![]() |
An original drawing of John Watson and Sherlock Holmes |
The Hound of the Baskervilles
By Arthur Conan-Doyle
PLOT
A man, named Dr. Mortimer, comes to Sherlock and John with a story, a myth of the hound of the Baskervilles. It states that there once was a man named Hugo Baskerville, and he cursed his family by going on a hunt with his hounds after an innocent girl. People tried to stop him from reaching her, and so they gave chase over the moor, but when they reached him they found a huge hound over his body, ripping at his throat and ran away in fear. It is said that that dog has haunted that family ever since. Sherlock is told the myth, and also the story of Sir Charles Baskerville and his recent death on the moor. Dr. Mortimer asked of Sherlock’s opinion on the matter and tells him that Sir Henry Baskerville, Sir Charles’s nephew, will be arriving in England soon, to inherit the house, and wonders wether Sir Henry will be safe, or if he will also inherit the myth…
John is sent out to the moor with Sir Henry and is left to solve the case by himself, seeing Sherlock is too busy to leave London.
My Response
I think it is a fantastic book. It is written, of course, in the point of view of Watson, and he describes everything in detail. I love the way he describes characters especially. He won’t say the colour of their hair, or their eyes etc, but he will describe something like the their type of nose, or wether their stout or stocky, or the look in their eyes, or the fact that they’re tight lipped. It gives you a much better idea of the character he’s describing.
Also, another thing I like about the way Watson dictates ‘The Hound of the Baskervilles’ is that he is usually telling the story like he’s recalling it, but he occasionally says something like ‘I think it would portray the story better if I show you the letters I wrote to Sherlock at the time’ or ‘Here’s an exert from my diary at the time, my memory won’t be the best to rely on to retell the event’. It’s refreshing, it keeps you in the story, it feels more real. I think it is clever the way Arthur Conan-Doyle wrote his Sherlock stories from the point of view of Watson because he has a more realistic (I mean basic compared to Sherlock’s brain) view of things, and you can understand both the characters more.
The storyline is also fantastic. It keeps you guessing, like a true detective story should, even if it can be a bit slow at times. It might be the fact that it’s in the point of view of a character, or because the style of writing might be dated, but there were times where Watson would say something exciting happened, and then would take a few paragraphs to get to that, and that could be frustrating because you just wanted to know what happened. But in a way, that’s good writing, because it keeps you on your toes. And it only does that occasionally.
CHARACTERS
Dr. John H. Watson
John can seem quite simple sometimes, but that’s mainly when you compare him with Sherlock. John is kind, and cares for people, but isn’t the best a interviewing them for a crime, he comes off too rash, not quite sly enough. He used to be in the army, so he’s a good shot and he’s quite fit (well, that’s how I imagine him, and in the book he runs across the moor nearly two times a day, so I consider him fit, even if other adaption’s show him as a short, fat man with a moustache.). In this book, because he is doing all the detecting by himself, you get a bit more of a sense of his character and how he actually depends on Sherlock. He is very grateful when Sherlock arrives at the moor.
I also like how innocent John is. Constantly he is exclaiming, ‘Sherlock, how did you work that out?’ and is so astounded by nearly everything Sherlock does. He is a nice, and strong character, and I like him just as much as Holmes.
Sherlock, as everyone knows, is an amazing sleuth. He can deduce remarkable things from next to nothing, such as a person’s walking stick or a couple of handwritten words. Holmes is also quite arrogant. He will get his ideas across, even if it offends others. He does occasionally use people, mostly John, but surprisingly I still find myself loving Sherlock’s character. He is described wonderfully by John, that is his nature as well as his looks. He is tall, thin face, has a long beaky nose, and doesn’t have a deerstalker hat. He is often smoking and when he’s concentrating he puts his hands together and rests them on his chin. He is described as having a cat-like neatness about him, but his house is always a bit of a tip, which can annoy John.
I like that Sherlock may be rash sometimes, but though it can seem otherwise, he also cares for people. For example, every time he mentions his success of the case (of the Hound of the Baskervilles), he still mentions how he is sad that it should have tried Sir Henry’s nerves, it’s like he can’t help point out this flaw in the case. Another example of Sherlock’s hidden kindness is that when he sends John off to Baskerville hall, without his permission, he does say before John leaves, “But I’m not easy in my mind about it.”
“About what?”
“About sending you. It’s an ugly business, Watson, and ugly, dangerous business, and the more I see of it the less I like it. Yes, my dear fellow, you may laugh, but I give you my word that I shall be very glad to have you back safe and sound in Baker Street once more.”
Sherlock is still popular today because people believe what he does could actually be possible, and I think it could. He’s like a super-hero, except he uses his wits, and I think that appeals to people. And that’s also why people like his character, even if he can be very unsympathetic sometimes.
![]() |
Sherlock Holmes and John Watson from the BBC TV series, 'Sherlock' |
Reference sites to the BBC TV series: