By Rose Benjamin
In the popular Sherlock Holmes books, the narrator is Holmes's friend Dr. Watson, who accompanies him on many of his adventures. It is sometimes mentioned in the stories how Watson documents the adventures of his friend, and the two characters occasionally get into arguments about Watson's style of writing them. Watson wants to write the stories to show the observant and clever qualities of his friend, while Holmes would rather they be more educational to the reader. I believe he once commented that he should start documenting some of his adventures himself, in a more educational way.
So, what would a story be like if Holmes had written it instead of Watson?
For one thing, Holmes tends to be concise with his words, so he would probably go on fewer tangents than Watson tends to do, especially at the beginning of stories. Watson tends to disclose quite a bit of somewhat unnecessary information at the beginning, including, in many instances, the fact that he cannot disclose some information. I highly doubt Holmes would include much of that information, as very little of it contributes to the reader's understanding of the story.
There is also, of course, the difference in the goals of the two people. While Holmes would want to educate the reader, Watson simply wants to show off some of his friend's best qualities. Watson's style of writing the stories is very narrative, disclosing the information to the reader in the same order as he received it himself. This usually has the reader mostly clueless for the main part of the story, and essential information is not disclosed until the end, where Holmes usually has a long dialogue where he just dumps the remaining information on Watson. Watson writes it in this way too, leaving no room for the reader to analyze the mystery themselves before it is solved. However, when Holmes inevitably provides his shocking solution towards the end, the reader is virtually forced to admire him. The same thing will happen with the "information dump" shortly after, when the reader finally understands the information they did not have before that allowed Holmes to solve the mystery, as well as how Holmes used that information. Because the lack of earlier information prevents the reader from solving the mystery along with Holmes, it does not help the reader be able to do what Holmes can do.
If Holmes wrote the stories, he would give the information in the same order as he received it in (which is always different from the order that Watson did), and would explain what he made of the information right then-- and if he changed his mind later, he would explain that in the correct order as well. The reader will have as much information as Holmes does at any given point in the story, so they will understand Holmes's solution when they receive it, not when he explains everything to Watson. This style helps the reader understand how Holmes does what he does instead of just admiring it.
I would probably enjoy the stories more if they were written to be more educational. You really don't have to be superhuman to do what he does, you just have to take note of things and know a lot of information. Guaranteed, it will take a lot of time and energy to master being observant like that (the information tends to come along with observations). It is still possible. And anyway, learning his tactics will still help if you're not trying to become another Holmes.
Personally, I find Sherlock Holmes stories confusing enough – I think that, if told from Holmes's perspective, I would not be able to keep up. I really like how you reasoned all of this out! You did a great job of trying to figure out how the books would change.
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you analyzed how the different characters may write based on some of their personality traits. I feel like I could like both characters as the author of the story and it would be very interesting if Watson wrote a few and Sherlock wrote a few. However, I do really like Watson's way of telling since you can kind of just let the story play out instead of having to really analyze it. Also, I guess if this were to really happen in real life, Sherlock Holmes may not want all of his tricks told to the public because he is a private investigator and probably has some competition in his career, so he might not want to be the one to write it in fear of revealing to much, while Watson's fresh eyes and tendency to make him kind of look like a superhero, kind saves him in that regard. Overall really great post.
ReplyDeleteThis was a really interesting interesting post! It's definitely fun to consider what the stories might be like if they were written from another person's perspective, but ultimately I think that they were supposed to be written from Watson's perspective (just an opinion, don't @ me please). Holmes's analytical mind and desire to make sure the reader is educated above all else might take away some of the charm of the stories.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Holmes presenting his adventures instead of Watson would definitely make the stories different, but like William, I'm not sure if it would necessarily lead to more entertaining stories. Holmes' style would probably be simple and logical and read more like a geometric proof than a story. Watson's awe and ignorance of Holmes helps maintain the stories' suspense and entertainment factor.
ReplyDelete