Hound of the Baskervilles

Want to read this along with me? This essay is part of The Hound of the Baskervilles, published in 1902. I used the epub version found on Feedbooks.com.

And now, a handful of other interesting points about the novel.

Remember how I mentioned that Lestrade is marginalized and ignored throughout the first part of the canon? He comes back in Hound, and we see where Lestrade gets his canonical longevity. Not only does his appearance here in this widely-known story increase his exposure to the eyes of casual Holmes readers, but also Lestrade is given a lot more room as a character here. He is mentioned as “the best of the professionals,” a far cry from Holmes’ original opinion of him. Some of that may be because Lestrade is now reverential to Holmes, and is noted as learning much from the master detective. As a result, it’s likely that Lestrade has become less aggressive and antagonistic towards Holmes, and this increased Holmes’ opinion of Lestrade. We also get some more details about him, as he is described as a “wiry bulldog” and a “little detective.”

We encounter more phrenology in this story, in what is probably one of my favorite lines in the book:

“I had hardly expected so dolichocephalic a skull or such well-marked supra-orbital development. Would you have any objection to my running my finger along your parietal fissure? A cast of your skull, sir, until the original is available, would be an ornament to any anthropological museum. It is not my intention to be fulsome, but I confess that I covet your skull.”

(Also, for a bit of fun, compare the description in this story of Dr. James Mortimer and the description of Professor James Moriarty in “The Final Problem.” And both do seem to be well-versed in phrenology….)

Doyle continues his trend of apocryphal cases, this time having Holmes refer to “the little affair of the Vatican cameos” and his work for “one of the most revered names in England,” as well as two more in the final chapter. There’s also a reference to a previous case in which Holmes works with Cartright, which shows an interesting narrative component to all of these apocryphal cases – they not only continue to paint a picture of Holmes’ wider career in a world outside of the stories we are reading, but also doubles as a nice way to quickly introduce a minor character into the narrative.

There’s a second instance of someone making a note on their shirt-cuff. The last time was in “The Naval Treaty,” and I talk more about this practice in that essay. We also see another case of brain-fever when Baskerville snaps near the end of the story. We also see another butler as a suspect, but this one is falsely accused (as opposed to the one in “The Musgrave Ritual”). Doyle’s peppering of “gipsys” in the canon continues, this time with a passing reference to Murphy, the horse-dealer. And we have another villain that escapes mortal law, only to be claimed by natural justice (in this case, the moor).

All in all, this is a classic story in the Holmes canon. It hits a lot of key elements for the main characters as well as the canon as a whole. Many of the themes and tropes you see throughout the canon are presented in The Hound of the Baskervilles, so it’s no wonder that it’s often viewed as the archetypal Sherlock Holmes story. I cannot recommend it enough.