Published in 1927, Shoscombe Old Place* [SHOS] is the final story Doyle wrote of his famed consulting detective creation. Or, it is the still-latest published report from the desk of Watson. Six of one, half dozen of the other. Kinda. Meaning it all depends upon if you are 'playing the game;' solving discrepancies within the tales in the nod-and-a-wink fashion of taking Holmes and Watson as real-life historical figures. I won't be playing the game (much) here, quite frankly I mostly don't see how. I'll simply be raising questions that I feel have no answers and perhaps fleshing out further, the dynamic duo to my own liking.
Two nights ago as I write this, I was cuddled up in bed reading SHOS for the manyth time. Why? Because The Case-Book was on my bedside table and I am, first and foremost, a lazy person. This is to take nothing away from the volume, one that many find to be the least of Doyle's Sherlockian portfolio. Personally, I like many of the stories just fine, and it has much more worth than just as fodder for completists. I will say the works do get looser as time wears-on into the Edwardian Era. 'Looser' describes, in fact, much of what I'll point out in the upcoming brief italicized exchange (a slice of a larger segment-pie) between Holmes and Watson. Perhaps it actually defines it.
"By the way, Watson, you know something of racing?"
What's that? Years of at times shared housing within a professional as well as personal partnership and Holmes has to ask such a question? I'd hazard that they should be well-beyond even the 'I know you know, you know?' period of their familiarities. An old married couple and the Mrs. asks her Mr. how he prefers his eggs? "Over-easy, dear. And how do you take your coffee?" not "Cream and sugar, right?" It really jumps out as odd, does it not? Particularly since...
"I ought to. I pay for it with about half of my wound pension."
"I ought to. I pay for it with about half of my wound pension."
Holmes (likely for reasons such as this) keeps Watson's check-book under lock and key in his desk(?) drawer. "Your check book is locked in my drawer, and you have not asked for the key." (The Adventure of the Dancing Men*.) I suppose there could be other ways to fund your bookie, sure. Most importantly perhaps, this highlights Watson as the action freak I know him to be. Always shaking free of boring patients and/or his unexciting wives in order to visit 221b in the hopes of anything at all ever being afoot insofar as game.
In a tick of a tangent, this could be quite dark, deep waters, indeed. Let's recall now Dr. Verner in The Adventure of the Norwood Builder*. If it's not in your brain to recall, making my request unfair, a Dr. Verner purchased Watson's practice at a high asking price, thus freeing up the good doctor to further be at Holmes' disposal, read: beck and call. The funds, as we later find, came from Sherlock himself. Hum! Could these same financial tactics be also keeping Watson trapped to chronicle Holmes with the added aid of nurturing a gambling addiction? Could this whole exchange (and all sidebars mentioned) which we're discussing be chalked up to Holmes reminding Watson where he stood? It gives much of it a ::: very ::: different spin, as perhaps Holmes tightens the screws...
"Then I'll make you my "Handy Guide to the Turf". What about Sir Robert Norbertson?"
"Then I'll make you my "Handy Guide to the Turf". What about Sir Robert Norbertson?"
Ouch! Or, this casts questioning glances on Holmes' file-keeping as well as information sources. As we learn way back in A Scandal in Bohemia*: "For many years, he had adopted a system of docketing all paragraphs concerning men and things, so that it was difficult to name a subject or a person on which he could not at once furnish information." You'd think a seemingly well-known at least in certain circles Sir would have the presence of at least a mere paragraph. Secondly, what exactly is the quality of Holmes' info, filed or not? You said you know about this thing since I asked if you did--and so, you're my guy.
I sincerely hope that this doesn't leave you with a quite different and hauntingly-so take on the relationship between Holmes & Watson. It might, however, leave you with a question. I'll answer that for ya. Chronicler Watson included this little exchange, which he by no means had to, in a desperate cry for help from within a manipulated form of indentured servitude. This by the hand of his own addiction and under the cruel thumb of Holmes, who used said chronicles to enhance his own reputation and business. I mean it's probably not that but if it were--haunting!, to say the least.
*According to William Stuart Baring-Gould's chronology, SHOS takes place in 1902, and DANC in 1898 (published 1905). SCAN, also mentioned, takes place in 1887 (published in 1891). NORW, while we're at it, is thought to take place in 1895 (published in 1903).
Online sources for this article include: The Arthur Conan Doyle Encyclopedia, Lit2Go, Sherlock Holmes Wiki, and (of course) Wikipedia.
Online sources for this article include: The Arthur Conan Doyle Encyclopedia, Lit2Go, Sherlock Holmes Wiki, and (of course) Wikipedia.
::: very :::