After this Sherlock Holmes had come to a conclusion but didn’t tell Helen or Watson what it was, instead he asked whether Helen could stay in her room (as she was staying in her sisters room as there was building work going on in hers) without notifying Roylott and whether Holmes and Watson could stay in her room for a night to prove Holmes’ theory.
That night Holmes did prove his theory as a swamp adder, the deadliest snake in India, came through the vent and slithered down the bell rope but Holmes hit it away and it went back through the vent and following that there was a horrible scream as Roylott had been bitten by the snake, he died shortly afterwards.
It turned out that Roylott would lose a lot of money if Helen got married as that was what was stated in Helen and Julia’s mum died so that is why Roylott killed Julia when she was about to get married and tried to kill Helen when she was in the same situation.
The story was based on an article which was printed in ‘Casell;s Saturday Journal’ Published in 1891’ about a man who stayed with a Portuguese merchant and was woken to hear a slight creaking noise and noticed a boa constrictor slithering down his wall
Sherlock Holmes was very clever by introducing a few characters quite mysteriously so we may think that the murderer was someone other than Dr Roylott. The first of these were the gypsies who I was first suspicious about them when Watson refers to the speckled band (Julia’s last words) and accounts that gypsies have spotted head-scarves on. The other characters I was suspicious of were the baboon and cheetah which is kept in the garden by Roylott. Helen seemed very scared of them and she locked her doors and windows to keep them out so they were obviously quite dangerous.
The first character I will analyse is Watson, the person who is written to be telling the story. Watson seems to really respect Holmes and almost be in awe of him. He also seems to know him quite well at one point referring to the case “You would, I am sure, wish to follow it from the outset” the words I am sure seem to show he has an understanding of him. I think also that Watson feels privileged to be with Holmes and doesn’t mind being bossed around by Sherlock Holmes.
Personally I don’t like Holmes as he comes off to me as an arrogant, self-absorbed person. When Roylott storms in and compares him to the police Holmes says "Fancy his having the insolence to confound me with the official detective force” Here he is saying that he is so much better than the police force and that he is stupid for comparing him to it. He is also very calm and not easily surprised as shown again when Roylott storms in, Sherlock answers him “When you go out close the door, for there is a decided draught."
He completely ignores the fact that Roylott is very angry,
Then there is Dr Roylott who is described as “indulging in ferocious quarrels.” , having a ”Violence of temper approaching to mania” , being the “ Terror of the village” and “Absolutely uncontrollable in his anger” Helen told Holmes of how he threw the local blacksmith into a stream, Roylott was portrayed as a very dangerous man. Conan Doyle wrote him well by building up a hate towards him that by the end when he died we have no sympathy for him just like Holmes.
Lastly there is Helen Stoner who is petrified of Roylott and what she thought was impending death. When she arrives at Holmes’ residence she was shaking and when Holmes asked whether she was cold she replied "It is not cold which makes me shiver," "It is fear, Mr. Holmes. It is terror." She is very open with Holmes as I think she is really confused and just wants to know what happened to her sister as when Holmes says that he has a theory Helen gets very angry because he won’t tell her.
Sherlock Holmes is very good at maintaining interest and creating suspence mainly because he is very good with the language he chooses. Firstly Conan Doyle loves to use personification, stuff like “It was a wild night”, or “gathering darkness” this works as it adds a more personal feeling by writing actions or feelings which happens to us and linking them with objects.
He also uses mysteriousness about objects, animals or people just to get us hooked and we want to know more about it and it makes many questions in our heads which we want answered and we try to guess only to be surprised by the final twists and turns in the plot.
When Conan Doyle sets the scene he uses many feelings and adjectives describing the place.
“A moment later we were out on the dark road, a chill wind blowing in our faces, and one yellow light twinkling in front of us through the gloom to guide us on our sombre errand.
There was little difficulty in entering the grounds, for unrepaired breaches gaped in the old park wall.”
This creates strong images in our head by using words like gaped and sombre with each individual word adds a little piece of the picture. Conan Doyle also adds strength to the picture by using strong versions of words like boomed and wild instead of weak words like called or rough.
My personal response to the book is that I didn’t really enjoy the plot of the story but the way that Conan Doyle writes is amazing and it is blatant why he is so highly valued as a writer. I also enjoyed the way he described the settings and characters and used red herrings to have a big surprise twist at the end which was very thrilling reading
