Hi everyone! I'm Tom Colton, formerly (and, uh, still) of AH.com. If you recognise me from...
User | Total |
---|---|
Tom Colton | 3 |
Ergo, The Sign of Four takes place in 1888, and Ms. Morstan's mother is deceased."Briefly," [Mary Morstan] continued, "the facts are these. My father was an officer in an Indian regiment, who sent me home when I was quite a child. My mother was dead, and I had no relative in England. I was placed, however, in a comfortable boarding establishment at Edinburgh, and there I remained until I was seventeen years of age. In the year 1878 my father, who was senior captain of his regiment, obtained twelve months' leave and came home. He telegraphed to me from London that he had arrived all safe and directed me to come down at once, giving the Langham Hotel as his address. His message, as I remember, was full of kindness and love. On reaching London I drove to the Langham and was informed that Captain Morstan was staying there, but that he had gone out the night before and had not returned. I waited all day without news of him. That night, on the advice of the manager of the hotel, I communicated with the police, and next morning we advertised in all the papers. Our inquiries led to no result; and from that day to this no word has ever been heard of my unfortunate father. He came home with his heart full of hope to find some peace, some comfort, and instead --"
She put her hand to her throat, and a choking sob cut short the sentence.
"The date?" asked Holmes, opening his notebook.
"He disappeared upon the third of December, 1878 -- nearly ten years ago."
[...]
"I have not yet described to you the most singular part. About six years ago -- to be exact, upon the fourth of May, 1882 -- an advertisement appeared in the Times asking for the address of Miss Mary Morstan, and stating that it would be to her advan- tage to come forward..."
It is commonly understood that Watson's "bereavement" refers to the death of Mdm. Morstan, so they were married from 1888 to 1894 until she passed away.It was in the spring of the year 1894 that all London was interested, and the fashionable world dismayed, by the murder of the Honourable Ronald Adair under most unusual and inexplicable circumstances.
Such was the remarkable narrative to which I listened on that April evening—a narrative which would have been utterly incredible to me had it not been confirmed by the actual sight of the tall, spare figure and the keen, eager face, which I had never thought to see again. In some manner he had learned of my own sad bereavement, and his sympathy was shown in his manner rather than in his words. "Work is the best antidote to sorrow, my dear Watson," said he, "and I have a piece of work for us both to-night which, if we can bring it to a successful conclusion, will in itself justify a man's life on this planet."
Ergo, Watson had remarried by then. There are numerous theories as to the identity of this other wife, but one commonly held one is Miss Grace Dunbar from The Problem of Thor Bridge, which is not unbelievable despite her superficial differences to Mary Morstan as Watson sums up her character similarly and in favourable terms. Seeing as this subsequent wife doesn't turn up again, she may or may not be alive by the time Watson got round to writing some of the Case-book stories.I[, Sherlock Holmes,] find from my notebook that it was in January, 1903, just after the conclusion of the Boer War, that I had my visit from Mr. James M. Dodd, a big, fresh, sunburned, upstanding Briton. The good Watson had at that time deserted me for a wife, the only selfish action which I can recall in our association. I was alone.
...The year '87 furnished us with a long series of cases of greater or less interest, of which I retain the records. Among my headings under this one twelve months I find an account of the adventure of the Paradol Chamber, of the Amateur Mendicant Society, who held a luxurious club in the lower vault of a furniture warehouse, of the facts connected with the loss of the British barque Sophy Anderson, of the singular adventures of the Grice Patersons in the island of Uffa, and finally of the Camberwell poisoning case.
[...]
My wife was on a visit to her mother's, and for a few days I was a dweller once more in my old quarters at Baker Street.
Seconding.You already have my interest based on coherent citation to the Canon for the source of your pastiche, combined with inclusion of a romance element involving a character who already is established as having romantic interests in external characters, rather than, y'know, Sherlock Holmes.
Ahh, the eternal mystery of Watson's wives, otherwise known as "the fandom knows more about the internal chronology of the stories than the writer did." (And...that is so completely believable, because I've done it myself: I tend to write my fanfiction in single chronologies (my GrimGrimoire fiction, for example), and mistakes get made, particularly when I have a best friend with a much better memory than I have (hi, Fuyu!) and I forget to consult my notes before inserting a reference, and she then notices!).
You already have my interest based on coherent citation to the Canon for the source of your pastiche, combined with inclusion of a romance element involving a character who already is established as having romantic interests in external characters, rather than, y'know, Sherlock Holmes.
Thanks, guys!
A(especially since in Study, Holmes paraphrases Carlyle after claiming to have never heard of him, which suggests that the whole thing is just him trolling his new roommate)
A good start, though some of your notes seem a bit odd (what does where Holmes went to university have to do with the cases Holmes did in 1887?)
Also, while I understand the impulse, I'm not sure an explanation for the reversal of Brain Attic Theory is needed (especially since in Study, Holmes paraphrases Carlyle after claiming to have never heard of him, which suggests that the whole thing is just him trolling his new roommate)
Thanks for the comments and honest feedback, guys.This is the kind of thing I sadly miss by reading the books a hundred years after publication (and without benefit of an annotated edition): I wouldn't know Carlyle if his corpse crawled out of its grave and bit me on the leg, so I couldn't recognize a possible in-joke that an educated Englishman of the time would have caught and smiled at.
The footnotes I find genuinely distracting (except for the one at the Goethe quote, about which I take the exact opposite tack). They're one of the more irksome elements of June Thomson's otherwise solid pastiches, for example. And this sentence, I would suggest the following edit:
I have said before, in my account of the Lauriston Gardens murder,which I had submitted under the evocative title of "A Study in Scarlet" to my literary agent, who had paid me five pounds upfront, with a promise of more to come once he had actually found a buyer for this tale of detection and seen it published in the papers,that Sherlock Holmes, believing the human brain to contain a limited amount of information, limited his knowledge of literature to the bare minimum.
The central clause is basically a metatext in-joke for the benefit of Holmesian readers. Actually, added to the footnotes, I'd say that that's the major problem with this chapter as written: it spends too much time on you, the author, discussing Holmesian lore with the fans. Everything I had an issue with falls into this category (too many references to unpublished cases, another example: the Amateur Mendicants reference was done well, but the Paradol Chamber bit one too many (similarly with canon cases, the reference to Study was well-taken as an internal reference and the Greek Interpreter reference important because of Mycroft, but the Shoscombe Old Place one was, again, an in-joke; just saying "the track" would have served).
As for the story itself, that's a different kettle of fish entirely. I like the frank discussion of their monetary issues; it feels very true to early-Canon Watson's issues, while Holmes is still wrestling with building his practice; it's a straightforward and direct segue into the case itself, and by directly addressing the "Brain-Attic" issue which Doyle himself rapidly abandoned you show some character progression and sense of their place in time.
"Well, my dear Holmes, since you have paid me so rich a compliment, allow me to offer you one in return.
It actually wasn't, but I must have had The Final Problem in my subconscious when writing it.
"Terrorists" definitely was since the French Revolution (although it meant an armed group committing political violence in a slightly different fashion), but "classified" might not have been. "Hijacking" wasn't coined until the 20th century, hence why it doesn't make an appearance here.Anyways, were the phrases "terrorists", "classified", and "de-classifed" in use in this fashion at the time?
There are worse things to have in there.It actually wasn't, but I must have had The Final Problem in my subconscious when writing it.
Huh, I didn't know that."Terrorists" definitely was since the French Revolution (although it meant an armed group committing political violence in a slightly different fashion),
Sorry.
Neat!"Hijacking" wasn't coined until the 20th century, hence why it doesn't make an appearance here.
You're welcome!