NORW - Brad's summer reading list #17 - no bones about it.

The first image to come to mind for me when re-reading this tale was; Where is Watson at the time he put pen to paper to record this story of Sherlock Holmes?
He probably would have been in his fifties.
Was he still with Holmes? Was he married?
The publication date of this story is 1903. It is believed Watson was once again married in 1902. So it would seem he was happily sequestered in his home study when he recorded it.

Holmes at the time of this tale is recently back from his great hiatus. Watson has moved back in to Baker St., at Holmes' request. Holmes is however bored with the lack work for his singular talents. At one point he remarks how London once was the European capital of high crime, and he longs for those more active days.
It would be interesting, if records had been kept, to compare crime statistics for major European cities at this time.

Holmes has trouble hiding his glee when McFarlane shows up with what seems to be a case worthy of Holmes' abilities.
The following line reminds one of a small child trying to restrain his emotions after receiving good news; “Arrest you!” said Holmes. “This is really most grati—most interesting. On what charge do you expect to be arrested?”

As this summers reading has suggested (as does Bill Cochrans book), Holmes appears to have come back from his travels a much more easily satisfied man.

Another incident on the first few pages of the story that I found interesting was how Holmes offered an asthmatic a cigarette.  Although definitely a no-no now a days, in Holmes time was it thought a cigarette would help ones breathing.   The following advertisements may suggest that that was indeed the case.  (And Watson doesn't admonish Holmes in any way for this suggestion.)

(But don't give it to kids under six.)

(see Cubeb)

              

The mystery itself is good, with a very good plot along with very good detective work. Lestrade is, as always, Lestrade.

And once again we get a fine example of how far forensics had or had no come at this time in Holmes life.

It is not uncommon in modern forensic science for the police to determine the types of bones found at a site by DNA, bone measurement and probably any number of other ways to tell one bone from another.

And it also is the case with the examination of the blood samples. It doesn't appear that there was a method yet that could determine the nature of the blood.

There were probably many naturalist in Europe at the time of this story that could identify different types of bones, but it doesn't seem to be the police forces practice to involve experts from other fields yet.

Watson may have been able to help, but he did not visit the bone site during the story.

I would have been a little worried about starting a fire in the house, but, after all, it was a fairly modern villa so probably it met up to some better fire standards than . .  let's say. . . something built during. . . Victorian times.

So. next time you are feeling under the weather. . . .

But make mine a Guinness!

Canonical Quiz - What story is this poking fun at?

LION - Brad's summer reading list # 16 - Holmes does community service and the other 'The Woman'.

Personally I think LION was written because Holmes was asked by some older women on some local board seeking stories by notable locals that could go into some local publication that was going to raise money for the lifeboat service or something like that. Instead of another cook book, these ladies were trying something different. And since Holmes seems in a very good frame of mind at this point in his life he thinks, "What the heck. I'll do it!"

We have to wonder if Holmes was toying with some of our conceptions of him as he wrote this story down.

We are often lead to believe that Holmes was loathe to leave his beloved London. And although many of his cases take him away from his home, he always seems to be in a hurry to return.
He has used fishing and other pursuits as a guise when it has helped in his 'cover story', but we don't really ever hear that the natural world holds much draw for him.
If we look at his personality we can however see where, to his scientific mind, the study of the natural world could hold much interest. But before this story it appeared that nature only held interest to him where it might apply to his chosen profession.

We learn that Holmes is now living in Sussex along the channel coast. High above the sea, near chalk cliffs.
He has a housekeeper with him which could or could not be Mrs. Hudson. We never really  know Mrs. Hudson's age, and she to may have longed for many years to escape London.

We learn that although Holmes keeps in touch with Watson, it is indeed rare and limited. We have to believe at this time that if Watson was indeed still unattached he would have followed Holmes to Sussex. Hopefully it means Watson is happily married or at least wanting to be near grand kids or somethin'.

The case itself is very unimportant, except to the dead man. With such knowledgeable people at 'The Gables", it seems rather remarkable that no one else figured out the origin of the criminal. (It took Holmes a week to come to his conclusions.)
Well, I guess the science master figured it out, but unfortunately he was the one that got killed.
At one point Holmes actually seems to over think the problem. Looking for a crime where none exists.

It is also interesting to note that there are two references to where Holmes 'stores' his knowledge, and once again both making reference to architectural images.
We have often, especially of late, heard of Holmes' 'brain attic' and also referenced his lumber-room. (Both references can be found in FIVE.)
In LION, when finally coming up with the answer to the mystery, Holmes makes first a comment about his brain being like a "crowded box-room" And later, just a paragraph or so away we hear he keeps his books and reference material in a "great garret room in his little house". Basically saying the very same thing as in FIVE but with two different phrases.

We also find a Holmes who can possibly out write Watson on the appearance and comportment of the fairer sex. Holmes himself says he is taken by the presences of Maud. Who would have though after all these years.

It is also interesting to note that when researching J. G. Wood and the book Holmes refers to we come up with lots of Sherlockian familiarities; Norwood, Croydon, St Barts, Boys own Magazine.
Watson, Holmes or the literary agent, either or all, could have known J. G. Wood, or at least been familiar with his work.

Perhaps the two greatest speculation that have come out of this story are; Where is the location of Holmes' retirement cottage? And why did Holmes wish to study bees?

Who could not like the man Holmes as become at this point in his life. Social, well respected and still very, very interesting.

As with all the cases, most of the fun is written between the lines. Where first this case may seem uninteresting, there is much to be gotten out of it.

NAVA - Brad's summer reading list #15 - Holmes and Brett at their best.

What's not to like about NAVA?

Holmes is at Baker St., and busy on a case and playing with his chemistry set.

Watson is married ( I like Watson being married) and living away from Baker St. with his wife. We assume it is Mary, but Watson never actually says as much.

And we learn a little about Watson's early days.
(Has anyone ever tried to peg down a location for where Percy and Lord Holdhurst came from and tried to make a connection to Watson's region?)

The case is interesting and involved, and the clues are fun to follow.

Holmes seems to be in very good spirits throughout and once again displays his sense of theatrics and humor.
And once again almost giving someone a heart attack.

We also get an insight into how many cases he has worked on and the nature of some of his clients.

We even get Holmes acknowledging the good traits of a women.

We get some wonderful quotable material.
We get the wonderful monologue about the nature of rose's and flowers, insight into Holmes views on board-schools and the social fabric of the future of England. And is Mrs. Hudson Scottish or is it just that her cooking skills are being compared to a Scotch woman's?

We have to kinda wonder where Mycroft was throughout this one
.
And we also have to wonder why more security wasn't allowed for with such an important document on the premises.

We once again get a nobleman with a weak chin, and a beautiful woman with lots of backbone.

You also have to wonder why on this occasion, when Holmes expected someone to break into the house, that had been shown to carry a sharp possible weapon, he did not have an armed Watson and a Lestrade type individual with him. (We know Lestrade always keeps something in his hip pocket.)
He felt it was needed in BLAC, so why not here.
Surely Percy could have been gotten out of the way into his old bedroom. Or was Holmes unsure of his plan and thought if it failed, the case most then be pursued in London? Or did they need to be nearer a hospital in case Percy did not survive the theatrics.
(Note in the picture on the right, where breakfast is being served. It is depicted as a table other than in the sitting rooms of Baker St., where we always assume Holmes and Watson took there meals. Paget depicted the table as one other than near the fireplace we are accustomed to imagining. No slipper on the mantel, which is referenced in this story. No pen knife affixing letters either. Platters on the mantel instead,  as you would expect in a more formal dining room. How interesting.)

But even with all this great material to chose from, none of these are my favorite part of this story.

For me, as with many of the cases, it is the little references and objects peppered throughout that are a symbol of the contemporary time in which the tales were written. Objects we no longer have a use for or at least are not commonly referenced any more.

How often have to heard someone ask for char-slippers? And would we even know what to look for if they did?
Matter of fact, other than in cooking, do you ever use the word char?

Have you ever heated up something on a spirit-lamp? (Now, Watson said spirit-lamp, not spirit stove.) If you do a lot of camping you may have used a spirit stove, but they aren't called that much anymore. And the fuel you use is probably a little different
You don't have to ring a bell to get your coffee; no phones, no intercoms, no text message.

These are the types of reference I love in the stories. Things that make the atmosphere for me. Things I would love to put in my replica of 221b.

Like I said; What's not to like about NAVA.

Because it's a little past Friday yet you still deserve it and it has been a while.

DANC - Brad's summer reading list #14 - The Sherlockian two step.

The Adventure of the Dancing Men is not a story that I have a whole lot feeling about.

Lots of attempts have been made to finish out the complete alphabet using dancing men. Just search Google and see how many there are.

The story is similar to SECO in that a woman attempts to save the honor of her husband by making bad decisions. In both cases the women want us to believe that what ever is pursuing them from their past is not really all that bad, but bad enough to destroy the honor of their husbands.
One is willing to betray her country, the other destroy her marriage.
Yet neither one feels able to trust their spouses with the truth.

I believe in Brad's review of DANC, he argues that honor and loyalty were different beasts in Holmes times than they are now.
And for the most part I would have to agree, well at least the perception of what honor was suppose to be.

In DANC we do however have a women who has taken it upon herself to remove herself from an environment which she was loathe to, basically living in a den of thieves.
She has secured enough of her own funds to remove herself from Chicago and relocate to London, where either by social graces or monetary self-sufficiency (or both) able to participate in the London social scene at the Jubilee, which we have to assume is Victoria's Golden or Diamond Jubilee (1887 or 1897, which also helps date this story).
She is not a weak women. She was able to pick herself up and start a new life.
We could easily call her a Gold-digger, coming to London to find a wealthy man to settle with.
But, as with honor, times were different then and women were not suppose to make there own way (although many did) and events like the Jubilee were perfect times for finding perfect mates.
But she wasn't so secure in her independence as to be able to trust her husband with the total truth.
But we have come to believe, in the Canon, that this was just the way things were done.

It seems to have been a fine marriage up until the diminutive dancers started showing up.
But still she couldn't tell him the truth, even though it was tearing her marriage apart.
And we can't believe she didn't see that, "Oh, it's okay honey. I see you getting the strange messages and all. And you are sad all the time, and about to fall apart, but I trust you will solve this on your own and our marriage is just fine because I am a lonely country squire and don't have any other prospects."
Ya gotta wonder about the reasoning of people sometimes.

So my questions are; Was she doing it out of honor or was there more to her past than what she told her husband?

Given the information he had, should Holmes have acted earlier?

Does Watson ever figure out how Holmes does it?


Again, like Brad said, different times and all. . . .

We do find Holmes and Watson together in Baker St. And we once again get Watson astound with Holmes' abilities. (Did Watson ever learn how Holmes did it?)

Although a fun story, I think it is the mysterious dancing figures that has made this story so popular.
Has anyone ever done a dancing women code?

He's not just ours anymore!. . . as if he ever was.

How Benedict Cumberbatch Won the First Day of Comic-Con

Oliver JonesJul 24, 2014

Benedict Cumberbatch’s visage — in which he portrays an intensely focused Sherlock Holmes — adorns posters and T-shirts throughout a cavernous but crowded room, but it was the man himself who brought the San Diego Comic-Con to a standstill when he took part in the panel introducing Dreamworks Animation’s latest installment in theirMadagascar series, The Penguins of Madagascar, in theaters this Thanksgiving.

 Even before he took the stage inside the convention center’s packed Hall H, the 37-year-old actor was making his presence felt: when they showed the clip of the character he voices — an “all-action” James Bond-like wolf who is head of an elite team of animal helpers called the North Wind — the hall erupted in loud cheers. Indeed, the screaming started anytime moderator Craig Ferguson, or anyone else for that matter, merely mentioned the words Benedict Cumberbatch.

So, why is the London native, who not long ago was best known for his stage and voiceover work, suddenly the undisputed king of Comic-Con’s first day? Let’s break it down:

He is genuinely humble. “You exist?” wondered Cumberbatch quizzically as he peered out into throngs of fans. “You don’t get to see this normally. I have never seen this before.” “First time at Comic-Con?” asked Ferguson. “Uh, yeah,” replied the actor. “I think you will enjoy it. Many people are happy you are here.” Talk about an understatement.

He is fully committed to his work. “I worked in Yellowstone park as a wolf for awhile,” joked Cumberbatch when asked how he prepared for the part. “I was accepted by the pack quite quickly. It got a bit hairy, no pun intended, when I became the alpha male. In about a month or two, I realized that two of the other wolves were Christian Bale and Daniel Day-Lewis.” The hardest part of his role? “Getting un-wolfed,” he replied. “Don’t put any kittens in front of me.”

He’s is a natural-born wit: “I like to use my body,” he said, when asked what he thinks of doing voice-work for animation. Later on, when a questioner was struggling to come up with something to ask him, he said, “Why don’t you ask me about my shoe size?”

He has solid geek credentials: The first book the man who would one day play the dragon Smaug read as a kid? “The Hobbit, actually. That was in my head as an imaginary space when I tried to get to sleep at night. I am not sure how healthy that is, but it worked out alright.” When asked what superhero he would most like to play, Cumberbatch, who has been rumored to play Doctor Strange in the recently annnounced Marvel movie, he did not exactly rise to the bait. “Batman, I guess,” says Cumberbatch. His costar, John Malkowich, chose Lois Lane, but based on the chemistry the two showed on stage, he would make a lovely Robin to Cumberbatch’s Caped Crusader.

Photo: Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP

Do you agree?

Best fictional characters from Sherlock Holmes to Jane Eyre as chosen by 100 literary figures.

A pod of Sherlockians just doesn't sound right, so.. . . .

So Doyleockian is suggesting another 'collective' noun.
And I am going to help spread the word.

A gathering of more than one Sherlockian should now be called a "'Deduction' of Sherlockians."

What do ya think?

SECO - Brad's summer reading list #13 - The Second Stain - a couple of quivering stiff upper lips.

As is so true with many of Watson's works, it is the first paragraph that really grabs your attention.

We find out, that at the time of the writing down of this case, that Holmes is retired, no longer in London and seeking solitude to study and to bee-farm in Sussex.

We know at the time the case took place, Holmes and Watson were still together in Baker St; ". . . we found two visitors of European fame in our humble room. ..".

What is really fun to try to figure out in this case is the date and not many have come up with a great argument yet.

And Watson doesn't really help.

Several chronologist of the Canon place the date for this story in July of 1887 or 1888.
We do however have Watson himself stating in NAVA that the story took place in the July succeeding his marriage, which took place after SIGN which most people put in 1888, with two chronologist putting SIGN in the fall of that year. Which means SECO would have to be, if you are going with July, in July of 1889. But neither of the two I use most place SECO after SIGN.

Again Watson does not help us in stating they he still lives in Baker St. and that this case took place in the Autumn of the unnamed year.

So, which story do you believe and from where do you take your dates.

NAVA says; "The July which immediately succeeded my marriage was made memorable by three cases of interest." Of which he lists SECO as one.

SIGN of which most put in 1888 in the fall, which would place SECO in 1889, which only a few do, but if you use the other stories for dates, that is the only year it works.

And in SECO Watson says the story took place in the autumn of an unnamed year or decade.

By 1889 there had been two Prime Ministers who could have been  'twice Premier' by that time of the story.

So the exercise becomes one of which time to you believe Watson to be accurate and which facts do you question.

One problem with dating the story in July is that Watson states in SECO that the story took place in the autumn. If he was being vague about everything else about the story, year and decade, way not be vague about the season or the day.
Was it meant to be misleading?
Is there a reason the autumn and Tuesday are important?

We will probably never know when SECO actually took place, the best you can do is build an argument based on the most facts that actually fit your theory.
Was this 'episode', Watson's words, that has become known as SECO part of a more elaborate investigation that include the NAVA and un-documented 'The Tired Captain' (hence forth know as TIRE)?
We know two involve international intrigue. And with a somewhat military title of 'The Tired Captain', it to could spell international adventure.

So, pick your starting point and prove your argument. Well, at least as far as Watson will let you.