Category: 2017 Blog Post

“Exactly. I fancy the yew alley, though not marked under that name, must stretch along this line, with the moor, as you perceive, upon the right of it. This small clump of buildings here is the hamlet of Grimpen, where our friend Dr Mortimer has his headquarters. Within a radius of five miles there are, as you see, only a very few scattered dwellings. Here is Lafter Hall, which was mentioned in the narrative. There is a house indicated here which may be the residence of the naturalist — Stapleton, if I remember right, was his name. Here are two moorland farmhouses, High Tor and Foulmire. Then fourteen miles away the great convict prison of Princetown. Between and around these scattered points extends the desolate, lifeless moor. This, then, is the stage upon which tragedy has been played, and upon which we may help to play it again.”

 

In viewing Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles through the lens of names, we can glean a great many hints about the type of story being told and the world the story is set in simply from the names Conan Doyle gives to his characters, towns, and buildings. That is, before we learn anything about the particulars of what happens on the moors, the names Conan Doyle uses to set the scene give hints about what’s to come.

 

For example, one of the farmhouses is called Foulmire, and we later hear a great deal about the mire from Stapleton himself in a later chapter. In addition to that, the name Foulmire is very Gothic and in keeping with the tone of the story. Foul means offensive to the senses, and it may also be a Macbeth reference, for Conan Doyle, a well-educated, literary individual, would surely have read Macbeth–and The Hound of the Baskervilles itself has a very similar setting to the Scottish play. The name also echoes of the famous lines of Macbeth, “Fair is foul and foul is fair” could be a hint, as befits a good mystery story, that things are not always as they seem.

 

The other farmhouse is called High Tor, tor meaning a rocky hill, and that makes that house (by name at least) the direct opposite of Foulmire–a mire would be found in a valley, between tors, and the words foul and high can be construed as opposites, in the sense that “foul” is a low-sounding word, and that “high” is much more lofty.

 

Also consider the name of the hamlet–Grimpen—grim meaning, well, grim–dark, foreboding, unwelcoming–and pen meaning a pen, a fenced-in area. A finite space. Pen in this sense is usually used to mean an enclosure for animals–like, say, a certain hound. A pen is also a prison, and there is an actual prison fourteen miles from where the story takes place–Princetown. This establishment has significance in the narrative because we later learn there’s an escaped convict running around on the moors. Also, a ghostly monstrous dog in English folklore is called a grim. So Grimpen is literally a pen for a grim.

I’ll wrap this post up by talking about death-related symbolism, because it appears in two counts here and is rather more heavy handed. First off, yew trees, especially in British literature, are strongly associated with death, often being found in graveyards–not to mention that every part of them is poisonous–so the yew alley could be easily interpreted as an alley of death. The last name I want to touch on is Mortimer–mort meaning death and mer meaning sea. This sinister-sounding name implies that the seemingly helpful Dr. Mortimer may not be as much of an ally as he seems.

In the two very distinct novels “Lady Audley’s Secret” and “The Hound of Baskervilles”, the representation of women, especially in their introduction, is strikingly similar. The narratives of the two stories differ greatly; “Lady Audley’s Secret” tells the story of a man’s plight to figure out the disappearance of his good friend and the true identity of the titular lady, while “The Hound of Baskervilles” follow the famed detective Sherlock Holmes to investigate the supposed supernatural death of a Sir Charles Baskerville through the eyes of Holmes’ friend Dr.Watson. The obvious similarity of the two novels is the investigation of a death, but a subtle similarity that struck me was the description of the female characters. In “Lady Audley’s Secret”, Lucy Graham first is described as having ,”…soft and melting blue eyes; the graceful beauty of that slender throat and drooping head, with its wealth of showering flaxen curls; the low music of that gentle voice; the perfect harmony which pervaded every charm…” (Braddon 12) This very detailed description of Lucy is almost uncomfortable in its tone and specificity. In “The Hound Of Baskerville”, Watson gives a very similar description of Miss Stapleton in which he goes into detail about her skin, hair, face, mouth, and eyes.(Doyle 70) The description of the women focused more on their physical attributes, and this type of narration of the women continue throughout the books. It should also be noted that these physically detailed descriptions both come from men, one being Sir Michael Audley and the other being Dr.Watson. The depiction of the women in both books put primary focus on their physical appearance while the ones of men do not. I think that the image of women in the stories shows how the females characters were meant to serve as something for the male characters to consume rather than be rounded characters.

While reading The Hound of the Baskervilles, I could not help but notice some similarities between it and Lady Audley’s Secret. Specifically, Miss Stapleton struck me as very similar to Lady Audley, both in how she is described and through her actions thus far.

Like Lady Audley, Miss Stapleton is described as very beautiful, and almost “exotic”, as we see from Watson’s narration: “I had heard someone describe her as being a beauty. The woman who approached me was certainly that, and of a most uncommon type…for Stapleton was neutral-tinted, with light hair and grey eyes, while she was darker than any brunette whom I have seen in England – slim, elegant, and tall” (Doyle 70). Watson is taken aback by Miss Stapleton’s beauty, and only becomes more shocked when she urgently tells him to go back to London. She tells him she cannot explain why he must leave, and when her brother comes near, she tells Watson to not speak of this to him. Already we can see there is some secret that Miss Stapleton is hiding, and she does not want Watson, or even her own brother, to know what it is (just like Lady Audley wanted to keep her secret from both Sir Audley as well as Robert). Miss Stapleton also shows she is quite capable of lying, when she gives her brother a fake explanation of what she and Watson were talking about.

Clearly, Miss Stapleton is actively interested in keeping her secret, as we see when she runs to apologize to Watson about the mixup. Watson expresses his doubts as she tries to brush off what she told him earlier: “‘Please forget the words I said, which have no application whatever to you.’ ‘But I can’t forget them, Miss Stapleton…Tell me why it was that you were so eager that Sir Henry should return to London.'” (73). This exchange reminds me of when Lady Audley pays a visit to Robert at the inn. Like Lady Audley with Robert, Miss Stapleton wants to make sure Watson does not know too much, but he is very intent on finding out what she is hiding. This idea of a character keeping secrets hidden behind a veneer of beauty reminds me exactly of Lady Audley.

 

When reading The Hound of the Baskervilles through a gothic literature lens, it becomes very clear that this book shares elements with gothic literature. Based on the video we saw in class, gothic literature contains a variety of different tropes. A couple of these tropes include the uncanny and the supernatural, both of which I found within this novel.
“Dr Mortimer looked strangely at us for an instant, and his voice sank almost to a whisper as he answered: Mr Holmes, they were the footprints of a gigantic hound!”(p.20). The tone and content of this quote resonate with me like that of a campfire scary story or a Scooby Doo episode. Most campfire scary stories and Scooby Doo episodes revolve around an uncanny element or mystery, exactly like many gothic novels. In this case that uncanny element is the gigantic hound.
“Since the tragedy, Mr Holmes, there have come to my ears several incidents which are hard to reconcile with the settled order of Nature”(p.24). This quote brings to attention the concept of supernatural vs. nature. If something cannot be understood as a part the “settled” or known nature, then it must be of supernatural origin. With that logic in mind, the “gigantic hound” must be supernatural until it is proven natural. Just like the uncanny element or mystery in a Scooby Doo episode appears to be supernatural in almost all aspects, until it is discovered that the “insert random Scooby Doo monster” is just a man in a really good costume.
When reading this novel without looking at it through any particular lens, it is obvious that it is a detective novel. The first mention of Sherlock Holmes essentially places this novel immediately within the detective novel genre. The discovery of gothic tropes only add to the novel’s story, thus making it more compelling and interesting.

When looking at The Hound of the Baskervilles through a lens of Lady Audley’s Secret, I realized that both novels include a main character as the “detective”, but more interestingly the characters use different methods.

Robert Audley, from Lady Audley’s Secret and Sherlock Holmes, from The Hound of the Baskervilles both try to uncover the mystery presented to them. They use their resources such as letters and people of interest to ask questions. The interesting difference is that Sherlock Holmes is a well-known detective who knows none of the people is his case personally. While Robert Audley is not an actual detective, and his case involved people with whom he was emotionally attached to.

Sherlock Holmes, being the well-known detective said, “the world if full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes” (Doyle, 36). This quote made me wonder, are things obvious to Sherlock Holmes because he has no emotional tie to the case, or because he is a professional, and experienced detective? Does Robert Audley take a while to realize the obvious in his case because he was emotionally attached to the people in it, or because he wasn’t experienced?

It’s interesting because Sherlock Holmes, being the experienced detective uses the word “obvious” a lot, for example, “obvious conclusion” (Doyle, 4), and “obviously” (Doyle, 5). This made me infer that he uses deductive reasoning as his method to uncover the case, because deductive reasoning points out the general information or what is “obvious” and makes more specific or particular claims later. The word “obvious” infers that these things that Holmes notices are easy to observe, while they might not be for others, “things which nobody by any chance ever observes.” I think Robert Audley fits into that category of “nobody by chance ever observes.” Robert Audley, on the other hand has to use his circumstantial evidence in a chronological order to make a claim or theory (inductive reasoning), “1. I write to Alicia…. 2. Alicia writes…”(Braddon, 104).

I think it takes Robert a long time to realize the culprit in his case because he was emotionally attached to Mr. Talboys, Alicia, Lucy, and Sir Michael. I infer that he didn’t want to believe his evidence, and that his judgment was impaired. On the other hand Holmes has no emotional ties getting in the way, he just has the facts, so his judgment is not impaired and he can notice the “obvious.”

With the arrival of Dr. Mortimer at Detective Sherlock Holmes office as the first scene in The Hound of the Baskervilles, the questions of natural versus supernatural come into action. Dr. Mortimer tells Holmes and his friend/colleague, Dr. Watson, of Sir Charles Baskerville’s death and the mysterious, supernatural hound that is believed to haunt the Baskerville lineage and their estate. Watson and Holmes are informed that the next of kin of is to arrive to Baskerville Hall very soon, but Dr. Mortimer fears it is unsafe for him to do so. Unsure of what to do, he asks for the help of Holmes and Watson to which they agree to take the case.

From what Holmes has been told by Dr. Mortimer, he is not as quick to speculate that Sir Charles Baskerville died at the hands of a supernatural hound. Evident from the beginning of this novel, there is a connection between classism and the question of natural/supernatural. Holmes questions Dr. Mortimer, “and you, a trained man of science, believe it to be supernatural?” (Conan Doyle 24). Holmes thinks that men of a higher class, have had a better education, especially a man like Dr. Mortimer, therefore they must not believe in the supernatural. Their intellect is rooted in logic and what they have learned is the truth. Holmes states “if Dr. Mortimer’s surmise should be correct, and we are dealing with forces outside the ordinary laws of Nature, there is an end of our investigation. But we are bound to exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon this one” (Conan Doyle 29). For him to do his job properly he must consider all other options and examine all other pieces of the story to explain the death of Sir Charles Baskerville was not done by something supernatural.

Further into the novel, Watson moves into Baskerville Hall with Sir Henry. He decides to take a walk around the moor, where Sir Charles had died, and ran into one of the neighbors, Stapleton. Watson and he have a conversation pertaining to Sir Charles death and the mysterious hound. Stapleton adds, “it is extraordinary how credulous the peasants are about here! Any number of them are ready to swear that they have seen such a creature upon the moor” (Conan Doyle 65). What he states parallels Holmes’ idea that belief in the supernatural only belong to common folk and intellectuals are to dismiss the curse. This leaves the reader in a mystery, opening them up to the Gothic tradition of storytelling and who has the power to believe in it.

Conan Doyle, Arthur. The Hound of the Baskervilles. Penguin Group, 2003.

After reading the first eight chapters of Conan Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles, I argue that – with his famous character Sherlock Holmes – Conan Doyle contrasted his own beliefs and convictions about the supernatural. While he was a spiritualist and believer in the supernatural himself, Sherlock Holmes is a strictly logical and scientific person who usually dismisses supernatural explanations for problems.

In Conan Doyle’s novel, the protagonist and detective Sherlock Holmes is represented as a highly rational and logical individual who “balance[s] probabilities and choose[s] the most likely” (Conan Doyle 48). His usual method of investigation includes the close examination of objects or circumstances which then allows him to “reconstruct” (Conan Doyle 8) a person or their behavior.

In The Hound of the Baskervilles specifically, Holmes and his companion Watson are introduced to a case that challenges this mindset of Holmes. As Dr. Mortimer pays a visit to Baker Street and recounts the legend of the ‘Curse of the Baskervilles’ that has allegedly only recently killed Sir Charles Baskerville, Holmes’ first reaction to this story of a murderous “hell-hound” (Conan Doyle 34) is to consider it a “fairy tale[…]” (Conan Doyle 23). Holmes does, however, take on the case and is continuously confronted with ideas about ‘the otherworldly’. Dr. Mortimer, for instance, strongly believes in the myth of the “dreadful apparition” (Conan Doyle 34) that killed Sir Charles Baskerville. To him, the incidents surrounding his friend’s death “are hard to reconcile with the settled order of Nature” (Conan Doyle 34).

This represented binary between the natural and the supernatural seems to be highly relevant when considered in the biographical context that is known about the novel’s author, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Conan Doyle himself was known to have been rather interested in spiritualism during his lifetime. Accordingly, Conan Doyle is said to have been a strong believer in supernatural beings such as fairies and practices such as séances (cf. Davies 20), which led to many critics considering him to have been “gullible” (Davies 20). These beliefs and convictions of Conan Doyle allegedly even resulted in his own “feelings towards the character he had created in Sherlock Holmes [being] famously mixed” (Davies 12).

Knowing this makes it even more interesting to consider why Conan Doyle chose to create a character such as Sherlock Holmes who “confine[s] [his] investigations to this world” (Conan Doyle 34) and who wishes to “exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon” (Conan Doyle 40) the supernatural explanations of Dr. Mortimer.

Finally, what seems most revealing about this observation is that a number of characters that the reader is introduced to in the first eight chapters of The Hound of the Baskervilles is represented as being scientific, educated characters of high intellect: Sherlock Holmes, of course, being the legendary detective; Dr. Watson and Dr. Mortimer, two medical doctors; and Stapleton, a naturalist and former schoolmaster.  Still, the novel suggests that at least one of them – Dr. Mortimer – believes in supernatural causes for Sir Charles’ death. Holmes himself challenges this contradiction by asking him how “[Mortimer], a trained man of science, [can] believe it to be supernatural?” (Conan Doyle 34). In the character of Mortimer – a believer in the supernatural – Conan Doyle therefore successfully creates a foil to his famous detective – the man of science. A final question that arises from this observation is why Conan Doyle chose to contrast his own beliefs and convictions about the supernatural and to thereby highlight the tension between myth and reality.

 

Sources

Conan Doyle, Arthur. The Hound of the Baskervilles. Harpenden: Oldcastle Books, 2013. Print.

Davies, Stuart David, et al. « Introduction ». The Sherlock Holmes Book. London: Dorling Kindersley Ltd, 2015. 10-31. Print.

Treated as a companion by her mistress, in the receipt of the most liberal wages, and with perquisites such as perhaps no lady’s-maid ever had before, it was strange that Phoebe Marks should wish to leave her situation; but it was not the less a fact that she was anxious to exchange all the advantages of Audley Court for the very unpromising prospect which awaited her as the wife of her cousin Luke. (Braddon, 110)

This passage implies the complex relationship between Lady Audley and Pheobe and each of their common/individual interest. And this relationship between them leads us to these questions; What made Lucy so anxious and burdened in her position as an assistant/accomplice to her lady that she wants to give up her benefits of being a maid of wealthy, generous lady as Mrs. Audley? What is Phoebe’s weakness that is seized upon Luke that made her go into an unwanted marriage? What does the ‘unpromising’ prospect of the marriage life with Luke indicate?

Firstly, the existence of huge burden that Phoebe has to bear is evidenced by her explicit and implied practices of running the lady’s errands regarding the secret quest the lady is going through. In the earlier chapter, Phoebe had been to London to run errand that should remain confidential to others except my lady and it seems that she must have been participating in additional works for the quest of lady. And Lady Audley’s referring to a tragic narrative of a beautiful woman who committed crime exposes the fear not only Phoebe but also lady herself even has to bear. It raises questions about what lies in their common fear of being revealed who they are or what they did.

Secondly, regarding the weakness of Phoebe that makes her go through the unwanted marriage, we can guess that it may not matter only to herself but also to the lady. In the later chapter of the book, there is a scene in which Phoebe is reprimanded for her sharing of lady’s secret with Luke. It may explain the fear that Phoebe and lady have in common, which makes up the motivation for cooperation out of necessity.

Finally, I want to explore the possible connotations that the word ‘unpromising’ implies. Given the conservative and women-oppressing environments of the Victorian age, it is very likely that the unpromising aspect/future of Phoebe’s marriage life does not simply mean dissatisfaction, but rather a more critical risk to her life, even to the degree of life-threatening. And it is also possible that Lady Audley herself may have gone through the predicament of unwanted, unsatisfactory, oppressive or threatening marriage before she got married to the ‘sweet’ gentleman like Mr.Audley.

“I do not believe in mandrake, or in blood-stains that no time can efface. I believe rather that we may walk unconsciously in an atmosphere of crime, and breathe none the less freely. I believe that we may look into the smiling face of a murderer, and admire its tranquil beauty” (Braddon 144).

In this passage, Robert makes it pretty clear to Lady Audley what he really thinks about her, and more specifically, what he thinks happened to George Talboys. In a literal sense, he says that George could have been killed by someone you would never expect to be a murderer, and it could have happened in the room you were just in. In reality, he is alluding to Lady Audley; he uses the words “smiling face” and “tranquil beauty”, which have been used throughout the book (or similar variations) as descriptors of Lady Audley. Robert is basically telling Mrs. Audley that he knows she killed George, and that everyone else may have been fooled by her looks, but that he knows better – all the while admitting that he does not currently have the proof to make anything of it.

While Lady Audley keeps a mostly calm, confident demeanor during the conversation, she does seem to get nervous from some of the things Robert says.  When he tells Lady Audley that he has letters from George’s wife, her initial laughter (at his mention of items George had left behind) turns to silence. She then simply asks the question, “Have you ever seen any of the letters written by the late Mrs. Talboys?” Clearly, the idea of George having seen Mrs. Talboys’ writing causes Lady Audley some distress, signaled by her sudden change in behavior. Personally, I have no doubt in my mind that Lady Audley is the same person as Mrs. Talboys, but even as obvious as it seems to me (and Robert), there is not enough evidence for Robert to mount a case against her. He and Lady Audley seem to be at a sort of standstill; she pretends like she knows nothing and acts confident, yet is worried about Robert being able to prove her guilt, while Robert seems to know for sure what the truth is, but is just as of yet unable to find the right evidence or crack Lady Audley’s facade.

“‘Do you remember, Phoebe. . . that French story we read – the story of a beautiful woman who committed some crime – I forget what – in the zenith of her power and loveliness, when all Paris drank to her every night, and when the people ran away from the carriage of the king to flock about hers, and get a peep at her face?’” (Braddon 109)

This passage emphasizes the juxtaposition between beauty and sins, how a woman of such loveliness, with such grand fortune could sink so low. As she recounts the story to Phoebe, Lady Audley emphasizes the woman’s fame, her beauty, and belovedness over the actual crime she committed. She never actually states the woman’s crime, as if her popularity was more important than her wrongdoings. Lucy seems to justify malevolence with beauty and fame; she pities this woman, expressing more sympathy for her loss of followership than concern over her sin.  This tale mirrors her own life story, as she conveys herself as this fresh, youthful, fairy-like woman, while she seems to be hiding a much darker interior.

Nonetheless,  this story seems to reflect Lady Audley’s fears of growing old and losing the support of those around her. Eventually, when her beauty has faded, Lucy will not hold the same power over her followers. As Lucy asks Phoebe, “‘What is to become of me when I grow old?’” she expresses a fear of losing the adoration of her followers after her beauty has faded (Braddon 109); she fears a loss of power, that she will no longer be able to enchant and seduce a crowd with her looks, and that they will inevitably turn on her. The question arises: what is Lady Audley concerned that they will discover? Or, more succinctly, what is Lady Audley’s secret?