Previous
Flashbacks
Part 1, Chapter 3: The Lauriston Garden Mystery
Explanation and Analysis—Holmes vs. Watson:
Throughout A Study in Scarlet, John Watson and Sherlock Holmes act as foils for one another. While both men are intelligent, Holmes possesses uncanny skills of observation and deduction that Watson does not. Watson appears to be more sensitive, describing a “subdued feeling in his heart which the presence of death inspires” and the way his “nerves […] tingled” when seeing a corpse, as well as exercising more tact and humility in his dealings with others than Sherlock does. Watson’s relative cluelessness and emotional sensitivity serve as a foil to Holmes acute analytical skills and aloofness.
In Part 1, Chapter 5, for example, Watson reveals that he is deeply disturbed by the murder of Enoch Drebber, while Holmes appears to regard the case at much more of an emotional remove:
"What's the matter? You're not looking quite yourself. This Brixton Road affair has upset you[,]" [said Sherlock.]
"To tell the truth it has," I said. "I ought to be more case-hardened after my Afghan experiences. I saw my own comrades hacked to pieces at Maiwand without losing my nerve."
"I can understand. There is a mystery about this which stimulates the imagination; where there is no imagination there is no horror. Have you seen the evening paper?"
Related Themes:
Explanation and Analysis—Holmes vs. Hope:
In A Study in Scarlet, Sherlock Holmes and Jefferson Hope are foils for one another. They are represented as possessing many similarities with one key difference: while Holmes is driven by logic and reason, Hope is driven by passion and emotion.
Throughout the novel, Holmes is described as being unusually determined and focused. It is this intense focus that allows him to observe things in crime scenes that other people do not and solve murders that stump other detectives. In Part 1, Chapter 3, Watson, who is observing Holmes as he investigates the scene of Enoch Drebber’s murder with intense focus and meticulousness, compares him to a “foxhound:”
Unlock with LitCharts A+[H]e whipped a tape measure and large round magnifying glass out of his pocket. With these two implements he trotted noiselessly, sometimes stopping, occasionally kneeling, and once lying flat upon his face. So engrossed was he with his occupation that he appeared to have forgotten our presence […] I was irresistibly reminded of a pure-blooded well-trained foxhound as it dashes backward and forward through the covert […] until it comes across the lost scent […]
“They say that genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains,” he remarked with a smile. “It’s a very bad definition, but it does apply to detective work.”
Related Themes:
Part 1, Chapter 5: Our Advertisement Brings a Visitor
Explanation and Analysis—Holmes vs. Watson:
Throughout A Study in Scarlet, John Watson and Sherlock Holmes act as foils for one another. While both men are intelligent, Holmes possesses uncanny skills of observation and deduction that Watson does not. Watson appears to be more sensitive, describing a “subdued feeling in his heart which the presence of death inspires” and the way his “nerves […] tingled” when seeing a corpse, as well as exercising more tact and humility in his dealings with others than Sherlock does. Watson’s relative cluelessness and emotional sensitivity serve as a foil to Holmes acute analytical skills and aloofness.
In Part 1, Chapter 5, for example, Watson reveals that he is deeply disturbed by the murder of Enoch Drebber, while Holmes appears to regard the case at much more of an emotional remove:
Unlock with LitCharts A+"What's the matter? You're not looking quite yourself. This Brixton Road affair has upset you[,]" [said Sherlock.]
"To tell the truth it has," I said. "I ought to be more case-hardened after my Afghan experiences. I saw my own comrades hacked to pieces at Maiwand without losing my nerve."
"I can understand. There is a mystery about this which stimulates the imagination; where there is no imagination there is no horror. Have you seen the evening paper?"
Related Themes:
Part 2, Chapter 5: The Avenging Angels
Explanation and Analysis—Holmes vs. Hope:
In A Study in Scarlet, Sherlock Holmes and Jefferson Hope are foils for one another. They are represented as possessing many similarities with one key difference: while Holmes is driven by logic and reason, Hope is driven by passion and emotion.
Throughout the novel, Holmes is described as being unusually determined and focused. It is this intense focus that allows him to observe things in crime scenes that other people do not and solve murders that stump other detectives. In Part 1, Chapter 3, Watson, who is observing Holmes as he investigates the scene of Enoch Drebber’s murder with intense focus and meticulousness, compares him to a “foxhound:”
Unlock with LitCharts A+[H]e whipped a tape measure and large round magnifying glass out of his pocket. With these two implements he trotted noiselessly, sometimes stopping, occasionally kneeling, and once lying flat upon his face. So engrossed was he with his occupation that he appeared to have forgotten our presence […] I was irresistibly reminded of a pure-blooded well-trained foxhound as it dashes backward and forward through the covert […] until it comes across the lost scent […]
“They say that genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains,” he remarked with a smile. “It’s a very bad definition, but it does apply to detective work.”
Related Themes:
