Book Review: "The Valley of Fear" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Feb 04, 2011 04:20

FINALLY!

I've been reading the collected works of AC Doyle for a while now, and I've been doing what I'd been advised and reading it all in order of published. So I started with "Study in Scarlett" (1887) and then "The Sign of Four," (1890) "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes," (1892) "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes," (1894) "The Hound of the Baskervilles," (1901) "The Return of Sherlock Holmes" (1904) and finally, "The Valley of Fear." (1914) I've been enjoying this immensely but also, wondering about a few things.

Finally I am seeing where some of what Sherlock Holmes is so well known for are showing up. Or, at least most well known to me. In that I mean parts of Holmes and Watson's bromance relationship and also the importance of the character of Professor Moriarty. And yet still, I have a hard time seeing where some of these well known themes and characters gained their universal acceptance as canon. Lets start first with the relationship of Holmes and Watson. I admit, it's easy to see where the idea of them as lovers comes into play. The language alone lends itself to that interpretation. But, I don't know. As much as I sort of love the idea of it, I also like to think of Holmes as asexual. His love and passion going to his study and work, while his tolerance and admiration goes towards Watson.

No, the part of the relationship that I struggled with understanding is more along the lines of Watson's annoyance and Holmes selfish neediness: think Ritchie's '09 movie and Fox's "House." It is easy to see that the creators of that show were using Sherlock Holmes-- the only mind bright enough to find the solutions to problems that no one else could solve while also being a drug addict-- as a model for Gregory House-- the diagnostician who gets the patients that have problems no one else can solve while also being a drug addict. So, if Holmes=House then obviously John Watson=James Wilson. The show has great fun with this--even alluding (as the original canon did if you read it a certain way) that House and Wilson are more than just friends. But the bickering, almost co-dependent relationship that both House/Wilson have and Downey Jr.'s Holmes/Law's Watson have just never existed in the canon of Sherlock Holmes, for me. Up until this novel.

Sure there were hints of it before in the way that Holmes was always looking down on Watson's detective skills, waking him up at odd hours to go have adventures and also in Watson's concern for Holmes drug use. But the part the correlation I didn't see until this novel was Watson's annoyance with all of this. Up to this book, he silently took the insults, marveled at Holmes' intellect and willingly (even eagerly) followed Holmes on any adventure he might find. In this book, he bristled at the insults (which seemed even more hurtful-- in true House fashion), did very little marveling, but still eagerly went on adventures. So, yeah, I can start to see where this interpretation came to be.

I'm still struggling with the importance of Professor Moriarity in the canon of Sherlock Holmes though. I understand why people are fascinated by him: the only villain to have alluded Holmes. But is he? In the collection of short stories "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes" which was published before "The Valley of Fear" but takes place after, we are introduced to Professor Moriarty and then shortly after, both Moriarity and Holmes die-- I'd call that at the very least a draw. BUT, Holmes is the only one who FAKES HIS DEATH AND COMES BACK! So, I call that a win.

Still, we're introduced to this arch-enemy in the second collection of short stories after two novels and we don't hear about him again until the last novel. This is the ultimate villain? Really?

So, I was super excited to once more see his name surface in "The Valley of Fear." In the beginning we get an informant who gives Holmes information and then is murdered but Moriarity-- Holmes concludes. Hours later, the police come and give Holmes the exact same information-- and they didn't even make him work out a code or anything. Then we get a whole case that winds around a fake murder and a nefarious gang in America. (On another note, this is the only time since "A Study in Scarlett" where we leave Watson's POV and travel to another country. It was far less jarring this time, which either means it was handled better, or I had become so engrossed in the story and the characters, that I didn't mind it so much.)

Anyway, after all of this, Holmes concludes that this all has something to do with Moriarty. I should be used to this, used to Holmes quietly and to himself working out answers and solving cases. He's done it throughout the series. Somehow though, this one just rang as convoluted to me. Maybe it's because I'm expecting something, expecting a big reveal that makes the fascination with Moriarty make sense.

Since starting this post, I've also finished "His Last Bow" and so now all I have left to read is "The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes." I'm hoping that collection sheds some light on this character. If not, then for me, the greatest unsolved mystery of the entire series is why there is such a fascination in a character, that for me, is one of the weakest villains in story telling history.

As I like to have my toes in as many social waters as possible, this post can also be found on DreamWidth. You can comment here or there...or not at all if you want to make me cry.

books, reading: project, review

Previous post Next post
Up