ACD Canon ReadAlong: The Boscombe Valley Mystery

[luthienberen]

This was an interesting reread as BOSCVM is not a favourite of mine, yet there were a few gems here which had me appreciate the case more fully. :)

1.  Sherlock Holmes' telegram:

"Have you a couple of days to spare?...Shall be glad if you will come with me. Air and scenery perfect…"

This is another perfect example of how Holmes simply can't do without his Boswell, even trying to tempt him with nature in case the call of friendship or a case is insufficient! 

Watson's presence is yet again necessary and as we shall see for company as well as inspiration. An interesting peek at the emotional side of the great detective Holmes.

2. Watson has an extremely understanding wife.

Mrs Watson is quite happy for Watson to disappear for a while since he is "...looking pale lately" and that Watson was "...always so interested in Mr Sherlock Holmes' cases".

We can only infer that the long list of patients Watson refers to has exhausted him.

Curiously, Watson's supposed paleness is not mentioned again so we can assume that being on a case and in the company of Sherlock Holmes was indeed what was required. :)

3. Anstruther is also an extremely understanding fellow 

I can only guess how many times he has covered for Watson! Man deserves his own series of tales.

 

4. Military habits 

Watson refers to his days in Afghanistan serving him well in respect of packing and travelling with speed.

Later on, when Holmes remarks upon his shaving, he says "...I know the military neatness which characterises you."

So it appears the army made its mark on Watson, retained even well out of service. Perhaps Watson was always a neat man and the army merely emphasised that aspect of his nature?

5. Holmes truly knows Watson well when observing his slovenly shaving. :-) His observation and familiarity with Watson's character are a nice representation of Holmes' analytical mind & his friendship with Watson.

6. Circumstantial evidence.

Holmes muses how easily circumstantial evidence can be twisted and this comes true in the case with Holmes at the end providing sufficient objections that James McCarthy was acquitted without protest.

7. Date

Holmes refers to the events occurring a week ago on 3rd June when talking to Watson. So...it must be around 10th June when the case begins. Yet which year? Watson is married to Mary and ostensibly this happened in 1888, so is this 1889? A mystery indeed!

8. Pocket Petrarch

Belying yet again Watson's list in STUD of Holmes’ knowledge of literature being limited, Holmes references Petrarch. I had to look up who he was and Petrarch was an Italian scholar and poet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrarch If anyone is familiar with his work it would be interesting to hear your opinion of his poems, as poetry is mostly a closed book to me ah.

9. Yellow-backed novel

While waiting for Holmes to return Watson reads a yellow back novel. These were cheap books designed for railway passengers, but also spreading for wider use. The novels could be quite sensationalist in nature. Looks like Watson has a flair for sensationalism, perhaps a suitable trait for someone who has a kinship with Mr Holmes ;)

More info on yellow back novels:

https://victorianlondonunderworld.wordpress.com/2013/05/22/fancy-a-literary-tryst-the-sordid-tale-of-yellow-back-books/

10. Watson's implicit faith in Holmes

No matter that the evidence is grim against young McCarthy, Watson believes that since Holmes holds out hope that there must therefore be points in favour of the accused.

11. Watson tries some medical deduction here which is marvellous and correct. As Holmes notes in the Blanched Soldier, Watson hides his own talents. Here, Watson does his best and whilst frustrated does ponder: "Then there was the peculiar dying reference to a rat. What could that mean? It could not be delirium. A man dying from a sudden blow does not commonly become delirious. No, it was more likely to be an attempt to explain how he met his fate."

12. Holmes let's old Turner go on the understanding he will use his signed confession if McCarthy is condemned.

This is an early example of Holmes letting the criminal go, yet whilst one can be sympathetic to Holmes’ decision (and indeed, it shows Holmes’ humanity and compassion blatantly as he too prays he is never tempted as Turner was tempted - a fact to return to when Watson is injured and Holmes is furious and afraid in Adventure of the Three Garridebs), Holmes doesn’t think he is actually letting Turner off lightly:

Holmes to Turner, “...You are yourself aware that you will soon have to answer for your deed at a higher court than the Assizes…”

Holmes to Watson, “There, but for the grace of God, goes Sherlock Holmes.”

It is an intriguing glimpse into Holmes’ belief that there is a higher power and judge and builds on Mr Sherlock Holmes’ character. I quite enjoyed those references and felt they added weight and gravity to Holmes’ decision to remain silent unless utterly called for to save an innocent gentleman.

Comments

[smallhobbit]

My Dad was in the navy in WWII and he clearly learned the benefits of packing everything into his kitbag, because he was always able to get the most into a suitcase - the key being to roll everything, which is something I still do now.

[luthienberen]

An incredibly useful skill! I'm the opposite...packing light is not my forte lol.

[mightymads]

Rolling everything, I should definitely try it next time I pack my suitcase 😄

[rachelindeed]

I quite enjoy some of Holmes's initial deductions in "The Boscombe Valley Mystery" -- they please me because they are not based on inarguable logic, but rather on what seems to me a sensitive observation of human character and emotion, as well as the simple suggestion that one should strive for consistency when weighing a person's behavior. I like the way that Holmes demonstrates how the details that at first look most damning are in fact the most promising indications that his client may be innocent. His early approach to the case displays not his brilliance but his common sense, a quality for which he's sometimes not given enough credit :)

[luthienberen]

I completely agree! Holmes' initial assessments of the case are based on common sense twinned with a fine sense of understanding of human behaviour and emotion. It is a shame that these qualities are overlooked, because as you note, Holmes' perception of the case immediately differed from the Inspector and Watson (the latter of course, trusted Holmes and tried following said reasoning).

[rachelindeed]

My personal favorite passages in this vein are:

"On the inspector of constabulary informing him that he was a prisoner, he remarked that he was not surprised to hear it, and that it was no more than his deserts. This observation of his had the natural effect of removing any traces of doubt which might have remained in the minds of the coroner’s jury.”

“It was a confession,” I ejaculated.

“No, for it was followed by a protestation of innocence.”

“Coming on the top of such a damning series of events, it was at least a most suspicious remark.”

“On the contrary,” said Holmes, “it is the brightest rift which I can at present see in the clouds. However innocent he might be, he could not be such an absolute imbecile as not to see that the circumstances were very black against him. Had he appeared surprised at his own arrest, or feigned indignation at it, I should have looked upon it as highly suspicious, because such surprise or anger would not be natural under the circumstances, and yet might appear to be the best policy to a scheming man. His frank acceptance of the situation marks him as either an innocent man, or else as a man of considerable self-restraint and firmness. As to his remark about his deserts, it was also not unnatural if you consider that he stood beside the dead body of his father, and that there is no doubt that he had that very day so far forgotten his filial duty as to bandy words with him, and even, according to the little girl whose evidence is so important, to raise his hand as if to strike him. The self-reproach and contrition which are displayed in his remark appear to me to be the signs of a healthy mind rather than of a guilty one.”

I shook my head. “Many men have been hanged on far slighter evidence,” I remarked.

“So they have. And many men have been wrongfully hanged.”

And also this one:

“I see,” said I as I glanced down the column, “that the coroner in his concluding remarks was rather severe upon young McCarthy. He calls attention, and with reason, to the discrepancy about his father having signalled to him before seeing him, also to his refusal to give details of his conversation with his father, and his singular account of his father’s dying words. They are all, as he remarks, very much against the son.”

Holmes laughed softly to himself and stretched himself out upon the cushioned seat. “Both you and the coroner have been at some pains,” said he, “to single out the very strongest points in the young man’s favour. Don’t you see that you alternately give him credit for having too much imagination and too little? Too little, if he could not invent a cause of quarrel which would give him the sympathy of the jury; too much, if he evolved from his own inner consciousness anything so outré as a dying reference to a rat, and the incident of the vanishing cloth. No, sir, I shall approach this case from the point of view that what this young man says is true, and we shall see whither that hypothesis will lead us.

I love this stuff :)

[luthienberen]

Those two passages are works of art :-) Truly, it is so evident when Holmes points out to Watson and us that the human behaviour on display
is consistent and normal with an innocent individual in the situation.

In a fashion Mr Sherlock H. was far more advanced in comprehending human psychology than he is given credit for...and yet this knowledge underpins successful and accurate deduction of crime!

[rachelindeed]

Yes, I like the humanity of it. I think in a lot of fairly simple mysteries — the type of things you see on procedural TV shows for example — there tends to be a trope that if a suspect can be caught out or tripped up, or if anything they say doesn't "add up," that's sort of a quick way for the detective to yell "gotcha!" and wrap up the case. But I like that Holmes points out that if a person is willing to lie, they will probably do their best to construct a coherent lie, and one that serves the purpose of making them look better. Not every liar will be good at inventing a consistent, sympathetic alibi, but most will be trying. So the fact that McCarthy's story seemed so oddly incoherent, failing to play for sympathy and adding in random strange details that didn't make him look more innocent, is what gave Holmes hope that this might be the real perspective of a confused but innocent man. There are certain types of mysteries that seem to work like clockwork, but I like the acknowledgment here that reality tends to be messier and that confusion/inconsistency/strangeness may more often be a sign of honesty than the reverse.

[mightymads]

Great points about Holmes's common sense and reality being a messy thing. Very interesting analysis!

[mightymads]

I'm a bit late for the discussion 😁

Thoroughly enjoyed your notes!

1) re: Watson's importance to Holmes. Agreed, Holmes came to rely on Watson and says precisely that: "It makes a considerable difference to me, having someone with me on whom I can thoroughly rely."

5) Watson's neatness. Thus the canon establishes that both Holmes and Watson are neat men: Holmes with his catlike love of personal cleanliness and primness of dress and Watson with his military habits and respect of hygiene which is to be expected from a doctor.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, this is the story where the deerstalker makes its first appearance in Sidney Paget's illustrations of Holmes :)

8) Petrarch. Holmes again demonstrates his interest in literature, contrary to the list in STUD. Besides Petrarch, he asks Watson that they talk about George Meredith (one of the novelists favoured by Wilde, btw) and even quotes Richard Baxter (a Puritan church leader, poet, and theologian) in the end of the story.

Also, thanks for the link about yellow backed novels. It was an interesting article!

11) Watson's medical expertise. It's adorable, isn't it? Watson sits in the hotel room waiting for Holmes and tries to analyse the case from the medical point of view.

Also, they share a room. Just ONE room was booked for them both while Lestrade has his own lodgings 😉

12) Holmes lets Turner go. There's an interesting analysis on Tumblr by plaid adder where she notes that this is the first time Holmes acts upon his own ideas of justice and doesn't give away the true culprit.

https://plaidadder.tumblr.com/post/162385937854/god-help-us-granada-holmes-rewatch-the-boscombe

In the previous two instances, STUD and SIGN, he clearly commiserated with Jefferson Hope and Jonathan Small, but gave them over to the official forces. This time Holmes doesn't, and there's a moral struggle going on in his heart. He asks Watson to hear him out, relying on his moral support.

To the case itself, I wonder why there were no traces of blood on the stone which was the murder weapon. The impact it did on the head of the victim caused much bleeding, so why?? One of loose ends which are never resolved in the canon.

It also felt a bit strange as to why Holmes would commiserate with a former robber. Maybe because he was later a victim of blackmail which Holmes so vehemently hates? Or maybe it's for the sake of Alice, an innocent girl?

And finally a quick note about Holmes's humanity and gentlemanly behaviour. He is clearly partial to star crossed lovers which is very romantic. He laughs softly and stretches luxuriously, he is as excited as a sleuthhound when he is on the scent. Speaks volumes about his emotional side. He calls Lestrade an imbecile only when Lestrade isn't present and only because he is frustrated with Lestrade's stubbornness and contempt for his methods. He is curt with Lestrade when they part but he is never demonstratively rude.

[mightymads]

A one-shot with the one bed trope sounds great! An incident when Holmes is downright rude, SCAN jumps to mind when he ignores the King’s outstretched hand. But that’s because Holmes detests him so much after he learns how the King wronged Irene and not the other way round that Holmes just won’t shake his hand. Or when he stands up against Grimesby Roylott and Neil Gibson... Actually, it’s an interesting task to mark all the occasions :)

[luthienberen]

Excellent examples and all due to Holmes having good reason to be rude. It would be interesting to keep such a tally.

I will prod the muses and see if I'msuccessful ;)