Roylott is Helen’s stepfather. Roylott is an aggressive, violent character who threatens Holmes by bending his poker. Roylott is the prime suspect in the story for the reader, because the death of his stepdaughters would mean he would receive their inheritance.
Throughout the story, Conan-Doyle gives several clues as to the outcome of the mystery.
Firstly, when Helen is telling her story from the beginning, the reader learns that Roylott, who would inherit an amount of money in the case of the two sisters’ deaths, is a short-tempered, dangerous man who has a history of violence: “There was a series of disgraceful quarrels and brawls with anyone giving him the least offence”. These clues make Roylott the prime suspect for the death of Julia Stoner.
Secondly, although it leaves many questions unanswered, Helen reveals that Julia’s last words were: “Helen! It was the band! The Speckled band!”. It turns out that she was describing the snake that bit her.
Finally, there are several important clues given in Helen’s bedroom, next to Roylott’s room, before the plot is unfolded. Above Helen’s bed, which is fixed to the floor, is a bell rope that does not work, and a ventilator. The ventilator is in a very strange place: the dividing wall between the two rooms. It turns out that these features were to allow the snake to get to Helen.
Such clues were intended to intrigue the reader and hint to the reader, giving them a chance to work the mystery out for themselves. These clues are typical of the mystery genre.
There are also several red herrings in the story, for example, the gypsies living in the grounds: “It must have been those wretched gypsies in the plantation”. These points are irrelevant but raise questions in the mind of the reader, making them want to read on.
Conan-Doyle also uses tension to keep the reader interested. When Holmes and Watson are waiting for the snake to arrive in Helen’s room, they are in darkness and speak in whispers. Holmes makes it clear to Watson that they are in considerable danger and must not get caught. Conan-Doyle also uses language techniques such as shorter sentences to achieve this tension.
At the end of the story, as was common in stories of this genre, Holmes gives an explanation of the crime for the benefit of the reader.
‘The Devil’s Foot’ is similar to ‘The Speckled Band’ in that from the start there is a character that we have reason to suspect: Mortimer. At first, Mortimer does not seem to be as vicious an enemy as Roylott, as was common in the time the story was written, but several clues unearthed by Holmes point the finger at him. The murder in this case is also similar to the murder in ‘The Speckled Band’. It is a very horrific and mysterious murder that some in the story believe to be of a supernatural nature. Murders like this were often present in stories of this time and genre and were designed to fascinate and shock the reader. Holmes, however, says: “if it is beyond this world then it is certainly beyond me”. This makes the reader believe that there must be a logical or scientific explanation.
The crime is again solved by Holmes, who solves the mystery by noticing small clues and gathering information, in this case, noticing the link of combustible powder between the two rooms in which the murders took place. To support his idea of this powder being the cause of the deaths, Holmes puts his life on the line and tries it on himself. This eccentricity and willingness to go so far to solve a crime makes Holmes all the more interesting and unusual to the reader.
Another similarity reader is left guessing. As it turns out, the murderer of Brenda Tregennis was in fact Mortimer. Therefore, Leon Sterndale, the famous hunter, in turn murdered Mortimer. His motive was that he was in love with Brenda. Because of this ‘good reason’ to murder Mortimer, Holmes lets Sterndale go back to Africa: “Go and do the other half” (of his work in Africa) “I at least am not prepared to prevent you”. This makes the reader impressed by Holmes’ rebellious attitude towards the law when the crime is for the greater good.
The last story we have studied is ‘The Final Problem’. As the name suggests, there is an air of finality about the whole story, which keeps the reader reading to find out why this is.
The main Characters in this story are Holmes, Watson and Professor Moriarty.
Moriarty, the character introduced to us for the first time in this story, is described by Holmes as “The Napoleon of Crime”. He is the man responsible for all the organised crime in London and is one of the most intelligent people in the city, even, perhaps, a match for Holmes. Despite and makes them want to read on. Watson, when he asks if Holmes is afraid of something, receives the reply: “Well, I am. Of air-guns. I think that you know me well enough to understand that I am by no means a nervous man. At the same time it is stupidity rather than courage to refuse to recognise danger when it is close upon you”.
After hurriedly arranging with Watson to meet him on a train to the continent the following morning, Holmes leaves in a manner which again suggests he is in a certain amount of danger, out of the back door and then “clambering over the garden wall which leads into Mortimer street”. The manner of Holmes arrival and departure, his eagerness to stay out of sight, and his plan to flee to the continent together effectively create a tense atmosphere, which carries on for the rest of the story.
The reader’s fascination and admiration of Holmes is added to when, after Watson has followed Holmes’ instructions and boarded the train, the “old Italian priest” in Watson’s compartment turns out to be Holmes in disguise.
The tense atmosphere then continues, as Holmes and Watson realise they narrowly escaped being caught by Moriarty himself, who turns up at the station. Holmes correctly predicts that Moriarty would engage a special engine to catch Holmes. Consequently, Holmes and Watson decide to go across country to Switzerland.
When Holmes learns that his plan for Moriarty to be arrested has failed, it again becomes starkly evident that Holmes is in great danger. So much danger, that he suggests that Watson, his faithful companion, should return to England: “I think that you had better return to England, Watson, because you will find me a dangerous companion now. This man's occupation is gone. He is lost if he returns to London. If I read his character right he will devote his whole energies to revenging himself upon me. He said as much in our short interview, and I fancy that he meant it”. This confirms the reader’s suspicions that the chase will come to a climax resulting in the death of either Holmes or Moriarty, or both.
The choice of this country for the climax of the tense chase will have appealed greatly to readers at this time. The readers would have been fascinated by the images put into their heads of the dramatic landscape of Switzerland. Many people would never have visited the places in the story, which makes it all the more interesting.
Once again there is a twist in the tale, as Watson receives a letter whilst out walking with Holmes near the Reichenbach falls. The letter explains to Watson that there is an English woman at their hotel who is seriously ill. Watson is quick to go to the woman’s aid, again reflecting the attitude towards women at that time: that they should be treated well and respected. The letter turns out to be a hoax to ensure that Holmes is on his own when he reaches the Reichenbach falls, where Moriarty is waiting,
Such a location would have seemed fitting to the reader: “It is, indeed, a fearful place. The torrent, swollen by the melting snow, plunges into a tremendous abyss, from which the spray rolls up like the smoke from a burning house. The shaft into which the river hurls itself is an immense chasm, lined by glistening coal-black rock, and narrowing into a creaming, boiling pit of incalculable depth, which brims over and shoots the stream onward over its jagged lip. The long sweep of green water roaring forever down, and the thick flickering curtain of spray hissing forever upward, turn a man giddy with their constant whirl and clamour”. After such a description, it seems obvious to the reader that the location is significant, and the reader would be satisfied, and yet sad, about the ending: “A contest between the two men ended, as it could hardly fail to end in such a situation, in their reeling over, locked in each other's arms”.
In conclusion, I think that the many ways in which Conan-Doyle keeps the reader interested throughout the stories are effective. They are typical of the time and genre and all three stories (especially the first two) follow the same trend. The third story is slightly different in that there is no mystery, and the story is about Holmes’ demise, however, Conan-Doyle still uses his methods of keeping the reader interested effectively, especially the use of tension.