosis required verification--and verification of an undisputable sort. Watson's presence might have led to a diagnosis too soon, and thus put an end to the suspense in the story. Also, since Watson was
1114
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Caplan
not a specialist, his diagnosis would have "spilled the beans" and yet not have been corroborative nor persuasive t o the reading audience. An eminent fictional dermatologist, Sir James Saunders, served as the crucial validator. Watson had to be out of the way to allow for the comfortable appearance of this specialist. I grant that this story might have been told by Watson, since the issue of a specific cutaneous diagnosis arises only in the final paragraphs of explanation, and Dr. Saunders (Sir James) could have been consulted anyway. But that would have required either that Watson be made to seem grossly inadequate as a diagnostician, or that Holmes be made to wound his friend's pride by going over his medical head to bring in the eminent expert for the esoteric and crucial distinction required for the plot. It must have seemed easier to Dr. Doyle simply to do away with Dr. Watson for this story and allow Holmes the novelty of speaking "for himself." (Incidentally, it should be clear now why the Sherlockian club of dermatologists calls itself the Sir James Saunders Society,) Even if Dr. Watson had been allowed to participate in "The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier," it became critical to omit him from "The Adventure of the Lion's M a n e . " He does not appear in even a " c a m e o " role; his name appears only at the opening when Holmes explains why he had seen little of his old friend at the time of the story. The adventure depends upon a detailed description of a dramatic cutaneous lesion, the multiple linear wheals and punctate hemorrhages produced by contact with the stinging tentacles and nematocysts of a giant jellyfish. If Watson had been present, he would (or should) have made a diagnosis at once and thus would have ruined completely the suspense of the unfolding story, or else he would have shown himself a total dimwit as a medical diagnostician. That Holmes himself failed to make the diagnosis for a full week--unusually long for
him--permitted a heightened tension to grow in the story and led Holmes to much self-deprecation. Yet the reader can easily forgive him, since what was required was a medical diagnosis. Many Sherlockians feel that these two stories that Holmes relates, both hinging on dramatic skin lesions and their correct interpretation, are relatively weak ones. Even so, one would not want to forego them; and after all, any compilation of sixty stories by one author will of necessity contain some stories of greater literary or dramatic merit than others. Also, Dr. Doyle might have been deliberately interested in attempting some stories in a slightly different format. After all, as early as 1891 he had grown so tired of writing Holmes stories that he planned to quit them forever by having Holmes appear to be killed by falling into the chasm at Reichenbach Falls. Those familiar with the Sherlockian canon will easily follow the arguments I have offered, and I hope find them persuasive. For those not acquainted with the stories (my true intended audience), I hope these comments may whet the appetite to read or re-read them. They are great fun, and as I tried to show at the outset, of special interest and charm for dermatologists. Happy reading !
NB: The Sir James Saunders Society meets annually in conjunction with the meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. Those wishing to attend should contact E. Ben Smith, M.D., Department of Dermatology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77550.) REFERENCES
1. Doyle AC: The complete Sherlock Holmes. New York, 1956, Doubleday & Co., Inc. 2. Higham C: The adventures of Conan Doyle. New York, 1976, W. W. Norton & Co., Inc. 3. Doyle AC: The Crown Diamond, in Tracy J: Sherlock Holmes, the published apocrypha. Boston, 1980, Houghton Mifflin Co., pp. 277-289.