“You will go down?”
“No, my dear fellow you will go down”
--Watson and Holmes totally in context, “The Adventure of the Solitary
Cyclist”
Leigh:
Before I start on a feminist rant,
I'm going to openly remind myself that this was written in another time period
where arranged/forced marriages were commonplace.
Now, on with the story.
The introduction of this story is a bit like Watson bragging, I
think. He says that Holmes was SO busy and they have SO many stories that he
has to pick and choose more than normal when deciding which stories to write
about. I thought this seemed a little out of place and more like Arthur Conan
Doyle saying, "Don't worry, guys, I gots stories to last for YEARS! Holmes
isn't gonna die again any time soon!" I think it was supposed to be a
reassuring nod to readers but felt more like a pompous, "Don't worry, I
got this." That could just be me though.
A young woman is mysteriously contacted by two men after her uncle
dies in South Africa (exotic locale!). She is then hired by one of these men
for a lot more money than she was expecting to teach his daughter music while
the other one is a legitimate creeper and stares at her like he's going to
molest her at any moment, both in the Victorian sense and the present day sense
of the word. She is then followed by a mysterious man on a bicycle whenever she
goes to visit her mother. Holmes is then so busy that he again sends Watson out
to do some investigating and when Watson comes back with what he thinks is very
important information, Holmes tells him he did a shit job. Holmes then goes and
does everything he told Watson he should've done after the fact.
|
"Miss can you describe the cyclist?" "He had bulging eyes, terrible skin and an impossible to place accent." |
So the mystery. This is one that I felt like Holmes was cheating a
lot. The audience didn't get nearly enough information to figure out what was
going on so by the time the conclusion comes around, I was scratching my head
going, "Huuuh?" This one that I've read a couple of times and I never
remember it and I blame it on the fact that the conclusion comes out of left
field. A lot of the conclusion would be left to guesswork if the audience were
the ones solving it. How were we supposed to know there was a secret deal about
who got to marry the young woman? How were we supposed to figure out her dead
uncle left her with a small fortune? Why is her boyfriend mentioned if he never
shows up and is only mentioned in the introduction and in the last paragraph of
the story? I enjoyed this story for the drama of it all but I have to stay from
a mystery aspect, it seemed to fail.
What do you
think? Am I just in a bad mood or are some of my complaints legitimate? Also,
what is with ACD naming his female characters the same thing? This is the
second Violet we've come across and it completely threw me off. I have half of
a completely different email written but what I was talking about happened with
a DIFFERENT Violet.
Austin: I was
also a bit disappointed by this one. I was intrigued when Violet was telling
her story but then once they stopped their huddle and shouted
"BREAK!" it lost my interest.
We've seen Watson explore and detect by himself before, most
famously in The Hound of the Baskerville. In that, through all our blog
entries, we valued the idea that Holmes was serving as a mentor figure
encouraging Watson to use the skills he's learned. Yes Holmes still swoops in
to save the day, but there was respect there that was missing here.
On the Wikipedia page for this entry, it says that the Strand
refused the first draft because Holmes wasn't as involved with the plot. This
could be the cause of the structural issues where Holmes suddenly arrives
because it could have easily been a late edition change. So now I can just
think of Doyle plotting instead of the character having reason for splitting
things up. Oh, I know...he was SO BUSY.
|
"I would ask Mrs. Hudson to go but she couldn't hear me." |
We've discussed
the rise in excitement in this collection, but is this perhaps one of the most
violent stories we've read? We have fistfights and gunshots and all sorts of
stuff that would be ideal for Robert Downey Jr. Is this a case when Doyle was
trying to amp up the action that he severely lost track of the mystery?
Leigh: I hate to
agree with you all the time because a lack of drama can be boring, but the
"BREAK" moment is the perfect moment of when I stopped caring too.
Everything was SO interesting until that point. And it's not like the rest of
the story isn't interesting when you look at the facts, it just wasn't
presented in as intriguing of a manner.
I don't think the additional action is what lost the mystery. You
can have an action packed adventure that surrounds a mystery and it still be a
logical conclusion. I think that this one really needed another editing. It
makes sense now that you've mentioned that Holmes wasn't in it in the first
submission. He does really feel like he was shoehorned in the story. As an
audience member, I would've been completely happy with Watson doing the
investigation by himself. At this point in the canon, I feel like Watson is
completely capable to get 75% of what Sherlock Holmes does in his
investigations. I think this story though was purposefully (re)written so that
Watson was doddering about the countryside and Holmes had to come in to save
the day, which of course upsets me because I love Watson and I hate the
doddering dullard Watson-stereotype.
|
Coming soon.... |
Because Sherlock Holmes was SO BUSY, I would've loved to have like a
side by side story that is an adventure of Holmes and Watson solving the
multiple mysteries at the same time and how they might overlap or not. I think
it could've added some interest there that was lacking in the last 2/3 of the
story. I know everything is written from Watson's POV but it would've been
interesting to have an omnipotent narrator describe the multiple mysteries
going on at the same time. It would at least have given a reason as to why
Holmes was so busy and why he made Watson go do his busy work.
What do you
think, Lugar? Is there any way to save this mystery?
Austin: I think
it's something that we're talked about this entire blog. Focus on what people
care about. For us, it seems that means the characters and the fantastical
elements. When those things are hitting just right, we typically love the
story. We aren't exactly the type of mystery fans that will sketch out every
single step to make sure it all works. If the elements are heightened in a
cohesive way, then we're game.
When things stumble around and it leaves us focusing on the broken
pieces then we have to wonder what's going on. We're fine with someone sending
a snake up a pipe to kill someone if the ride to that conclusion works even
though I'm pretty sure a simple poison would be more effective.
I'd be curious to one day read a proper biography of Arthur Conan
Doyle. I know nothing about his romantic life, but from these stories he
doesn't have the happiest sense of relationships. Mrs. Watson was killed off
without me noticing. Sherlock won't ever be in a proper relationship.
Then--perhaps for the sake of the genre--if a spouse comes to Sherlock Holmes
with some marital issues, it never really ends well. This story was no
exception.
|
Molly and Jim were the happiest couple on the show. |
Anywho, we'll revisit this story again but this time we'll get the
intensity of Jeremy Brett as we revisit his show The Adventures of Sherlock
Holmes with the episode cleverly titled "The Solitary
Cyclist".
Here is Leigh
Montano with the final word....
Leigh: Daisy, Daisy...
|
I'm sorry, Leigh, I'm afraid I can't let you keep quoting films you haven't seen. |