Written in 1904, the novel is set several years into the association of Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson - though is still set in the period prior to Watson's marriage whilst he was still living with Holmes at Baker St. One morning, Holmes and Watson are visited by a slightly absent minded country doctor, Dr Mortimer, who tells the legend of the hound of the Baskervilles which haunts the Baskerville family who live on the moors and the death of Sir Charles Baskerville of a heart attack bought on by the supposed fright of seeing the hound of legend. Dr Mortimer is in London to meet the late Sir Charles's nephew and heir, Sir Henry Baskerville who has arrived from Canada, and dreads the effects that the story of his uncle's death may have on the young man. After Sir Henry has his boots stolen at his hotel and is stalked around the streets of London, Holmes volunteers Watson to return to the moor with the young baronet and Dr Mortimer to investigate the case as Holmes remains in London to follow up on a different case. Watson suddenly finds himself in the foggy moors where ponies disappear in bogs, where an escaped murderer is lose, where the servants are creepy and the neighbours odd, where a strange man appears out of the fog, and where the sounds of howls pierce the air.
I will start by saying that Sherlock Holmes to my mind one of the finest creations of the flurry of British fin-de-siecle speculative fiction from the close of the 19th century and he is simultaneously the second most misunderstood famous literary character out there thanks to the machinations of Hollywood (Frankenstein's monster of course being the first). When people come to Holmes they expect a pipe smoking, deer stalker wearing, genius on all areas who says "Elementary, my dear Watson" a little too often. Holmes may smoke a pipe but no more than the average 19th century man (Watson smokes one too in fact), there is NO clear statement in any of the books that he is wearing a deer stalker, he is noted by Watson on many occasions to be a complete idiot when it comes to areas that don't interest him, and he never in any of the books combines the word "elementary" with the phrase "my dear Watson" (though he says both separately on more than one occasion). Holmes of the books is at his heart an obsessive with a focused intellect that allows for fewer distractions and a complete inability to relate well to most other people. The obsessive nature of his character verges on bipolar disorder as when he has no case to interest him he spirals into a depressed state from which only drugs of various kinds can revive him (opiates in some of the books though not in Hounds of the Baskervilles- that said there is a scene in where Holmes spends an afternoon in his flat drinking two pots of coffee and smoking copious amounts of tobacco in order to "help" him focus). Thankfully the real Holmes is slowly creeping out following the underrated though very good Richard Roxburgh version of Hound of the Baskervilles (good to see Aussies do good in that version though odd that Roxburgh who plays Holmes and Matt Day who plays Sir Henry Baskerville now play hilariously different characters opposite each other in Rake), Guy Ritchie's recent Holmes film with Robert Downey Jr as Holmes and Jude Law as Watson, and my personal favourite (and I think the closest to Holmes of the books that has yet emerged) the Steven Moffat/Mark Gatiss modernised TV version with the Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes and Martin Freeman as Watson.
What of the book itself? My past experience of Holmes has been mixed. I loved the some of the short stories which I read at uni in particular The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire (still my favourite Holmes story) and liked two thirds of A Study in Scarlet. However the remaining third of Study in Scarlet (the first Holmes story and the only other of the "longer" ones I've read) is a dull and odd; it focuses on a tale of Mormons in America and does not feature Holmes or Watson but is the back story of the murderer and all I could think was someone needs to tell old Arthur to edit that bit somewhat. So I came to the Hound with that as my last Holmes experience on the page and the added issue of knowing the plot having seen film/TV versions of it. Even with these issues, at only 150 pages it is quite a short and easy read, and ultimately I enjoyed it thoroughly. I recommend that if you haven't seen it in film or TV format, or haven't been told the ultimate plot line, that you read the book first as many people I know who were less aware of the conclusion of the novel found it scary (as it is intended to be) whilst I did not. Even if you know the conclusion but haven't read the book, I still recommend it as it is well written, exciting and fast paced and if you've been watching most older adaptations of the novel, it will give you a view of the "real" Sherlock Holmes.
 |
| OK so not the book cover (mine had Holmes in a deerstalker with a pipe on it so not good) instead Holmes and Watson in the Steven Moffat/Mark Gatiss TV version, Sherlock. They are doing Hound of the Baskerville this season and it promises to be brilliant- I mean you combine the brilliance of the book with the fact that Steven Moffat is a TV writing/producing god and the fact the leads are easy on the eye and how could you go wrong. Seriously WATCH IT! |
And another reminder, it's not too late to sponsor me at http://register.thenovelchallenge.org.au/The-Novel-Challenge/clarewoodley
No comments:
Post a Comment