The Hound of the Baskervilles
Response 3: The Hound of the Baskervilles
First off, I would like to say that this novel was the best story yet considering the length and elaboration of the case. This novel was much easier to understand and read because it explained all the aspects of the case with precise details. In The Hound of the Baskervilles, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle uses the characters, Watson and Sherlock to illuminate his attitude toward superstition and legend.
After Watson comes back from his club, Sherlock claims, “The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes. Where do you think that I have been?” (Doyle 592). When Holmes addresses Watson in this way, the detective gives some awareness to his method of deduction. In essence, Sherlock is capable of both observing and managing more than one details at once. Proving that he is a logical and down-to-earth character. Also, this can suggest that Sherlock can review a scene in his mind without ever going anywhere because how else would he know what Watsons whereabouts are. Doyle uses Sherlocks character as a proxy to us to let the reader understand Doyles point of view toward rationalism versus superstition.
Once Sherlock and Watson have found three “threads” that lead nowhere, again Holmes remarks, “…we hold several threads in our hands, and the odds are that one or other of them guides us to the truth. We may waste time in following the wrong one, but sooner or later we must come upon the right” (Doyle 605). After finding three dead end “threads” that could have potentially solved the case, Holmes does not panic. He instead seems like he is happy that there are a number of different threads. He believes in this way because he knows, from past experience, that humans always leave a trail and that that trail will be eventually found by someone. He also believes