ACD Canon Reread: The Noble Bachelor Notes

[luthienberen]

Hello All!

Just a few notes on The Noble Bachelor today on points that stood out for me =^_^=

Date

According to Watson this is set a few weeks before his marriage and in autumn for "I had remained indoors all day, for the weather had taken a sudden turn to rain, with high autumnal winds…"

So, either this is very late 1888 or 1889? What do the members of this community think?

Watson is writing this four years later so most likely between 1892-93, so after Holmes is lost to him :(.

Watson's wound

Further to the above, Watson mentions the autumn weather affecting his wound: "...the jezail bullet which I had brought back in one of my limbs as a relic of my Afghan campaign throbbed with dull persistence."

Poor Watson! Yet also, I am amused that here ACD was vague as to where the bullet hit ;)

Holmes & Watson

-Holmes relying on Watson to post him up on the latest in papers due to Watson being stuck indoors all day reading the newspapers. It is a lovely dip into their friendship :)

-Watson mentions his upcoming marriage at the beginning of the story, but apparently either Holmes forgot or is in denial, because the tale finishes with Holmes declaring:

"Ah, Watson...perhaps you would not be very gracious either, if, after all the trouble of wooing and wedding, you found yourself deprived in an instant of wife and fortune…and thank our stars that we are never likely to find ourselves in the same position. Draw your chair up and hand me my violin, for the only problem we have still to solve is how to while away these bleak autumnal evenings."

The other reason could be due to Watson forgetting himself considering inconsistency is his middle name...or Doyle, but it does grant us fans wriggle room when writing!

Case

-The case begins with a very "fashionable epistle" according to Watson, to which Holmes remarks is usually a dull affair and that "the humbler are usually the more interesting."

Naturally, in this instance that isn't true. However, what I find more fascinating is that Holmes receives correspondence from fish-mongers and a tide-waiter* which suggests that by now, Holmes' practice and reputation is well established. Thanks in part, perhaps to Watson, as well as word of mouth?

*According to merriam-webster a tide-waiter was/is:

"a: an officer in various preventive customs services who boards ships and watches the landing of goods
b: any customs inspector working at dockside or aboard ships"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tidewaiter

-My sympathies are mixed on this because I do feel for everyone involved. While I do not like Lord St. Simon, I agree with Holmes that it would be hard for him to react particularly nobly given the circumstances, so do feel sorry for the man.

I am curious as to what the members of this community thought of this story?

Comments

[stonepicnicking_okapi]

The Noble Bachelor is important to me because we have the mention of the woodcock!! Which I have written about many times.

It was after five o’clock when Sherlock Holmes left me, but I had no time to be lonely, for within an hour there arrived a confectioner’s man with a very large flat box. This he unpacked with the help of a youth whom he had brought with him, and presently, to my very great astonishment, a quite epicurean little cold supper began to be laid out upon our humble lodging-house mahogany. There were a couple of brace of cold woodcock, a pheasant, a patè de foie gras pie with a group of ancient and cobwebby bottles

[luthienberen]

Yay for the mention of woodcock! ❤️

Oh gosh yes, that description had me laughing and also quite hungry ha.

[mightymads]

Holmes has rather gourmet tastes: is it a common trait with Mycroft?

[luthienberen]

I do wonder! Along with Watson who is always trying to eat they would make the perfect trio ;)

[rachelindeed]

This is one of the more low-key stories, with little drama, but I think it offers some interestingly nuanced glimpses of flawed human beings. We are clearly not supposed to like Lord St. Simon -- he's telegraphed from the start as being supercilious and condescending. We can see that he married for money rather than out of emotional attachment (his pride rather than his heart is wounded by his wife's disappearance, and he comforts himself with the thought that the (imagined) shock of his high social position may have 'deranged' her?!), and his behavior to his mistress is dismissive and aggressive enough (having police posted around his house to throw her out) that we are left to assume that he almost certainly made promises to her that he never intended to keep and strung her along.

But it's possible for a person to be a jerk without being a villain -- a lot of fiction tends toward a black-and-white view of characters, but St. Simon is allowed to be gray. I appreciate that Holmes pities him, that he advises Hatty that she is treating him unfairly and that it's better to tell him the truth, and that he urges Watson not to judge him too harshly. And for his part, once St. Simon understands the situation, he does back off and gives up any claim to the lady or her money without even a threat of lawyers or breach of promise -- he simply shakes Hatty's hand coldly and wishes them all good-night. For someone used to getting his way, that wasn't actually a terrible response to such a huge disappointment.

Holmes, too, has his attractive and unattractive moments in this story. He is full of fun zingers, twitting Lord St. Simon for his pride and never missing a chance to take him down a peg. I think we all feel that's not only entertaining but perfectly appropriate -- Holmes has always refused to kow-tow to rigid class divisions and has little patience for people who believe their birth gives them inherent superiority. But Holmes is also unattractively condescending toward Lestrade, laughing at him, poo-pooing his perfectly reasonable theories and concerns, and dropping deliberately misleading 'hints' for him rather than being straightforward or helpful. His quips at Lestrade's expense in this story come across, at least to me, as his own brand of classism. He ridicules social snobbery when he sees it in St. Simon's attitude, but then indulges in intellectual snobbery of his own toward Lestrade. If I were Lestrade, I would also be frustrated with him, and it's not surprising to me that Lestrade doesn't like him much at this point in their relationship. But, again, it's not all black-and-white. Lestrade is dismissive and condescending toward Holmes, too, under-rating his methods and too impatient with him to get past his grandstanding and find out what he really means. They both have a lot of growing to do as people and as colleagues.

Watson mentions his upcoming marriage at the beginning of the story, but apparently either Holmes forgot or is in denial

I didn't read that line as Holmes forgetting Watson is getting married. I think his point is that neither of them are likely to be in Lord St. Simon's position of being abandoned by a wife, Holmes because he never intends to marry and Watson because he and Mary are marrying for love and will stand by each other.

[luthienberen]

You have struck the nail on the head. The story is low-key, but the characters are allowed to be complex and not simply black and white. I do like that since it is refreshing and adds strength to the overall story.

For someone used to getting his way, that wasn't actually a terrible response to such a huge disappointment.

Oh I agree, in fact, St. Simon took it remarkably well in my opinion, and better than I would have done to be fair.

Holmes and Lestrade's relationship here is very strained with little respect on either side. Holmes' behaviour is disappointing and Lestrade's frustration understandable. Then again, as you say Lestrade's behaviour is also dismissive. I do like how their relationship developed through canon to the point where they respected each other.

Good point re Holmes' closing line.

[mightymads]

I really enjoyed your observations! Lord St. Simon does come across as the typical toff whose kind Holmes doesn’t like, finding people of the humbler background and their problems more interesting. There’s also a reference to Holmes’s dislike of social formalities:

“This looks like one of those unwelcome social summonses which call upon a man either to be bored or to lie.”

Despite Hatty’s real husband’s sketchy behaviour, I think that she’s lucky to have escaped St. Simon, as he clearly married her for money, and the circle of people which Hatty was entering was foreign to her in more senses than one: she didn’t feel comfortable among those aristocratic snobs and no doubt she would have been quiet isolated.

Also, dammit, Doyle, do you always have to name American women like that? Hatty, Elsie, Effie, etc.

Brilliant point about Holmes & Lestrade. They have a long way to mutual respect. But then again this hilarious scene when Lestrade throws a pile of wet clothes onto the floor wouldn’t have taken place otherwise.

[rachelindeed]

A few other observations about this story:

It's unfortunate but hilarious to see Holmes promising St. Simon discretion and privacy in regards to his case when we know that Watson is going to publish the full details just a few years later, thereby reviving the scandal that had by then died down, and apparently not even altering St. Simon's name since he expects his readers to remember the case as it was reported in the newspapers:

The Lord St. Simon marriage, and its curious termination, have long ceased to be a subject of interest in those exalted circles in which the unfortunate bridegroom moves. Fresh scandals have eclipsed it, and their more piquant details have drawn the gossips away from this four-year-old drama. As I have reason to believe, however, that the full facts have never been revealed to the general public, and as my friend Sherlock Holmes had a considerable share in clearing the matter up, I feel that no memoir of him would be complete without some little sketch of this remarkable episode.

Poor St. Simon! He literally says that it is not my custom to discuss my most intimate personal affairs in this public manner when he and Hatty are in front of a grand total of three other people...that Watson chose to publish the details of this affair to the entire reading public seems an indefensible violation of privacy. I think it was just a case of Doyle not thinking through the implications of his framing device, but still. If we take it seriously from an in-universe perspective, then it makes Watson look very untrustworthy with Holmes's clients' confidentiality.

On a happier note, though, I love the way that Watson dramatically reveals the bride's disappearance to Holmes! It's so rare for him to get the chance to really surprise Holmes, and I can tell that he relishes the opportunity :) He starts off by reading a full excerpt from the society pages (Doyle clearly had fun writing in their gossipy style!) knowing perfectly well that Holmes finds that type of 'reporting' boring and ridiculous -- “Anything else?” asked Holmes, yawning -- and then, after having covered all the relevant facts, stages his dramatic revelation in a masterfully casual conclusion!:

"Those are all the notices which appeared before the disappearance of the bride.”

“Before the what?” asked Holmes with a start.

Ahahaha, it's so satisfying! Well-played, Watson! You got him!!

Incidentally, every now and then I come across a phrase in a Holmes story that sounds so non-Victorian that if I were to write it in a fic I would probably second-guess myself: 'oops, wait, that sounds too anachronistic!' But sometimes Victorian English surprises me by sounding just like 21st century English:

“What’s up, then?” asked Holmes with a twinkle in his eye.

"What's up?" Really??? Wow.

P.S. Does anyone else find Hatty's real husband Frank's behavior kind of fishy? He supposedly nobly refuses to claim her as a wife until he has earned the riches to support her, but oh he'll just marry her right now anyway to 'be sure of her' and yeah he happened to bring a minister along he's right outside let's just get married right now! Ummmmm...sounds sketchy to me. Also, when did he have time to earn a fortune (as he apparently has, given the swanky hotel where he's staying and his plan to whisk Hatty off to Paris) while being a hostage and presumed dead? Baffling.

[mightymads]

The breach of Lord St. Simon’s privacy by Watson is indeed baffling. Perhaps he managed to disgrace himself by some other scandal afterwards? Or perhaps Watson did change the name but it was so thinly veiled that everyone would understand at once who was hidden under it?

The exchange between Watson and Holmes over the newspapers is priceless. And Holmes’s humanity and kindness towards his clients shines in this story: despite disliking St. Simon, Holmes persuades Hatty to come and explain everything to him. He does so very gently as she says herself. I think that he wouldn’t have managed to persuade the young couple without being kind.

“What’s up?” caught my eye too! There have been several occasions when I used ACD’s own vocab during writing and my beta would cross it out and say that it was too modern XD

And lastly, a point about Hatty: she was on the verge of swooning when she saw Frank, but she managed to preserve her composure. In comparison, Watson did drop senseless in the same situation.

[luthienberen]

Ah commenting to concur with both rachelindeed and mightymads regarding Watson's betrayal of Lord St. Simon's privacy.

It is baffling, because for me:
(a) Four years is not a long time for such a scandal to ebb away
(b) unlike the SPECK BAND there is no imitation from Watson that he must tell all to save St. Simon from slandar or nefarious rumours.
(c) Even if Watson changed St. Simon's name the aristocracy in Britain would certainly be able to guess quite closely who the real individual is, or precisely due to peerage lists, common knowledge, knowing each other or *of* each other, servant gossip and past newspaper articles.

So...it is odd why Watson chose this tale out of roughly 70 cases he had in his collection (according to the SPECKLED BAND) he chose one where a breech of privacy was involved most evidently. Naturally, from Doyle it is due to a good tale but internally it requires some mental gymnastics to square Watson's choices.

Blackmail perhaps so option (b) above, but unmentioned due to discretion on not revealing said blackmail? Of who? Watson, Holmes or St. Simon? And so Watson is anxious to lay the facts out as they were in actuality to gainsay the blackmail..?

[mightymads]

Blackmail or refuting dangerous rumours could be actually a good reason. Lord St. Simon’s description can have a double reading. He is a dandified, confirmed bachelor at 41. His dandyish appearance can mean his superficial personality and his not marrying for so long as being a playboy, but it also comes off as queer. What if there were rumours that his marriage fell apart due to a gay scandal? What if Watson had to invent Miss Flora Millar to screen St. Simon, and the whole breach of privacy thing was done with St. Simon’s agreement? What if being involved in a queer case cast a shadow on Holmes himself? Suddenly it could make a nice little fic.

[luthienberen]

Yes! I admit this was lurking in my head. An accusation of Lord St. Simon being queer (true or false) could lead to Watson publishing the "facts"...and whether Miss Millar was a screen and never existed, or did and St. Simon really did wish to marry her /is straight, would serve the benefit of clearing the Lord.

It would also clear Holmes & Watson who by association with the Lord might face the same accusation,(again falsely or truthfully), by throwing a blackmailer off their scent.

A fun fic with much potential! :>

[mightymads]

Was looking forward to your notes! :)

1) Date. I wondered about that too. The story was published in 1892 which makes it 1888, but Holmes also says about Lord St. Simon

“Born in 1846.’ He’s forty-one years of age,” which makes it 1887, and hence another inconsistency about Watson’s marriage

2) Watson’s wound. I bet ACD forgot again and didn’t bother to look it up. As an in-universe explanation, perhaps Watson was reluctant to mention again his shoulder and leg, and just glossed it over?

3) H&W. There’s so much sweetness about them in this story. They read to each other, and Holmes again makes it clear how important Watson’s presence is to him:

“Do not dream of going, Watson, for I very much prefer having a witness, if only as a check to my own memory.”

Re: Holmes’s closing line, I do regard it as an inconsistency, since Mary did lose a fortune already, so Holmes could have easily joked about her disappearance. This line could be a rather elegant hint at H&W relationship, since it can read with different meanings: that Watson marries for love or that he actually doesn’t marry at all.

There’s one more curious detail I looked up:

“to quote Thoreau’s example”

The meaning is that although you did not see the dairy farmer do it, he most probably dipped the milk pail in the stream to water down the product. It’s not direct evidence but a very strong circumstantial case.
It is attributed as follows: "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.

[luthienberen]

Thank you mightymads!

1.) Crikey, that does make the dating of this story even more mystifying! Looking at is from an internal viewpoint it really does lend an inconsistent unreliable narrator to Watson, not just on his marriage but in general as this canon re-read so far is highlighting beautifully!

2.) I think it is safe to say that Doyle forgot! Yes, I do favour Watson just preferring not to go into detail over his wounds.

3. )H&W - you have said it perfectly, their is a sweetness to their interactions in this story, especially with Holmes needing Watson as a back-up for his memory :)

Re: Holmes’s closing line, I do regard it as an inconsistency, since Mary did lose a fortune already, so Holmes could have easily joked about her disappearance. This line could be a rather elegant hint at H&W relationship, since it can read with different meanings: that Watson marries for love or that he actually doesn’t marry at all.

<3 Excellent points and completely concur!

Oh, thanks for looking up 'Thoreau's example, that is fascinating and fitting for this tale.