![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Okay. So. The second part of my 'slightly annoyed about Holmes' essay (yes, I'm going to be slightly stubborn about this). This one is on ACD Holmes' interpersonal relations in the original stories.
I feel I should clarify, before I continue, that I'm not necessarily annoyed by the adaptations themselves, though I prefer some over others. It's the fact that people seem to be saying the original was such-and-such a thing in light of the adaptations, when in fact he wasn't. Much as you generally can't really judge canon characters sight-unseen based on fanfic characterisations of them, so too you can't judge the original versions sight-unseen based on the versions seen in adaptations. If you want to tell me the original Holmes was such-and-such, please provide the original stories that prove so, yes?
And in that cause ...
[Again, links to online versions of the stories used, the ones I could find, are provided at the end. Most of them are hosted at Wikisource]
I feel I should clarify, before I continue, that I'm not necessarily annoyed by the adaptations themselves, though I prefer some over others. It's the fact that people seem to be saying the original was such-and-such a thing in light of the adaptations, when in fact he wasn't. Much as you generally can't really judge canon characters sight-unseen based on fanfic characterisations of them, so too you can't judge the original versions sight-unseen based on the versions seen in adaptations. If you want to tell me the original Holmes was such-and-such, please provide the original stories that prove so, yes?
And in that cause ...
[Again, links to online versions of the stories used, the ones I could find, are provided at the end. Most of them are hosted at Wikisource]
ACD Holmes and his Interactions with People, Part I (Clients & General Public):
Alright. I was going to take this in sections based on who Holmes is interacting with, shaking out into Clients & General Public, then John Watson, with a note on the police. But it basically got way too long, so basically this section you get the clients and general public, the quick note on the police, and I'll finish up with Watson in a second post, yes?.
His dealings with the police we'll do here, very quickly. A lot of that was skirted around in the previous essay on Holmes' approach to law and criminality, so for this, I'm just going to give a quick reading list on stories that showcase his interactions with various members of Scotland Yard and the constabulary:
The Adventure of the Norwood Builder (Holmes vs the police on whether a man is innocent or not); The Adventure of the Six Napoleons (actually one of my favourites, the one where you see a faint softening between Holmes and Lestrade); The Adventure of the Abbey Grange (mentioned in the last essay, Holmes' views on duty vs morality in the case of the law, also he's fond of Inspector Hopkins); The Adventure of the Red Circle (Gregson is basically the Holmes version of Inspector Javert, in some ways); The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge (Baynes, the one man to intellectually equal Holmes on the police force, who Holmes honestly congratulates on having gotten one over on him); and The Man with the Twisted Lip (for one of the few upright, honest policemen in the earlier stories).
Now. Back to the main section. I'm just going to make a couple of notes first?
Okay. The thing I've noticed about a lot of the later adaptations is that they generally tend to focus on one particular subset of the canon Holmes' interactions (outside of Watson, who is generally constant). And I tend to think the broad dividing line in adaptations falls according to the genre shift they've taken.
The original canon was ... well. Proto-crime, proto-mystery. Generally, Holmes bears most resemblance to the noir heroes of later eras, the private eyes of early pulp crime. Mostly because, well, he was the private eye of early pulp crime. Genre-wise, his thread goes up through the likes of Sam Spade to Eddie Valiant to Harry Dresden, rather than directly to the CSIs and mentalists of the modern era. Holmes takes clients off the streets, gets called in by the police, gets referals by word of mouth through most layers of society, from the government to foreign dignitaries to society ladies to bankers. Not so much on the lower classes, really, though that could be more an artefact of his era. Point is, his client base is widely varied and his reasons for ending up on particular cases as much so. He's a private investigator. He does everything from murders to missing people to advising people on questionable jobs to finding lost jewellry to taking on arch criminals. Though death and violence usually ending up accompanying those cases for one reason or another, at the outset, six stolen statues are as interesting to him as a body, and he'll advise on the strange hiring practices of country gentlemen as readily as he'll investigate a violent crime.
Adaptations, though, tend to zoom in on particular aspects of his case-load and client base. And they tend to do this depending on the genre they want to fall into. So modern BBC Sherlock mostly gets his cases via the police or the government, because that adaptation is aiming more at modern police procedural with a sideline into government conspiracy, and generally for those you need bodies at the outset. Downey's Holmes, meanwhile, generally gets his cases because arch-criminals come looking for him, because the films took a sidestep into Victorian James Bond, possibly by way of From Hell. Downey's Holmes essentially gets his cases from the criminals themselves.
And that is important for the adaptations' interpretations of Holmes' interpersonal interactions for one simple reason: it decides in advance what kind of people we get to see him deal with, and how. What BBC Sherlock is picking up on is mostly Holmes' at times belligerant and/or strained relationship with Scotland Yard or the local constabularies. What Downey Holmes is picking up is Holmes' relationship with criminals like Moriarty. Both of them add in the government via Mycroft, because Mycroft is handy like that.
And what both of them are generally missing, and what allows both of them to be more visibly manic and erratic and, to be frank, outright rude, is the stream of normal clients that Holmes got through his front door. The victims, not the police or the criminals. The normal people Holmes dealt with on a regular basis, who were often confused, or afraid, or in some desperate trouble. The people who came to Holmes looking for someone to help them.
Being perfectly honest, how many normal, off-the-street clients would Downey's Holmes manage to keep if he welcomed them looking like a shambling, sleep-deprived bear and inviting them to come into a room that looks a cross between a circus tent and a tornado zone? (I know 221B was usually cluttered and smelling of chemicals, but you could theoretically sit down without impaling yourself in the original). How many would BBC Sherlock manage to keep when his general reactions to most people, on meeting them, is 'be interesting or piss off, and for gods sake stop blithering'? Would Violet Hunter have come to either of them? Mrs Dobney? Helen Stoner? (We'll leave aside for a second ACD Holmes' tendancy to acquire young, female clients in distress - again, artefact of genre, really). ACD Holmes got a lot of cases by essentially word of mouth, but he kept them because in general he knew how to handle clients tactfully within the strictures of Victorian society.
Which is not to say that neither of the adaptations' Holmeses don't get clients that way. We just don't usually see it. And, um. I can't remember which episode it's in, but the parade of potential clients BBC Sherlock tells to piss off because they're 'boring'? Yeah, that ... Ah. Marked difference, there.
Anyway. Getting slightly back on track. The genre shifts between original and adaptations, with the knock-on effects for what kind of people we get to see Holmes interact with, seem to me to have a visible effect on that Holmes' style of interpersonal reactions. But I think there are ... some acute personal differences, too. So. Moving on to look at ACD Holmes, and how he interacts with people.
Holmes with Clients and the General Public:
How does ACD Holmes deal with the normal people involved in his cases? I'm going to dwell a little more on this one, since it's the one usually left out of adaptations, and shows much more of his outlook than many.
Okay. Quick list of short stories for reference: The Man with the Twisted Lip; The Red-Headed League; The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet; The Adventure of the Copper Beeches; The Adventure of the Noble Bachelor ... Okay, actually the entirety of the first collection: The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, you get a pretty consistent look at his early client list there. Hmm. Later personal clients were often by referal or letter (see The Disappearance of Lady Francis Carfax, also The Problem of Thor Bridge). The most famous walk-in is probably Dr James Mortimer of Baskerville. A couple of cases he actually got through Watson, as in The Adventure of the Engineer's Thumb.
Just a quick overview of the initial interviews, then. Holmes is, generally, polite and gentle with almost all of his clients. At least initially - he may get snippy further into the interviews if he finds the person offensive (see Noble Bachelor, Holmes does NOT like people acting like they are gracing him with their presence). When faced with people who are afraid or badly agitated, Holmes moves to calm them and reassure them. InThe Adventure of the Speckled Band the young lady is shivering with terror, and Holmes offers her a cup of coffee, tells her gently not to be afraid, pats at her arm. When she tells him her story is mostly supposition and no real evidence, he tells her he's listening anyway. In The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet, a man comes rushing in in such a paroxysm of despair that he starts physically beating his head against a wall. Holmes and Watson pull him away, then Holmes "pushed him down into the easy-chair, and, sitting beside him, patted his hand, and chatted with him in the easy, soothing tones which he knew so well how to employ". (Side note, ACD Holmes was a lot more easy with physical contact than many later versions. Partly period values, I suspect).
In most cases when people come to him for help, Holmes immediately moves to give the impression both that he can, and that he is willing to. He doesn't dismiss them, they don't have to pass a test or prove themselves interesting to be allowed in the door. Whether or not he ends up taking the case later, for that first moment when they come in needing someone to help them, Holmes is always welcoming. They get to make their case, and then he usually tells them up front whether or not he can do anything about it.
And those cases, as I stated above, are very varied. They don't require a murder to interest him. A theft will do just as well, or strange occurances that are making you nervous and/or afraid. One young woman came in asking him to advise her whether to take a job or not, since she had no relatives to ask (The Adventure of the Copper Beeches). Holmes gave her his advice, and since she had determined to take the job regardless, told her that if she ran into trouble at said job, to telegram him and he would come to help. Generally, Holmes is willing to listen to most things, even if he isn't willing/able to act on all of them. (I will say, he's much more likely to do this if the client in question is a young woman. But then, young women in Victorian society often didn't have that many places to go, so the fact that Holmes was willing to stand for them even on seemingly silly issues was probably why he got so many clients in that quarter).
Which is not to say that Holmes is incapable of being mean to a client. In The Red-Headed League, Holmes basically finds Mr Wilson's story so amusing he's literally wriggling in his chair, and at the finish does actually laugh in the man's face. Watson along with him. Mr Wilson was both proud and very guillible, having basically fallen for quite an obvious scam. Of course, his story leads them onto quite an important case (bank robbery in progress), and Holmes does tell him he'll look into it, but still. Holmes most certainly does have his mean moments. But they are, in general, only moments. Not the entirety of his interactions.
He also has moments where it's very obvious that it's the case he's interested in, sometimes to the detriment of the client. For example, in The Adventure of the Norwood Builder, when MacFarlane bursts out with "For Heaven's sake don't abandon me, Mr Holmes! If they should come to arrest me before I have finished my story, make them give me time so that I may tell you the whole truth." Holmes reacts with: "Arrest you! This is really most grati-- most interesting. On what charge do you expect to be arrested?" ... Tactful, Holmes. Very tactful. 'Gratifying' bit of excitement though it may be. *shakes head* Mind you, he does curtail it mostly in time, so there's that.
And he does have a slight tendancy to swindle people out of things. In The Adventure of the Six Napoleons, Holmes gave a man ten pounds to buy the last bust off him, which the man, being honest, tried to turn down because he'd paid much less for it. Holmes said no, he'd go ahead with the ten pounds, just sign this piece of paper saying I have all rights to the bust, will you? Which the man does, and wanders off thinking Holmes is a capital fellow. What Holmes knew, which the man didn't, was that the bust contained the freaking black pearl of the Borgias, worth a fortune, which he had just quite neatly swindled your man out of. Now, arguably, the man would never have known, and the pearl would have been lost for however long it took him to knock the bust off the mantlepiece by accident or something, but basically the man had been sitting on a fortune, Holmes never told him, and Holmes quietly swindled him out of it. Which is ... not the most gallant behaviour, really. Holmes can, most definitely, be an utter dick. Just not a rude one, or generally an unkind one. *smiles crookedly*
Anyway. Back on track. In general, Holmes doesn't judge people for what brings them to him. He doesn't casually refuse them, mostly listens to them regardless of their trouble, and often extends small courtesies and offers of help even if the case isn't a case, or isn't something he can act on.
He doesn't usually mock people for the substance of their fears, either: in Baskerville, when Mortimer offers the belief that the Hound is supernatural, all Holmes says is: "I have hitherto confined my investigations to this world. In a modest way I have combated evil, but to take on the Father of Evil himself would, perhaps, be too ambitious a task. Yet you must admit the footprint is material". He doesn't go 'you are a blithering idiot for believing in a ghost hound', he goes 'ghost hounds are not my specialty, let's stick with the material parts'. (Mind you, in The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire, later on, Holmes has a small rant at Watson about not taking the supernatural seriously, honestly, he can't be having with that sort of thing. So he does believe the supernatural is generally balderdash. He just doesn't gripe about it in front of clients without proof to the contrary).
Once Holmes is on a case, of course, he tends to be a lot more 'hurry up, hurry up, we need to figure this out'. He values his investigation over quite a few social niceties, though not usually to the extent that he gets kicked out of places (counter-productive). But almost all interviews with people while on cases follow mostly the same pattern, unless he has reason to suspect that the person in question is in some way involved in or trying to hide the crime.
Just for consistent examples, two pretty good early case studies of how Holmes deals with clients and innocents of his cases are The Man with the Twisted Lip and The Adventure of the Yellow Face. In the former, Holmes has to tell his client that he has failed to find her husband, and suspects that the man may be dead. He's not happy about this, he's grave and gentle about it, and when she drops a small bombshell in the form of a letter that proves her husband might, in fact, still be alive, it's ... well, one of the most unfeigned reactions we ever get from him, catapulting out of the chair in shock and some excitement. In the latter story, Holmes is wrong about his conclusions of the case, and is proved so when they burst into the cottage to see what the woman is hiding, perhaps her blackmailer, and find instead ... a child. More pertinently, a mixed-race child from a previous relationship, that the woman has been hiding from her husband for fear he'll reject her. What follows is possibly the most heart-warming ending in the canon, and Holmes reaction to it is happiness, humour and satisfaction, and a request to Watson to remind him of the case should he ever start getting on his high horse about how he's right and everyone else is wrong.
Holmes is just basically not, generally speaking, a rude or unkind man, though he can be snippy, he can be borderline violent when his buttons are pushed, and he can be relentless to the point of exclusion. Mostly this is pointed at the criminals, though, and those who are concealing them. It's almost never pointed at the victims, the clients or the innocents involved along the way. Holmes doesn't disdain people. He simply has other priorities than dealing with them, usually along the lines of keeping himself from being bored. But he doesn't treat them ill, he doesn't generally look down on them for the troubles they get into, and he doesn't value being right over the people put in front of him.
Misanthrope? Not really, I think. More an aloof, rather arrogant man who craves intellectual stimulation more than he does company, outside of certain individuals. Holmes doesn't hate people, or think them useless. He never did. He just doesn't really bother with them too much beyond what's pertinent to the case at hand, or in the cases of rare individuals he wants to keep.
Continued in Part II: John Watson
Links to Pertinent Stories:
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (includes most of the first stories mentioned at the top)
The Adventure of the Yellow Face
The Adventure of the Norwood Builder
The Adventure of the Six Napoleons
The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire
Baskerville, I think, you'll have to look up on your own -_-;
Alright. I was going to take this in sections based on who Holmes is interacting with, shaking out into Clients & General Public, then John Watson, with a note on the police. But it basically got way too long, so basically this section you get the clients and general public, the quick note on the police, and I'll finish up with Watson in a second post, yes?.
His dealings with the police we'll do here, very quickly. A lot of that was skirted around in the previous essay on Holmes' approach to law and criminality, so for this, I'm just going to give a quick reading list on stories that showcase his interactions with various members of Scotland Yard and the constabulary:
The Adventure of the Norwood Builder (Holmes vs the police on whether a man is innocent or not); The Adventure of the Six Napoleons (actually one of my favourites, the one where you see a faint softening between Holmes and Lestrade); The Adventure of the Abbey Grange (mentioned in the last essay, Holmes' views on duty vs morality in the case of the law, also he's fond of Inspector Hopkins); The Adventure of the Red Circle (Gregson is basically the Holmes version of Inspector Javert, in some ways); The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge (Baynes, the one man to intellectually equal Holmes on the police force, who Holmes honestly congratulates on having gotten one over on him); and The Man with the Twisted Lip (for one of the few upright, honest policemen in the earlier stories).
Now. Back to the main section. I'm just going to make a couple of notes first?
Okay. The thing I've noticed about a lot of the later adaptations is that they generally tend to focus on one particular subset of the canon Holmes' interactions (outside of Watson, who is generally constant). And I tend to think the broad dividing line in adaptations falls according to the genre shift they've taken.
The original canon was ... well. Proto-crime, proto-mystery. Generally, Holmes bears most resemblance to the noir heroes of later eras, the private eyes of early pulp crime. Mostly because, well, he was the private eye of early pulp crime. Genre-wise, his thread goes up through the likes of Sam Spade to Eddie Valiant to Harry Dresden, rather than directly to the CSIs and mentalists of the modern era. Holmes takes clients off the streets, gets called in by the police, gets referals by word of mouth through most layers of society, from the government to foreign dignitaries to society ladies to bankers. Not so much on the lower classes, really, though that could be more an artefact of his era. Point is, his client base is widely varied and his reasons for ending up on particular cases as much so. He's a private investigator. He does everything from murders to missing people to advising people on questionable jobs to finding lost jewellry to taking on arch criminals. Though death and violence usually ending up accompanying those cases for one reason or another, at the outset, six stolen statues are as interesting to him as a body, and he'll advise on the strange hiring practices of country gentlemen as readily as he'll investigate a violent crime.
Adaptations, though, tend to zoom in on particular aspects of his case-load and client base. And they tend to do this depending on the genre they want to fall into. So modern BBC Sherlock mostly gets his cases via the police or the government, because that adaptation is aiming more at modern police procedural with a sideline into government conspiracy, and generally for those you need bodies at the outset. Downey's Holmes, meanwhile, generally gets his cases because arch-criminals come looking for him, because the films took a sidestep into Victorian James Bond, possibly by way of From Hell. Downey's Holmes essentially gets his cases from the criminals themselves.
And that is important for the adaptations' interpretations of Holmes' interpersonal interactions for one simple reason: it decides in advance what kind of people we get to see him deal with, and how. What BBC Sherlock is picking up on is mostly Holmes' at times belligerant and/or strained relationship with Scotland Yard or the local constabularies. What Downey Holmes is picking up is Holmes' relationship with criminals like Moriarty. Both of them add in the government via Mycroft, because Mycroft is handy like that.
And what both of them are generally missing, and what allows both of them to be more visibly manic and erratic and, to be frank, outright rude, is the stream of normal clients that Holmes got through his front door. The victims, not the police or the criminals. The normal people Holmes dealt with on a regular basis, who were often confused, or afraid, or in some desperate trouble. The people who came to Holmes looking for someone to help them.
Being perfectly honest, how many normal, off-the-street clients would Downey's Holmes manage to keep if he welcomed them looking like a shambling, sleep-deprived bear and inviting them to come into a room that looks a cross between a circus tent and a tornado zone? (I know 221B was usually cluttered and smelling of chemicals, but you could theoretically sit down without impaling yourself in the original). How many would BBC Sherlock manage to keep when his general reactions to most people, on meeting them, is 'be interesting or piss off, and for gods sake stop blithering'? Would Violet Hunter have come to either of them? Mrs Dobney? Helen Stoner? (We'll leave aside for a second ACD Holmes' tendancy to acquire young, female clients in distress - again, artefact of genre, really). ACD Holmes got a lot of cases by essentially word of mouth, but he kept them because in general he knew how to handle clients tactfully within the strictures of Victorian society.
Which is not to say that neither of the adaptations' Holmeses don't get clients that way. We just don't usually see it. And, um. I can't remember which episode it's in, but the parade of potential clients BBC Sherlock tells to piss off because they're 'boring'? Yeah, that ... Ah. Marked difference, there.
Anyway. Getting slightly back on track. The genre shifts between original and adaptations, with the knock-on effects for what kind of people we get to see Holmes interact with, seem to me to have a visible effect on that Holmes' style of interpersonal reactions. But I think there are ... some acute personal differences, too. So. Moving on to look at ACD Holmes, and how he interacts with people.
Holmes with Clients and the General Public:
How does ACD Holmes deal with the normal people involved in his cases? I'm going to dwell a little more on this one, since it's the one usually left out of adaptations, and shows much more of his outlook than many.
Okay. Quick list of short stories for reference: The Man with the Twisted Lip; The Red-Headed League; The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet; The Adventure of the Copper Beeches; The Adventure of the Noble Bachelor ... Okay, actually the entirety of the first collection: The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, you get a pretty consistent look at his early client list there. Hmm. Later personal clients were often by referal or letter (see The Disappearance of Lady Francis Carfax, also The Problem of Thor Bridge). The most famous walk-in is probably Dr James Mortimer of Baskerville. A couple of cases he actually got through Watson, as in The Adventure of the Engineer's Thumb.
Just a quick overview of the initial interviews, then. Holmes is, generally, polite and gentle with almost all of his clients. At least initially - he may get snippy further into the interviews if he finds the person offensive (see Noble Bachelor, Holmes does NOT like people acting like they are gracing him with their presence). When faced with people who are afraid or badly agitated, Holmes moves to calm them and reassure them. InThe Adventure of the Speckled Band the young lady is shivering with terror, and Holmes offers her a cup of coffee, tells her gently not to be afraid, pats at her arm. When she tells him her story is mostly supposition and no real evidence, he tells her he's listening anyway. In The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet, a man comes rushing in in such a paroxysm of despair that he starts physically beating his head against a wall. Holmes and Watson pull him away, then Holmes "pushed him down into the easy-chair, and, sitting beside him, patted his hand, and chatted with him in the easy, soothing tones which he knew so well how to employ". (Side note, ACD Holmes was a lot more easy with physical contact than many later versions. Partly period values, I suspect).
In most cases when people come to him for help, Holmes immediately moves to give the impression both that he can, and that he is willing to. He doesn't dismiss them, they don't have to pass a test or prove themselves interesting to be allowed in the door. Whether or not he ends up taking the case later, for that first moment when they come in needing someone to help them, Holmes is always welcoming. They get to make their case, and then he usually tells them up front whether or not he can do anything about it.
And those cases, as I stated above, are very varied. They don't require a murder to interest him. A theft will do just as well, or strange occurances that are making you nervous and/or afraid. One young woman came in asking him to advise her whether to take a job or not, since she had no relatives to ask (The Adventure of the Copper Beeches). Holmes gave her his advice, and since she had determined to take the job regardless, told her that if she ran into trouble at said job, to telegram him and he would come to help. Generally, Holmes is willing to listen to most things, even if he isn't willing/able to act on all of them. (I will say, he's much more likely to do this if the client in question is a young woman. But then, young women in Victorian society often didn't have that many places to go, so the fact that Holmes was willing to stand for them even on seemingly silly issues was probably why he got so many clients in that quarter).
Which is not to say that Holmes is incapable of being mean to a client. In The Red-Headed League, Holmes basically finds Mr Wilson's story so amusing he's literally wriggling in his chair, and at the finish does actually laugh in the man's face. Watson along with him. Mr Wilson was both proud and very guillible, having basically fallen for quite an obvious scam. Of course, his story leads them onto quite an important case (bank robbery in progress), and Holmes does tell him he'll look into it, but still. Holmes most certainly does have his mean moments. But they are, in general, only moments. Not the entirety of his interactions.
He also has moments where it's very obvious that it's the case he's interested in, sometimes to the detriment of the client. For example, in The Adventure of the Norwood Builder, when MacFarlane bursts out with "For Heaven's sake don't abandon me, Mr Holmes! If they should come to arrest me before I have finished my story, make them give me time so that I may tell you the whole truth." Holmes reacts with: "Arrest you! This is really most grati-- most interesting. On what charge do you expect to be arrested?" ... Tactful, Holmes. Very tactful. 'Gratifying' bit of excitement though it may be. *shakes head* Mind you, he does curtail it mostly in time, so there's that.
And he does have a slight tendancy to swindle people out of things. In The Adventure of the Six Napoleons, Holmes gave a man ten pounds to buy the last bust off him, which the man, being honest, tried to turn down because he'd paid much less for it. Holmes said no, he'd go ahead with the ten pounds, just sign this piece of paper saying I have all rights to the bust, will you? Which the man does, and wanders off thinking Holmes is a capital fellow. What Holmes knew, which the man didn't, was that the bust contained the freaking black pearl of the Borgias, worth a fortune, which he had just quite neatly swindled your man out of. Now, arguably, the man would never have known, and the pearl would have been lost for however long it took him to knock the bust off the mantlepiece by accident or something, but basically the man had been sitting on a fortune, Holmes never told him, and Holmes quietly swindled him out of it. Which is ... not the most gallant behaviour, really. Holmes can, most definitely, be an utter dick. Just not a rude one, or generally an unkind one. *smiles crookedly*
Anyway. Back on track. In general, Holmes doesn't judge people for what brings them to him. He doesn't casually refuse them, mostly listens to them regardless of their trouble, and often extends small courtesies and offers of help even if the case isn't a case, or isn't something he can act on.
He doesn't usually mock people for the substance of their fears, either: in Baskerville, when Mortimer offers the belief that the Hound is supernatural, all Holmes says is: "I have hitherto confined my investigations to this world. In a modest way I have combated evil, but to take on the Father of Evil himself would, perhaps, be too ambitious a task. Yet you must admit the footprint is material". He doesn't go 'you are a blithering idiot for believing in a ghost hound', he goes 'ghost hounds are not my specialty, let's stick with the material parts'. (Mind you, in The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire, later on, Holmes has a small rant at Watson about not taking the supernatural seriously, honestly, he can't be having with that sort of thing. So he does believe the supernatural is generally balderdash. He just doesn't gripe about it in front of clients without proof to the contrary).
Once Holmes is on a case, of course, he tends to be a lot more 'hurry up, hurry up, we need to figure this out'. He values his investigation over quite a few social niceties, though not usually to the extent that he gets kicked out of places (counter-productive). But almost all interviews with people while on cases follow mostly the same pattern, unless he has reason to suspect that the person in question is in some way involved in or trying to hide the crime.
Just for consistent examples, two pretty good early case studies of how Holmes deals with clients and innocents of his cases are The Man with the Twisted Lip and The Adventure of the Yellow Face. In the former, Holmes has to tell his client that he has failed to find her husband, and suspects that the man may be dead. He's not happy about this, he's grave and gentle about it, and when she drops a small bombshell in the form of a letter that proves her husband might, in fact, still be alive, it's ... well, one of the most unfeigned reactions we ever get from him, catapulting out of the chair in shock and some excitement. In the latter story, Holmes is wrong about his conclusions of the case, and is proved so when they burst into the cottage to see what the woman is hiding, perhaps her blackmailer, and find instead ... a child. More pertinently, a mixed-race child from a previous relationship, that the woman has been hiding from her husband for fear he'll reject her. What follows is possibly the most heart-warming ending in the canon, and Holmes reaction to it is happiness, humour and satisfaction, and a request to Watson to remind him of the case should he ever start getting on his high horse about how he's right and everyone else is wrong.
Holmes is just basically not, generally speaking, a rude or unkind man, though he can be snippy, he can be borderline violent when his buttons are pushed, and he can be relentless to the point of exclusion. Mostly this is pointed at the criminals, though, and those who are concealing them. It's almost never pointed at the victims, the clients or the innocents involved along the way. Holmes doesn't disdain people. He simply has other priorities than dealing with them, usually along the lines of keeping himself from being bored. But he doesn't treat them ill, he doesn't generally look down on them for the troubles they get into, and he doesn't value being right over the people put in front of him.
Misanthrope? Not really, I think. More an aloof, rather arrogant man who craves intellectual stimulation more than he does company, outside of certain individuals. Holmes doesn't hate people, or think them useless. He never did. He just doesn't really bother with them too much beyond what's pertinent to the case at hand, or in the cases of rare individuals he wants to keep.
Continued in Part II: John Watson
Links to Pertinent Stories:
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (includes most of the first stories mentioned at the top)
The Adventure of the Yellow Face
The Adventure of the Norwood Builder
The Adventure of the Six Napoleons
The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire
Baskerville, I think, you'll have to look up on your own -_-;
Tags: