RR 1.-Point of View

Reading Response #1.

Point of View: Watson's Narration

 

Sherlock’s Holmes thoughts are kept quiet and only presented when needed because the story interestingly enough is narrated by his right hand man Dr. Watson, “ 'Well Watson, what do you make of it?' Holmes was sitting with his back to me, and I had given him no sign of my occupation. 'how do you know what I was doing? I believe you have eyes in the back of your head'. 'I have at, least a well polished, silver plated coffee pot in front of me'.” (Doyle, The Hound of The Baskervilles 1). When first starting the book, I would have naturally thought that the detective would have narrated the mystery. Why would Doyle have made the secondary character, Mr. Watson narrate it? This really puzzled me but I began to realize if Sherlock Holmes were the one narrating the novel, it would be too fast paced and overwhelming for the reader. Sherlock Holmes puts together pieces of information so quickly that there would minimal time for the reader to take in the information and guess who the culprit is. A mystery novel without any guessing and time to think things over would be no fun.

Not only the narration but also the solving of the case The Hounds of The Baskervilles, was done greatly by Dr. Watson. “If matters came to a crisis I should endeavor to be present in person,... it is impossible for me to be absent from London for an indefinite time. If my friend (Dr. Watson) would undertake it there is no man who is better worth having at your side when you are in a tight place. No one can say so more confidently than I” (67). My initial thought was along the lines of “What?! Sherlock Holmes isn't helping them solve the mystery?". I was confused, and skeptical, that Holmes wasn't solving the case.  Sherlock Holmes never ended up staying with Dr. Watson, Dr. Mortimer and Sir Henry Baskerville in Dartmoor, or at least this is what he led everyone to believe. Instead Sherlock Holmes, got Dr. Watson to send him detailed diary entries about anything he felt was out of the ordinary. Would these reports do any justice?

Although Sherlock Holmes said he would go back to London he actually returned to Dartmoor. He had lied to Dr. Watson, but for a good reason. At first Dr. Watson was furious and felt like Holmes didn't trust him, Holmes then explained “Had I been with Sir Henry and you (Dr. Watson) I am confident that my point of view would have been the same as yours, and my presence would have warned our very formidable opponents to be on their guard” (182). Having two points of view is the best way you come to a conclusion. Was what Holmes did for the better in solving the case? From the presence of others, and their influences on ones thoughts, can drastically change the way we look at things. When making a decision most make it differently than if someone were with them.

Holmes had specifically stated to Dr. Watson “ It may be yourself luminous, but you are a conductor of light. Some people without possessing genius have a remarkable power of stimulating it. I confess my dear Fellow I am very much in your debt.” (3). I found this to be a foreshadowing moment to the events that came later on where Holmes was observing with his own eye, but also got in sites from Dr. Watson's diary entries, which he put a lot of effort in in informing Sherlock Holmes about the strange events that occurred. Sherlock Holmes got two points of view, to put together the conclusion. An interesting technique without a doubt. All but four stories by Conan Doyle are narrated by Dr. Watson. Two are narrated by Holmes himself ( The Lion's Mane and The Blanched Soldier), and two stories (The Mazarin Stone and His Last Bow) were written in third person. It was better that Conan Doyle got Watson to narrate the story and be away from Sherlock Holmes for majority of it. Goes to show how we are influenced by others presence. Like the discussion we had in class about classifying something for example a piece of art or writing as 'good or bad'. When we have previous knowledge, we base our decision on what we think others feel is good, therefore in the end, our decision is more based on each other rather than what it should be which is: is good or not? Having Watson narrate the story I was really engaged in it because it game me just the right amount of time to think things over and get myself immersed in the book, which Doyle didn't make it very hard to do.